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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Singh (US 20180023648 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 Singh discloses, a brake system comprising: an electromechanical brake actuator (104); a pressure plate (110); an end plate (111); a ball screw (212) positioned between the electromechanical brake actuator (104) and the pressure plate (110); and a plurality of rotating discs (112) positioned between the pressure plate (110) and the end plate (111); wherein the electromechanical brake actuator (104) is configured to extend the ball screw (212) to a ball screw position to apply a requested force to the pressure plate (110) towards the end plate (111) thereby forcing the plurality of rotating discs (112) together in an axial direction in order to reduce a rotational speed of the plurality of rotating discs (112), and wherein the ball screw (212) is extended by the electromechanical brake actuator (104) to the ball screw position based on a worn state of the plurality of rotating discs and a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Abstract, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 2 Singh discloses, the brake system of claim 1, wherein the brake system further comprises: a position sensor (214), wherein the ball screw position (212) is determined using the position sensor (214) and wherein the position sensor (214) is at least one of a resolver, tachometer, or Hall sensor (see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 4 Singh discloses, the brake system of claim 1, wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using a selected one of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 5 Singh discloses, the brake system of claim 1, wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator and interpolating the ball screw position from the two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 6 Singh discloses, the brake system of claim 5, wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for a new state that is identified by an initial determined distance between a fully retracted ball screw position and initial contact of the pressure plate to the plurality of rotating discs and includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for a fully worn state is determined based on the initial determined distance and a thickness of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 7 Singh discloses, the brake system of claim 6, wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes at least a 25% worn state, a 50% worn state, and a 75% worn state interpolated based on the new state and the fully worn state (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 8, Singh discloses, a brake system comprising: an electromechanical brake actuator (104); and a ball screw (212), wherein the ball screw (212) is configured to be extended, by the electromechanical brake actuator (104), in order to apply a requested force to a brake pressure plate (110) in order to force a plurality of rotating discs (112) and stators (114) together in an axial direction in order to reduce a rotational speed of the plurality of rotating discs (112), and wherein the ball screw (212) is configured to be extended, by the electromechanical brake actuator (104), based on a worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (112) and a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state (see Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Abstract, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 9, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 8, wherein the brake system further comprises a position sensor (214), wherein the ball screw position (212) is determined using the position sensor (214) and wherein the position sensor (214) is at least one of a resolver, tachometer, or Hall sensor (see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 11, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 8, wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using a selected one of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 12, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 8, wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator and interpolating the ball screw position from the two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 13, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 12, wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for a new state that is identified by an initial determined distance between a fully retracted ball screw position and initial contact of a pressure plate to the plurality of rotating discs and includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for a fully worn state is determined based on the initial determined distance and a thickness of the plurality of rotating discs (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 13, wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes at least a 25% worn state, a 50% worn state, and a 75% worn state interpolated based on the new state and the fully worn state (see [0036-0041], Fig. 2).
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 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh (US 20180023648 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8, above, in view of Cahill (US 8590985 B2).
Regarding Claim 3, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 1, wherein the electromechanical brake actuator is configured to extend the ball screw to the ball screw position to apply the requested force to the pressure plate towards the end plate and wherein the ball screw is extended by the electromechanical brake actuator to the ball screw position based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs and the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state (see Fig. 2, [0034-0041]).
Singh does not disclose the brake system comprising a load cell sensor.
Cahill teaches a load cell sensor included in a brake system wherein response to the load cell sensor being faulty, the brake system breaks a feedback loop to engage brake operation (see Fig. 6, 6:59-67, 7:1-4).
It would have been obvious to combine the load cell sensor of Cahill with the brake system of Singh in order to provide increased accuracy (see US 20180023648 A1 [Singh]; Fig. 6) and a layer of redundancy to increase system safety. It should be noted that while Singh explicitly discloses not needing a load cell, this does not teach away this combination, additionally Singh disclosure functionality without a load cell further teaches the brake system functionality with a faulty load cell.
Regarding Claim 10, Singh discloses the brake system of claim 8, wherein the electromechanical brake actuator is configured to extend the ball screw to apply the requested force to a pressure plate (see Fig. 2, [0034-0041]).
Singh does not disclose the brake system comprising a load cell sensor.
It would have been obvious to combine the load cell sensor of Cahill with the brake system of Singh in order to provide a layer of redundancy to increase system safety and reduce chances of system failure. As applied in Claim 3 above, while Singh explicitly discloses not needing a load cell, this does not teach away this combination, as there is still an obvious known benefit of load cells in the art.
Claims 15-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh (US 20180023648 A1), in view Goto et. al. (US 8833526 B2).
Regarding Claim 15, Singh discloses a method of controlling an electromechanical brake actuator of a brake assembly comprising: responsive to receiving a request to apply a requested force to the brake assembly (see [0022]), where through the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the electromechanical brake actuator to extend a ball screw to the ball screw position to apply the requested force to a pressure plate towards an end plate thereby forcing the plurality of rotating discs together in an axial direction in order to reduce a rotational speed of the plurality of rotating discs (see Fig. 2, [0024], [0036-0044]). Additionally, Singh discloses the structure of a plurality of rotating discs, and a ball screw connected to an electromechanical actuator.
Singh appears to but does not explicitly disclose a method of identifying, by an electromechanical brake actuator controller, a worn state of a plurality of rotating discs of the brake assembly; identifying, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller a ball screw position based on the worn state and a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state; and responsive to identifying the ball screw position for the requested force from the stiffness curve commanding, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the electromechanical brake actuator.
Goto teaches a method of identifying, by an electromechanical brake actuator controller, a worn state of a plurality of rotating discs of the brake assembly; (see Fig. 5, 6:60-67, 7:1-10, 14:18-44); identifying, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a ball screw position based on the worn state and a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state (see Fig. 5, Fig. 15, 11:54-67, 12:1-10, 14:18-44); and responsive to identifying the ball screw position for the requested force from the stiffness curve commanding, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the electromechanical brake actuator (see Fig. 5, 12:23-30, 7:11-28).
It would have been obvious to combine the method of controlling an electromechanical brake actuator of Goto with the method of controlling an electromechanical brake actuator of Singh in order to maintain control accuracy despite brake pad wear and changes over time (see US 8833526 B2 [Goto]; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 16, Singh discloses wherein the ball screw position is determined using a position sensor (214) and wherein the position sensor (214) is at least one of a resolver, tachometer, or Hall sensor (see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 18, Goto teaches wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states (see Fig. 9) and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using a selected one of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see Fig. 5, Fig. 15, 11:54-67, 12:1-10, 14:18-44, 7:11-28).
Regarding Claim 19, Goto teaches wherein the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator is a plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for a plurality of worn states (see Fig. 9) and wherein the ball screw position for the requested force is determined using two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator of the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator and interpolating the ball screw position from the two stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs (see 14:18-44, Fig. 5, 7:11-28).
Regarding Claim 20, Goto teaches wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for new state that is identified by an initial determined distance between a fully retracted ball screw position and initial contact of the pressure plate to the plurality of rotating discs and includes a stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator for a fully worn state is determined based on the initial determined distance and a thickness of the plurality of rotating discs (see 14:18-44, Fig. 9), and wherein the plurality of stiffness curves for the electromechanical brake actuator for the plurality of worn states includes at least a 25% worn state, a 50% worn state, and a 75% worn state interpolated based on the new state and the fully worn state (see 15:40-46).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh (US 20180023648 A1), as modified by Goto et. al. (US 8833526 B2) and applied to Claim 15, above, further in view of Cahill (US 8590985 B2).
Regarding Claim 17, Singh modified by Goto teach the method of Claim 15 and the electromechanical brake actuator controller is configured to command an extension of the ball screw to the ball screw position to apply the requested force to the pressure plate towards the end plate and wherein the ball screw is extended by the electromechanical brake actuator to the ball screw position based on the worn state of the plurality of rotating discs and the stiffness curve for the electromechanical brake actuator that represents force versus ball screw position for the worn state (see Singh; Fig. 2, [0024], [0036-0044]).
Singh modified by Goto does not teach the electromechanical brake actuation being responsive to a load cell sensor being faulty.
Cahill teaches method of controlling a brake system wherein response to the load cell sensor being faulty, the brake system breaks a feedback loop to engage brake operation (see Fig. 6, 6:59-67, 7:1-4).
It would have been obvious to combine the method of controlling a brake system of Cahill with the method of controlling an electromechanical brake actuator of Singh modified by Goto in order to improve vehicle safety by ensuring the vehicle was braked in case of mechanical or electrical problems.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shea Irvin whose telephone number is (571)272-9952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 - 17:00.
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.
/S.W.I./Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616