DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Hydraulic Brake Controllers that Block Power Supply to Wheel Speed Sensor.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishino (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0039702) in view of Endres (U.S. Pat. No. 10,641,785).
Regarding claim 1, 8 and 15, Nishino discloses a brake system comprising:
a first hydraulic pressure supplier (2) hydraulically connected to one or more of wheel cylinders of a vehicle (shown in fig. 1);
a second hydraulic pressure supplier (hydraulic pump P disclosed in ¶34) hydraulically connected to one or more of the wheel cylinders;
a first controller (8) configured to control the first hydraulic pressure supplier to provide a first hydraulic pressure to one or more of the wheel cylinders; and
a second controller (9) configured to control the second hydraulic pressure supplier to provide a second hydraulic pressure to one or more of the wheel cylinders, wherein:
the first controller is connected to a first power source (¶107 12V power supply) of the vehicle and a wheel speed sensor (¶28) of the vehicle, and the second controller is connected to a second power source (¶107 discloses this would be a 5V supply from Vcc1) of the vehicle and the wheel speed sensor.
Nishino does not disclose the first controller configured to control a first current of the first power source provided to the wheel speed sensor via the second controller, or the second controller configured to selectively allow or block a flow of the first current of the first power source to the wheel speed sensor and selectively allow or block a flow of a second current of the second power source to the wheel speed sensor.
Endres, which deals in sensors, teaches the first controller (201) configured to control a first current of the first power source provided to the wheel speed sensor via the second controller, or the second controller (105) configured to selectively allow or block a flow of the first current of the first power source to the wheel speed sensor and selectively allow or block a flow of a second current of the second power source to the wheel speed sensor (col. 3, line 59 – col. 4, line 5 discloses how the two controllers control power to the sensor).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Nishino with the power control of Endres because this allows for efficient operation (col. 3, lines 18-22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 9-14, 16-20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claims require that the two power sources of the individual controllers also both be connected to the sensor so as to independently power the wheel speed sensor. The power that is output from the sensor is what is read in order to determine wheel speed but the power input can be blocked from being provided to the sensor by those controllers.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please review when considering a response to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GONZALO LAGUARDA whose telephone number is (571)272-5920. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-Th Alt. F.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at (571) 270-5065. 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.
GONZALO LAGUARDA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747 email: gonzalo.laguarda@uspto.gov
/GONZALO LAGUARDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747