DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnishi et al. (US 2014/0026557) in view of Knechtges et al. (US 2015/0314686) and further in view of Dolmaya et al. (US 2020/0189546).
Regarding independent claim 1, Ohnishi discloses a brake system (see Abstract, FIG. 1) for actuating a plurality of wheel brakes (32FL, 32RR, 32RL, 32FR) comprising first (32FL, 32RR) and second (32RL, 32FR) pairs of wheel brakes, the system comprising: a reservoir (84); a motor-driven master cylinder (16) operable during a normal non-failure braking mode (see ¶ 0164) by actuation of an electric motor (72) of the master cylinder to generate brake actuating pressure at first (24b) and second (24a) MC outputs for hydraulically actuating the first and second pairs of wheel brakes, respectively (see ¶¶ 0164, 0165; FIG. 1); a secondary brake module (136) configured for selectively providing pressurized hydraulic fluid at first and second PTU outputs (140) for actuating the first and second pairs of wheel brakes in at least one of a normal non-failure braking mode and a backup braking mode (see e.g. ¶ 0213), the secondary brake module including an electric PTU motor (M) configured to selectively pressurize the hydraulic fluid by transmitting rotary motion to at least two pumps 136), each pump piston providing pressurized hydraulic fluid to a corresponding one of the first and second PTU outputs (see FIG. 1), each of the first and second PTU outputs providing fluid to a corresponding one of the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1) and an electronic control unit for controlling at least one of the secondary brake module and the master cylinder responsive to at least one brake pressure signal (see ¶¶ 0166, 0167).
Ohnishi does not disclose that the pumps are pump pistons.
Knechtges teaches a brake system (see Abstract, FIG. 1) comprising a pump that is configured as a pump piston (see ¶ 0035).
It would have been obvious to configure the pump of Ohnishi as a pump piston to implement a configuration of a pump that is known to be suitable for use in brake systems.
Ohnishi does not disclose a single return line placing the reservoir and each pump piston in hydraulic connection; a pump inlet attenuator interposed hydraulically between the reservoir and the pump pistons and in direct fluid connection with the reservoir via the single return line; wherein the pump inlet attenuator regulates pressure in the single return line to reduce pressure fluctuations at an inlet side of each pump piston via solely mechanical pressure attenuation.
Dolmaya teaches a brake system (see Abstract, FIG. 2) comprising a reservoir (4), a pump (2a, 2b), and a single return line (34) placing the reservoir and each pump in hydraulic connection (see FIG. 2); a pump inlet attenuator (5a) interposed hydraulically between the reservoir and the pumps (see FIG. 2) and in direct fluid connection with the reservoir via the single return line (see FIG. 2); wherein the pump inlet attenuator regulates pressure in the single return line to reduce pressure fluctuations at an inlet side of each pump piston via solely mechanical pressure attenuation (see ¶ 0048).
It would have been obvious to combine the single return line and the pump inlet attenuator of Dolmaya with the device of Ohnishi to provide the advantage that pressure medium is held ready and can be drawn out directly , thereby minimizing flow resistances and ensuring availability of building up pressure (see Dolmaya, ¶ 0048).
Regarding claim 2, Ohnishi discloses an iso/dump control valve arrangement (120, 124, 128, 130) associated with each wheel brake of the plurality of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), each iso/dump control valve arrangement being controlled by the electronic control unit (see e.g. ¶ 0160).
Regarding claim 3, Ohnishi discloses that each iso/dump control valve arrangement is in fluid communication with both a selected one of the first (24b) and second (24a) MC outputs (see FIG. 1) and a selected one of the first and second PTU outputs (140) for selectively receiving pressurized hydraulic fluid therefrom (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Knechtges teaches that the secondary brake module includes a plurality of pump pistons associated with each of the first and second PTU outputs (see ¶ 0035).
Regarding claim 5, Ohnishi discloses a first traction control iso valve (116) hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the first pair of wheel brakes via the first MC outlet (24b) (see FIG. 1); and a second traction control iso valve (116) hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the second pair of wheel brakes via the second MC outlet (24a) (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Ohnishi discloses that a first brake pressure sensor (Pp) is interposed hydraulically between the first MC output and a corresponding first traction control iso valve (see FIG. 1) and a second brake pressure sensor (Ph) is interposed hydraulically between the second MC output and a corresponding second traction control iso valve (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Ohnishi discloses an iso/dump control valve arrangement (120, 124, 128, 130) associated with each wheel brake of the first and second pairs of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), wherein the first traction control iso valve (116) is hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the iso/dump control valve arrangements of the first pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1), and wherein the second traction control iso valve (116) is hydraulically interposed between the motor-driven master cylinder and the iso/dump control valve arrangements of the second pair of wheel brakes (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Dolmaya discloses that at least a portion of the pump inlet attenuator is in fluid communication with an ambient space outside the brake system (see ¶ 0047).
Regarding claim 20, Ohnishi discloses that the motor-driven master cylinder includes an electric MC drive motor (72), a primary MC chamber (98b), a secondary MC chamber (98a), a primary MC piston (88b) configured for selective movement longitudinally within the primary MC chamber responsive to longitudinal motion imparted by a ball nut assembly (80) along a ball nut axis (see ¶ 0105), and a secondary MC piston (88a) configured for selective movement longitudinally within at least one of the primary and secondary MC chambers responsive to longitudinal motion imparted by the ball nut assembly along the ball nut axis (see ¶ 0105), and wherein the MC drive motor rotates a drive shaft having a drive shaft axis which extends substantially parallel to the ball nut axis (see FIG. 1), and wherein rotational motion of the drive shaft is transferred to rotational motion of a spindle of the ball nut assembly via an MC gear train (78) (see ¶ 0105).
Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohnishi et al. (US 2014/0026557) in view of Knechtges et al. (US 2015/0314686) and further in view of Dolmaya et al. (US 2020/0189546), as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Ganzel (US 2021/0155215).
Regarding claim 19, neither Ohnishi nor Dolmaya disclose that the pump inlet attenuator is a single pump inlet attenuator.
Ganzel teaches a brake system (see Abstract, FIGS. 16, 17) comprising a pump inlet attenuator (1010) (see FIG. 16), wherein the pump inlet attenuator is a single pump inlet attenuator (see ¶ 0162; FIG. 16).
It would have been obvious to use a single pump inlet attenuator to provide a more cost effective and simplistic brake system (see e.g. Ganzel, ¶ 0162).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13 and 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03-Jun-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of independent claim 1, Applicant argues that “[t]he pumps 136 of the vehicle stability device 18 of Ohnishi do not actuate the brake mechanisms during a normal non-failure braking mode or a backup braking mode” (see Amendment, page 10). Ohnishi, however, discloses that “[t]he VSA device 18 is configured to include, for example, an ABS (Antilock Brake System) function to prevent wheel lock during braking, a TCS (Traction Control System) function to prevent wheel slip during acceleration or the like, and a function to suppress side slip during turning, and is mounted on the vehicle body 1 via a bracket, for example, on the front end of the right side in the vehicle width direction” (see ¶ 0215). These braking operations, all actuated by the VSA, are performed during a normal non-failure braking mode.
Applicant further argues that “[t]he reservoir 5a of Dolmaya is not a pump inlet attenuator” because it “does not regulate pressure in line 34 to reduce pressure fluctuations at an inlet side of the pumps 2a, 2b” (see Amendment, page 11). Dolmaya, however, discloses that the reservoir (5a) offers the advantage that pressure medium is held ready in the device (see ¶ 0048), meaning that the supply pressure to the pump inlet is “attenuated” by preventing the lack of available fluid. Dolmaya further discloses that “flow resistances are minimized and the availability of pressure medium for building up pressure by means of the second brake control device is increased” (see ¶ 0048), which indicates that the supply pressure to the pump inlets is made readily available instead of fluctuating. As such, Dolmaya discloses a pump inlet attenuator.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J LANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5988. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at (571)272-7124. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NICHOLAS J LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
August 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights