DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) have been considered.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains implied phrases, e.g. “A brake system is disclosed herein”. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ralea (U.S. 2005/0269872).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Ralea discloses an aircraft (see claim 21), comprising: a wheel (see claim 1 at least); a brake system (see fig. 1) coupled to the wheel, the brake system comprising: a pressure plate (22); an end plate (24); a plurality of rotating discs (14) positioned between the pressure plate and the end plate (as shown); an electromechanical brake actuator controller (26); and
an electromechanical brake actuator (12 and constituent parts) comprising a ball screw (16c) configured to extend to exert a force on the pressure plate (see pgh. 0027), the electromechanical brake actuator operatively coupled to the electromechanical brake actuator controller (see lines of fig. 1);
wherein, responsive to receiving a command from the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the electromechanical brake actuator is configured to retract the ball screw away from the pressure plate to at least a zero-touch point (see pgh. 0032, 18 is moved a “predetermined distance away from the brake stack 14”, which is “at least a zero-touch point”).
Regarding claim 15, Ralea discloses a method of controlling an electromechanical brake actuator (12 and constituent parts) of a brake system (see fig. 1) comprising:
receiving, by an electromechanical brake actuator controller (26), a command from a brake control unit, wherein the command is to retract a ball screw (16c) within the electromechanical brake actuator away from a pressure plate (see pgh. 0032), the ball screw configured to extend to exert a force on the pressure plate (see pgh. 0027);
identifying, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a zero-touch point for the electromechanical brake actuator (see pgh. 0030 at least, “obtain and maintain the desired running clearance”, and “running clearance position reference”); and
commanding, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the electromechanical brake actuator to retract the ball screw away from the pressure plate to at least the zero-touch point (see pgh. 0032, 18 is moved a “predetermined distance away from the brake stack 14”, which is “at least a zero-touch point”).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Ralea discloses the electromechanical brake actuator is configured to retract the ball screw away from the pressure plate behind the zero-touch point (see pgh. 0032 at least, corresponding to the “predetermined distance away”).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Ralea discloses the brake system further comprises: a position sensor (30), wherein the zero-touch point is determined using the position sensor (see pgh. 0030 at least) and wherein the position sensor is at least one of a resolver, tachometer, or Hall sensor (see pgh. 0022 at least).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 17, Ralea discloses the brake system further comprises: a load cell (60), wherein the zero-touch point is determined by:
responsive to operating under position control (the position of the actuator is fed into load cell 60) and responsive to an autozero failing to be established for the load cell (pgh. 0030-0032, nonzero difference signal 64), determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a first position of the ball screw in response to the force being applied by the electromechanical brake actuator dropping below a first predetermined force threshold (pgh. 0032 at least, in the event of no commanded braking); and
determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the zero-touch point by subtracting a first offset from the first position of the ball screw (pgh. 0030-0032 at least, using the difference signal 64 being the difference between the reference value and the sensed value from 30, and thereafter the reference value 62 is updated).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Ralea discloses the brake system further comprises: a load cell (60), wherein the zero-touch point is determined by:
responsive to operating under position control (the position of the actuator is fed into load cell 60) and responsive to an autozero being established for the load cell (pgh. 0030-0032, difference signal 64 is effectively zero), determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a second position of the ball screw in response to the force being applied by the electromechanical brake actuator dropping below a second predetermined force threshold (pgh. 0032 at least, in the event of no commanded braking); and
determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the zero-touch point by subtracting a second offset from the second position of the ball screw (pgh. 0030-0032 at least, using the difference signal 64 being the difference between the reference value and the sensed value from 30, and thereafter the reference value 62 is updated).1
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 19, Ralea discloses the brake system further comprises: a load cell (60), wherein the zero-touch point is determined by:
responsive to operating under force control (the force command is input into load cell 60) and responsive to an autozero failing to be established for the load cell (pgh. 0030-0032, nonzero difference signal 64), determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a third position of the ball screw in response to the force being applied by the electromechanical brake actuator dropping below a third predetermined force threshold (pgh. 0030-0032, difference signal 64 is effectively zero); and
determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the zero-touch point by subtracting a third offset from the third position of the ball screw (pgh. 0030-0032 at least, using the difference signal 64 being the difference between the reference value and the sensed value from 30, and thereafter the reference value 62 is updated).1
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, Ralea discloses the brake system further comprises: a load cell (60), wherein the zero-touch point is determined by:
responsive to operating under force control (the force command is input into load cell 60) and responsive to an autozero being established for the load cell (pgh. 0030-0032, difference signal 64 is effectively zero), determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, a fourth position of the ball screw in response to the force being applied by the electromechanical brake actuator dropping below a fourth predetermined force threshold (pgh. 0030-0032, difference signal 64 is effectively zero); and
determining, by the electromechanical brake actuator controller, the zero-touch point by subtracting a fourth offset from the fourth position of the ball screw (pgh. 0030-0032 at least, using the difference signal 64 being the difference between the reference value and the sensed value from 30, and thereafter the reference value 62 is updated).1
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The documents listed on the PTO-892 disclose additional brake control systems.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru 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.
/DAVID MORRIS/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
1 With regard to recitation of first through fourth positions of the ball screw, first through fourth predetermined force thresholds, and first through fourth offsets, since these claims are separately dependent and do not depend from one another, the prior art need not teach multiple distinct instances of each element. For example, a teaching of a given position of the ball screw can correspond to either a “first position” or a “second position”, since each claim merely requires one instance of each limitation.