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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 04/21/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the specification and Applicant’s remarks have been considered. The prior art rejection has been modified as set forth below.
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 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sell (US-20150246666-A1) in view of Amtsfeld (US-20220032891-A1), and further in view of Heer et al. (US-20200361436-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sell discloses a system for controlling a wheel brake on an auxiliary axle of a vehicle (ABS functions are capable of controlling a wheel brake, see Abstract and ¶ 0002), comprising:
a first auxiliary axle brake control valve (modulator valve, see ¶ 0013) configured to deliver fluid pressure (pressure delivery from supply port 4 through the modulator valve and out delivery port 5, see ¶ 0048) to a first auxiliary axle wheel brake (delivery port 5 providing output to auxiliary axle anti-lock brake system E, see ¶ 0041) on the auxiliary axle of the vehicle (auxiliary axle of a truck, see ¶¶ 0002-0003) responsive to a first fluid pressure control signal (brake application pressure signal received at control port 1, see ¶ 0041).
Sell does not disclose an electro-pneumatic drive axle brake control valve, a steer axle wheel brake on a steer axle, or a fluid control signal generating valve configured to generate the first fluid pressure control signal responsive to a command to apply braking of the vehicle.
Amtsfeld teaches an electro-pneumatic drive axle brake control valve (rear axle modulator 18, see ¶ 0035) configured to deliver fluid pressure from a fluid source (10, 12) to a first drive axle wheel brake (20e, see Figs. 4 and 6) on a drive axle (rear axle RA) of the vehicle (100,200) responsive to a first electronic control signal (ECU 14, see ¶ 0035); and further teaches a steer axle wheel brake (20a/20b, see ¶0035) on a steer axle (front axle FA).
Heer teaches a brake control module in which solenoid vales 76, 77 serve for pilot-control of relay valve 78. Heer teaches that solenoid valve 76 is interposed between inlet line 48 and control port 79 of relay valve 78, and solenoid valve 77 is interposed between control port 79 and vent 52. Heer further teaches that relay valve 78 generates brake pressure at outlet port 49 corresponding to the pilot-control by solenoid valves 76, 77 (see ¶ 0092).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Sell with the electro-pneumatic drive axle brake control valve and steer axle wheel brake taught by Amtsfeld and the pilot-controlled relay valve arrangement taught by Heer with a reasonable expectation of success because this would have provided coordinated braking at different vehicle axles within an electronically controlled pneumatic brake system, while using known solenoid-generated pilot/control pressure for controlling brake pressure delivery to a brake actuator.
Regarding claim 2, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the first drive axle wheel brake and the first auxiliary axle wheel brake are disposed on a first lateral side of the vehicle (see Amtsfeld ¶ 0035, Figs. 4 and 6, with corresponding brake actuators arranged on lateral sides).
Regarding claim 3, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the electro-pneumatic drive axle brake control valve is further configured to deliver fluid pressure from the fluid source to a second drive axle wheel brake on the drive axle responsive to the first electronic control signal and further comprising a second auxiliary axle brake control valve configured to deliver fluid pressure from the electro-pneumatic drive axle brake control valve to a second auxiliary axle wheel brake on the auxiliary axle of the vehicle responsive to the first fluid pressure control signal (second-side counterpart of the first-side arrangement with respect to claim 1, as shown by the mirrored lateral brake arrangement in Amtsfeld, Figs. 4 and 6).
Regarding claim 4, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer teaches the system of claim 1.
Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer does not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 4.
However, Heer teaches wherein the fluid control signal generating valve comprises a solenoid valve (solenoid valves 76, 77; see ¶ 0092) that generates the first fluid pressure control signal (pilot/control pressure at control port 79 of relay valve 78) responsive to a second electronic control signal (control units 55 receive control signals from central brake control unit 5 via control lines 56 and control the solenoid valves; see ¶ 0066 ) indicative of the command to apply the steer axle wheel brake on the steer axle of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fluid control signal generating arrangement of Sell as modified by Amtsfeld to comprise the solenoid valve arrangement taught by Heerwith a reasonable expectation of success, because this would have allowed the control pressure signal to be generated in response to an electronic control signal through a solenoid-operated electro-pneumatic pilot-control valve arrangement.
Regarding claim 5, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer, teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the command to apply the steer axle wheel brake on the steer axle of the vehicle is generated in response to an input from an operator of the vehicle (user steps on the pedal 56 of the pneumatic foot brake module 52 a rear axle brake pressure pBRA is provided to the front axle braking arrangement, see Amtsfeld ¶ 0039).
Regarding claim 6, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer, teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the command to apply the steer axle wheel brake on the steer axle of the vehicle is generated by an automated braking system on the vehicle (electronic foot brake module 54 provides brake signal SB to ECU 14, and the brake system may be controlled by the main electronic control unit, particularly desirable for semi and or fully autonomous vehicles, see Amtsfeld ¶¶ 0022, 0049).
Regarding claim 7, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer, teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the second electronic control signal is not generated if the auxiliary axle is an inactive state (brake application signal is shut off when the auxiliary axle is in the lifted position, see Sell, ¶¶ 0011, 0014, and 0044).
Regarding claims 11-17, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer teaches the limitations of claims 11-17 for at least the same reasons set forth above with respect to the corresponding limitations of claims 1-7, respectively.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sell (US-20150246666-A1) in view of Amtsfeld (US-20220032891-A1) and Heer et al. (US-20200361436-A1) and further in view of Hurlburt (US-8123306-B2) and Fannin (US-4629256-A).
Regarding claim 8, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer teaches the system of claim 1, wherein fluid pressure is delivered to both the steer axle wheel brake and the first drive axle wheel brake, wherein the second fluid pressure is from an electro-pneumatic steer axle brake control valve configured to deliver fluid pressure from the fluid source to the steer axle wheel brake, and wherein the valve arrangement has a supply port in fluid communication with the fluid source.
Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer does not disclose wherein the fluid control signal generating valve comprises: a double check valve, having a first supply port and a second supply port configured to receive a second fluid pressure, and a delivery port configured to output the higher of the first fluid pressure and the second fluid pressure; and, a synchro valve, having a control port in fluid communication with the delivery port of the double check valve, and a delivery port configured to output the first fluid pressure control signal.
Hurlburt teaches a fluid control signal generating valve (selector circuit 200) comprises: a double check valve (240), having a first supply port (S1), a second supply port (S2) configured to receive a second fluid pressure, and a delivery port (delivery line D) configured to output the higher of the first fluid pressure and the second fluid pressure (DCV 240 permits flow of air from one of S1 and S2 based on the supply having the higher pressure);
Hurlburt further teaches a synchro valve (260), having a control port (control line C) in fluid communication with the delivery port (delivery line D) of the double check valve (240), and a delivery port (delivery line D) configured to output the first fluid pressure control signal (delivery from synchro valve 260 occurs when the supply line is on and the control signal is on, see ¶ 0023).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Sell in view of Amtsfeld to further include the double check valve and synchro valve arrangement taught by Hurlburt, with a reasonable expectation of success, because this would have provided a pneumatic signal-selection arrangement in which the higher of two pressure inputs is selected and used to control downstream signal output (see ¶¶ 0018-0019, and 0023-0024).
Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer does not disclose the first fluid pressure is from an operator-controlled valve configured to deliver fluid pressure from the fluid source.
Fannin teaches that the first fluid pressure is from an operator-controlled valve (dual brake valve 24 operated by treadle 26, see Col.2, lines 1-4) configured to deliver fluid pressure from the fluid source (reservoirs 14, 16 communicated to supply ports 22, 28 of dual brake valve 24, see Col.1, lines 59-65).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the operator-controlled valve arrangement taught by Fannin in the modified system, with a reasonable expectation of success, because this would have provided a brake valve operated by the vehicle operators for delivering fluid pressure from the fluid source into the pneumatic brake control circuit (Col.1, lines 61-65).
Regarding claim 18, Sell as modified by Amtsfeld and Heer, and further in view of Hurlburt and Fannin, teaches the limitations of claim 18 for at least the same reasons set forth above with respect to the corresponding limitations of claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 10, 19 and 20 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 04/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that the prior rejection relied on the same Sell structure as both the first auxiliary axle brake control valve and the fluid control signal generating valve. The rejection has been modified. The current rejection relies on Heer et al. to teach a distinct pilot-control arrangement in which solenoid valves 76, 77 control pressure at control port 79 of relay valve 78, and relay valve 78 generates brake pressure at outlet port 49 corresponding to the pilot-control.
To the extent Applicant argues that the fluid control signal generating valve must be physically upstream of the first auxiliary axle brake control valve, the claim does not expressly require a particular physical upstream location. In any event, the rejection has been modified to rely on Heer et al. for a distinct pilot/control-pressure generating valve arrangement.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 8 have been considered but are not persuasive. Hurlburt is relied upon for the double check valve and synchro valve arrangement, and Fannin is relied upon for the operator-controlled valve, as set forth in the rejection above.
Applicant’s remarks regarding claims 11-20 have been considered. Claims 11-20 are addressed in this non-final Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Karem Akram Algarash whose telephone number is (571)272-5789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-5pm.
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.
/K.A.A./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights