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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 30 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are persuasive only in part.
First, the amendment to claim 16 overcomes the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), which is withdrawn.
Second, the amendments to the claims overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, which is withdrawn, and with claim 2 reflecting an improvement to the operation of the computer as set forth previously, e.g., in applicant’s Remarks (on 4 February 2026) and in the examiner’s Response to Arguments (dated 18 February 2026).
Third, applicant’s arguments regarding the propriety of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are convincing only to the extent that they cause the examiner to use a new secondary reference for rejecting the claims.
In this respect, applicant unconvincingly argues:
In Claim 1, the control unit generates the control signal in response to the control unit receiving said request signal. In other words, the receipt of the request signal by the control unit causes the control unit to generate the control signal. Note that the phrase “in response to” indicates the causal relationship between (A) the receipt of the request signal by the control unit and (B) the generation of the control signal by the control unit.
In contrast, in Witte (Fig. 1), the brake control device 15 generates the control signal not in response to the brake control device 15 receiving the selection signal from the input device 16. Specifically, once the brake control device 15 receives the selection signal from the input device 16, the brake control device 15 does not necessarily generate a control signal for the trailer control unit 23. In other words, there is no causal relationship between (A) the receipt of the selection signal by the brake control device 15 and (B) the generation of the control signal for the trailer control unit 23 by the brake control device 15.
Specifically, in Witte, the input device 16 allows a driver to select a characteristic curve or operating setting, which is received and stored by the brake control device 15. Then, the brake control device 15 generates the control signal for the trailer control unit 23 only after detection of a vehicle operating condition, such as actuation of the service brake, accelerator pedal position, vehicle load, or another driving state.
Thus, in Witte, the generation of the control signal for the trailer control unit 23 by the brake control device 15 is caused by (i.e., in response to) detection of the vehicle operating condition, and not by (i.e., not in response to) receipt of the selection signal from the input device 16 by the brake control device 15.
The examiner disagrees, with Witte (DE, ‘901) showing (disclosing/rendering obvious) a causal relationship between the receipt of the selection signal by the brake control device 15 (by which the driver inputs his wishes regarding the selected degree of recuperation, via the input device 16, into the brake control device 15) and the generation of the control signal that is transmitted (see FIG. 1) from the brake control device 15 to the control unit 23 of the trailer, whereby “the braking effect of the trailer 20 [is] adjusted according to the driver’s wishes” (paragraph [0043]). Were there not a/the causal relationship, the braking effect of the trailer would not (could not) be adjusted according to the driver’s wishes. See also claim 7 in Witte (DE, ‘901), where the brake control device 15 provides characteristic curves (K) with desired degrees of recuperation, and a desired degree of recuperation is selected by the driver via the input means, meaning that the recuperation performed by the electric drive 21 of the trailer in accordance with the signal transmitted from the control device 15 is “in response to” the desired recuperation degree selected by the driver via the input means/device 16. Accordingly, applicant’s argument is not persuasive in this respect.
In this respect, the examiner additionally uses new secondary reference to Hyun (2015/0006039) which also shows these features, e.g., in equivalent signals (between the driver’s input device 11 [12, 13], the VCU 20, the MCU 30, and the motor 32) in FIG. 2 and describes such signals and their dependencies/causal relationship (e.g., “in response to”) at paragraphs [0034], etc., with FIG. 2 from Hyun (‘039) being reproduced below/on the next page by the examiner:
PNG
media_image1.png
696
1330
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to applicant’s argument that, “the brake control device 15 [in Witte (DE, ‘901)] generates the control signal for the trailer control unit 23 only after detection of a vehicle operating condition, such as actuation of the service brake, accelerator pedal position, vehicle load, or another driving state”, such generation of the control signal for the trailer control unit 23 is NOT precluded by applicant’s open-ended claim language[1], e.g., the control signal may be generated in response to more than one preceding event and/or condition precedent (e.g., such as, in Witte (DE, ‘901), i) the brake control unit 15 having first received the driver selection via the input device 16, AND ii) the initiation/actuation of the service brake by the driver). Such a broadest, reasonable interpretation (BRI) is apparently consistent with applicant’s specification e.g., at paragraphs [0013], [0018], [0057], and [0062] which teaches that generating the control signal is based on e.g., more than just the request signal:
[0013] Processing the request signal in the control unit or brake control unit of the towing vehicle and generating the control signal in this control unit, specifically in particular in the brake control unit, on the basis of the data available therein accordingly leads to prevention of the electric drive from being controlled incorrectly by a driver. Nevertheless, the operating unit allows the driver to influence control of the electric drive in suitable situations.
[0018] . . . Further, the control unit, in particular brake control unit, is configured to take the torque request value and a vehicle state as a basis for outputting a control signal containing a setpoint torque value for the electric drive. . . .
[0057] . . . The control signal 86 is accordingly generated on the basis of this vehicle state 88 and on the basis of the request signal 80.
[0062] . . . A control signal 86 is generated on the basis of the request signal 80 and a vehicle state 88 in step 150. The vehicle state 88 is for example on the basis of a vehicle velocity 152, a slippage 154 of at least one of the wheels 20 and/or a detected activity of at least one driver assistance system 156, which includes an ESP 158 or an ABS 160, for example. . . .
Since applicant himself apparently uses vehicle states as conditions to generate the control signal, any assertion that Witte (DE, ‘901) does not meet the claim language because he might use driving states or engine/drive motor load to generate his control signal (shown in FIG. 1) cannot be convincing.
Regarding claim 10, applicant argues:
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the Examiner's position (see OA2f, bullet 28). Claim 10 requires that the manual operating unit is integrated into another operating unit in the driver's cab. The present specification uses this expression to mean integration into another driver-operated control element, not placement on a dashboard. Yokoo only discloses a user interface located on a dashboard or instrument panel, which is not another operating unit.
The examiner sees no such limiting definition in the specification (cf. published paragraph [0028]), and moreover now uses the steering wheel of Hyun (‘039) to read on the another operating unit. Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 11, applicant asserts:
Witte does not disclose that the manual operating unit is connectable to a bus connectable to the control unit, nor that the manual operating unit is connected directly to an interface of the control unit as required by Claim 11. The Examiner's reliance on a line in Fig. 1 of Witte and an alleged "interface" is unsupported, and general knowledge cannot supply the missing limitations.
The examiner disagrees, with the bus in claim 11 (and thus in claim 12 as well which does not exclude any alternative in claim 11) being part of an alternative (“or”) limitation that need not (e.g., as mapped by the examiner below) be shown by the examiner. Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 13, applicant argues:
The Examiner asserts that Witte would generate plural request signals when the input device 16 is used multiple times. However, Claim 13 does not merely require multiple signals, but requires that the device is configured to send further request signals directly to the trailer brake control unit via an interface. The dashed arrow between input device 16 and control device 15 in Fig. 1 of Witte only shows signal transmission to the control device 15, not direct communication with the trailer brake control unit 23 as required by Claim 13. The Examiner does not identify any disclosure of such direct signaling or interface in Witte. Accordingly, Witte fails to teach the additional limitations of Claim 13.
The examiner disagrees. The claimed “device” is recited in the preamble of claim 1/13, and (in the examiner’s interpretation/mapping) includes all components in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901), e.g., the brake control unit 15 that transmits control signals (as further request signals) to the control unit 23 located on the trailer. In this respect, the examiner considers the information regarding actuation of the service brake and/or any characteristic curve selection (at paragraph [0056] in Witte (DE, ‘901)) as well as any other transmissions to the control unit 23 to be “further request signals” since nothing in the claims or specification require that further request signals must come from e.g., the driver, the manual operating unit, etc., and since the further request signal (94) in FIG. 4 of applicant’s own disclosure both contains a further function request (96) and is generated at a step (162), and is additionally not apparently generated at the operating unit (74) by manual manipulation. Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 17, applicant argues:
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the Examiner’s position (see OA2f, bullet 32). The Examiner asserts that the switches shown in Yokoo would have been detented and therefore correspond to the claimed predefined latching positions. However, Yokoo does not disclose detented or latching positions, and the rejection relies on unsupported speculation rather than an express or implicit teaching. Moreover, Claim 17 requires that each predefined latching position be associated with a predefined torque request value for the electric drive, but the Examiner does not identify any disclosure in Yokoo showing such an association.
Applicant’s arguments are not convincing, since the argues limitation in claim 17 is an alternative (“or”) limitation, and the examiner has shown/mapped another alternative.
Regarding claim 5, applicant asserts:
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the Examiner’s position (see OA2f, bullet 34). Claim 5 requires that the control unit determine a vehicle state based on at least one of vehicle velocity, wheel slippage, or activity of a driver assistance system. The Examiner cites DiGioacchino for tow-vehicle speed and wheel rotation information, but DiGioacchino merely uses wheel speed signals to determine trailer brake gain and detect lock-up conditions, not to determine a vehicle state as required by Claim 5.
The examiner considers the tow vehicle speed to be a vehicle state that is determined based on tow vehicle wheel rotation information from wheel speed sensors 171, as determined and used in DiGioacchino et al. (‘008). Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding claim 8, applicant argues:
Claim 8 requires that a multiplicity of function requests corresponding to different operating modes of the electric drive be selectable via the manual operating unit, including modes such as regeneration control, automatic driving control, torque distribution between retarders and the electric drive, or traction assistance level. Witte only discloses adjustment of braking or recuperation behavior, and Boss merely teaches switching a trailer drive on/off or changing drive power. Neither reference discloses selectable operating modes as claimed, nor their selection via the manual operating unit, and the combination does not remedy these deficiencies.
The (e.g., twenty at paragraph [0043]) different degrees of regeneration that are selectable in Witte (DE, ‘901) are considered by the examiner to be a multiplicity of function requests, with each different recuperation degree request being a different operating mode of recuperation (e.g., for examples only, a low recuperation degree operating mode, a medium recuperation degree operating mode, a high recuperation degree operating mode, etc., etc.) Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Regarding new claim 23, this feature is taught by at least three references cited by the examiner herewith, one of which has been applied in the 103 rejection.
Accordingly, applicant’s arguments are only persuasive in part.
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.
Claims 1, 8, 10 to 13, and 16 to 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witte (Germany, 102020201901; EPO machine translation provided previously) in view of Hyun (2015/0006039).
Witte (DE, ‘901) reveals:
per claim 1, a device [e.g., FIG. 1] for controlling an electric drive [e.g., the electric drive 21, possibly including the corresponding control unit 23 in the trailer 20] of a trailer vehicle [e.g., 20], the device comprising:
a manual operating unit [e.g., the input device(s) 16 arranged on the towing vehicle 10, for selection by the driver of the degree of recuperation (a.k.a. regeneration) on the trailer 20] configured to be arranged in a driver's cab of a towing vehicle [e.g., 10 in FIG. 1] and to generate and output a request signal [e.g., to the brake control device 15, as shown by the dashed line arrow in FIG. 1[2]; see also paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0043], claim 7, FIG. 1, etc.] for the electric drive in response to a manual selection using said manual operating unit or a manual input into said manual operating unit [e.g., the driver’s selection, by use of the input device(s) 16, of the degree of recuperation on the trailer 20; see e.g., paragraphs [0041], [0043], etc.];
a control unit [e.g., the brake control device 15 in FIG. 1] of the towing vehicle configured to:
receive said request signal [e.g., as obviously shown by the arrow between 16 and 15 in FIG. 1; see MPEP 2125];
generate a control signal [e.g., the obvious signal that is to be transmitted, wirelessly or via cable, by the brake control device 15 to the control unit 23 located on the trailer 20, as shown in FIG. 1[3], obviously to control the (degree of recuperation in the) electric drive 21] in response to the control unit receiving said request signal [e.g., the brake control unit 15 provides different characteristic curves with respect to the degree of recuperation on the trailer, and the degree of recuperation is selected by the driver via the input means 16, whereby the braking effect caused by the control unit 15’s depicted signal sent to the control unit 23 in the trailer is obviously performed “in response to” the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input means and received by the control unit 15] and on a basis of said request signal [e.g., the brake control device 15 contains various curve profiles for braking torque of the trailer as a function of the actuation of the service brake system, which differ in terms of degree of recuperation of the trailer, and the driver selects an appropriate curve via the input device (e.g., paragraphs [0018], [0043], [0054] to [0056], claim 7, etc.) for allowing the braking effect of the trailer, obviously effected by means of the depicted signal transmitted to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15, to be adjusted according to and in response to receiving the driver’s selected wishes for degree of recuperation as inputted via the input device 16, and on the basis of the depicted request signal from the input device 16]; and,
output said control signal to the electric drive of the trailer vehicle or to a trailer brake control unit of the trailer vehicle [e.g., as shown in FIG. 1, outputting the signal transmitted wirelessly or via cable (in paragraph [0055]) to the control unit 23 of the trailer 20, that controls the degree of recuperative (a.k.a. regenerative) braking of the electric drive 21] so as to control operation of the electric drive of the trailer vehicle based on said control signal [e.g., paragraphs [0053] to [0055], “In a motor vehicle, the aforementioned components, namely a braking torque at idle without actuation of the brake pedal, a braking torque when the brake pedal is actuated, and the load point increase in the towing vehicle 10 when the electric drive 21 is controlled, can be added. . . . If necessary, the driver can be offered a selection of different characteristic curves, which can be selected via appropriate input devices, as already mentioned. . . . The control can be integrated into a brake control device 15 arranged on the towing vehicle using software technology. This communicates, wirelessly or via cable, with a corresponding control unit 23 in the trailer 20, which in turn is connected to the electric drive 21 and the electric energy storage unit 22 in the trailer 20”];
It may be alleged that Witte (DE, ‘901) does not expressly reveal that the input device(s) 16 is/are in the driver’s cab or details of the control signal, although the examiner understands these claim limitations would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teachings of Witte (DE, ‘901) alone, even without further teaching.
However, in the context/field of an improved control apparatus and method for regenerative braking of a vehicle such as “trucks, various commercial vehicles”, etc. Hyun (‘039) teaches in conjunction with FIG. 2, reproduced below/on the next page, that paddle switches/shifts 11 (12, 13) may be “mounted on the steering wheel” (paragraph [0038]) for selecting the regenerative braking torque map (e.g., corresponding to the characteristic curve, in the parlance of Witte (DE, 901)) in FIG. 1, and that a vehicle controller unit (VCU) 20 may be configured to calculate a motor torque value based on the selected regenerative braking torque map, and a motor controller (MCU) 30 may be configured to receive a torque order that corresponds to the calculated torque value, and then the motor controller 30 may be configured to adjust the regenerative braking torque output of a driving motor 32 based on the torque order value (paragraph [0034]), with the examiner understanding (from the perspective of one having ordinary skill in the art[4]) that a steering wheel paddle is (or would have rendered obvious) a lever/rocker on the steering wheel. Moreover, as taught by Hyun (‘039), the control apparatus may include e.g., “a Controller Area Network (CAN)” (paragraph [0022]), whereby the controllers (as “network coupled computer systems”) execute programs in a distributed fashion, as was well-known and conventional in vehicles.
PNG
media_image1.png
696
1330
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or modify the Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination so that the input device 16 would have been implemented as, or at least would have included, one or more paddle switches/shifts 11, 12, 13 (having paddles that would have obviously been understood to be levers by one having ordinary skill in the art[5]) mounted on the steering wheel (and thus obviously in the driver’s cab), as taught by Hyun (‘039), so that the computer system elements in FIG. 1 of Witte (‘901) would have been connected by means of networks (obviously having buses), as taught by Hyun (‘039), and so that the brake control device 15 would have been configured to calculate the motor torque value based on the selected regenerative braking torque map as a/the characteristic curve, as taught by Hyun (‘039), and the control unit 23 would have been configured to receive a torque order value that corresponds to the calculated motor torque value, and adjust the regenerative braking torque output of the electric drive 21 based on the torque order value, as taught by Hyun (‘039) e.g., at paragraphs [0034], etc., in order that the degree of recuperation implemented in the electric drive 21 as a regenerative braking torque output would be conveniently selected by the driver using steering wheel mounted paddles, with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
As such, the implemented or modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination would have rendered obvious:
per claim 1, a device [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), FIG. 1] for controlling an electric drive [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the electric drive 21, possibly including the corresponding control unit 23 in the trailer 20] of a trailer vehicle [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), 20], the device comprising
a manual operating unit [e.g., the input device(s) 16 in Witte (DE, ‘901) arranged on the towing vehicle 10, for selection by the driver of the degree of recuperation (a.k.a. regeneration) on the trailer 20; implemented as paddle switches/shifts 11 (12, 13), as taught by Hyun (‘039)] configured to be arranged in a driver's cab of a towing vehicle [e.g., as shown by the paddle switches/shifts 11 (12, 13) mounted on the steering wheel (that was obviously in the driver’s cab) in FIG. 2 of Hyun; and at 10 in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901)] and to generate and output a request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), to the brake control device 15 from the input device(s) 16, as shown in FIG. 1 as a dashed line arrow; see also paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0043], claim 7, FIG. 1, etc.; and as shown by the Shift-up and Shift-down signals received by the VCU in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)] for the electric drive in response to a manual selection using said manual operating unit or a manual input into said manual operating unit [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the driver’s selection, by use of the input device(s) 16, of the degree of recuperation on the trailer 20; see e.g., paragraphs [0041], [0043], etc.; and similarly in Hyun (‘039), the input signals for selection and change of the torque maps (as characteristic curves) from the paddle switches/shifts (e.g., paragraph [0030], etc.)];
a control unit [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the brake control device 15 in FIG. 1] of the towing vehicle configured to:
receive said request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), as obviously shown by the arrow between 16 and 15 in FIG. 1; see MPEP 2125; see also the arrows 2 in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)];
generate a control signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the obvious signal that is to be transmitted, wirelessly or via cable, by the brake control device 15 to the control unit 23 located on the trailer 20, as shown in FIG. 1[6], obviously to control the (degree of recuperation in the) electric drive 21, in response to the selection of the input device 16; and in accordance with the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input device 16, at paragraph [0018] in Witte (DE, ‘901); and in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039), the variable amount of regenerative braking signal (arrow) as transmitted from the VCU to the MCU; see also e.g., paragraphs [0034], etc.] in response to the control unit receiving said request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the brake control unit 15 provides different characteristic curves with respect to the degree of recuperation on the trailer, and the degree of recuperation is selected by the driver via the input means 16, whereby the braking effect caused by the control unit 15’s depicted signal sent to the control unit 23 in the trailer is obviously performed “in response to” the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input means and received by the control unit 15; and with the “in response to” also being expressly taught in FIG. 2 and at paragraphs [0034], etc. of Hyun (‘039), e.g., as described above] and on a basis of said request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the brake control device 15 contains various curve profiles for braking torque of the trailer as a function of the actuation of the service brake system, which differ in terms of degree of recuperation of the trailer, and the driver selects an appropriate curve via the input device (e.g., paragraphs [0018], [0043], [0054] to [0056], claim 7, etc.) for allowing the braking effect of the trailer, obviously being effected by means of the depicted signal transmitted to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15, to be adjusted according to and in response to receiving the driver’s selected wishes for degree of recuperation as inputted via the input device 16, and on the basis of the depicted request signal from the input device 16]; and,
output said control signal to the electric drive of the trailer vehicle or to a trailer brake control unit of the trailer vehicle [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), as shown in FIG. 1, outputting the signal transmitted wirelessly or via cable (in paragraph [0055]) to the control unit 23 (as an obvious trailer brake control unit) of the trailer 20, that controls the degree of recuperative (a.k.a. regenerative) braking of the electric drive 21, in order to control the amount of energy supplied from the electric drive 21 to the electrical energy storage device 22 in accordance with the respective regenerative braking setting(s) of the input device 16; and, in particular, as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2, paragraphs [0034], etc. (e.g., as described above)] so as to control operation of the electric drive of the trailer vehicle based on said control signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), paragraphs [0053] to [0055], “In a motor vehicle, the aforementioned components, namely a braking torque at idle without actuation of the brake pedal, a braking torque when the brake pedal is actuated, and the load point increase in the towing vehicle 10 when the electric drive 21 is controlled, can be added. . . . If necessary, the driver can be offered a selection of different characteristic curves, which can be selected via appropriate input devices, as already mentioned. . . . The control can be integrated into a brake control device 15 arranged on the towing vehicle using software technology. This communicates, wirelessly or via cable, with a corresponding control unit 23 in the trailer 20, which in turn is connected to the electric drive 21 and the electric energy storage unit 22 in the trailer 20”; and, in particular, as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2, paragraphs [0034], etc. (e.g., as described above)];
per claim 8, depending from claim 1, wherein a multiplicity of function requests [e.g., for selected degrees of recuperation, in Witte (DE, ‘901)] containing different operating modes [e.g., which different modes of the electric drive obviously recuperate energy at different degrees of recuperation, in Witte (DE, ‘901) at paragraphs [0018], [0043], etc. and at the correct time based on e.g., detected actuations of the service brake system 12 (e.g., paragraphs [0038], etc.), as described in conjunction with FIGS. 2, 3, paragraphs [0021], [0043], [0051], etc.; and/or at different amounts of regenerative braking, in Hyun (‘039)] are selectable via said manual operating unit [e.g., 16 in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901); and as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 of Hyun (‘039)], the operating modes including at least one of:
(i) activating, reducing, or deactivating an automatic regeneration mode of the electric drive [e.g., paragraphs [0021], [0043], [0051], FIGS. 2, 3, etc. in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
(ii) activating, reducing, or deactivating automatic driving for the electric drive [e.g., paragraphs [0028], [0030], etc. in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
(iii) setting a torque distribution between retarders of the towing vehicle and the electric drive [e.g., with the retarders in Witte (DE, ‘901) being friction brakes and the distribution between P and MB being shown in FIG. 2]; or
(iv) setting a level of traction assistance [e.g., this is (now) an alternative limitation that need not be shown by the examiner] by the electric drive;
per claim 10, depending from claim 1, wherein said manual operating unit (i), corresponds to a retarder lever or (ii) is integrated into the retarder lever, or (iii) is integrated into another operating unit in the driver's cab of the towing vehicle [e.g., integrated onto the steering wheel (another operating unit) as paddle switches/shifts, as shown and described in conjunction with FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)];
per claim 11, depending from claim 1, wherein said manual operating unit is connectable to a bus which is connectable to said control unit; or, said manual operating unit is connected directly to an interface of said control unit [e.g., as shown and described with respect to FIG. 1 in Witte (DE, ‘901), and with respect to FIG. 2 in Hyun (‘039), with a vehicle bus (e.g., a well-known and conventional CAN bus as suggested by Hyun (‘039) himself) also being obvious, well-known and conventional for connecting input devices, control unit(s), etc. in the vehicle art];
per claim 12, depending from claim 11, wherein the bus is a vehicle bus [e.g., as shown and described with respect to FIG. 2 in Hyun (‘039) and as suggested in paragraph [0022] in Hyun (‘039), with a vehicle bus also being obvious, well-known and conventional for connecting input devices, control unit(s), etc. in the vehicle art; here, the examiner notes that this claim 12 limitation is a non-limiting part of an alternative limitation in claim 11 when the “said manual operating unit is connected directly to an interface of said control unit” limitation in claim 11 is being read upon by the examiner, as set forth above[7], with no claim requiring that “said manual operating unit is connectable to a [e.g., vehicle] bus which is connectable to said control unit”];
per claim 13, depending from claim 1, further comprising:
an interface [e.g., the wireless or wired (“via cable”) connection at paragraph [0055] and FIG. 1 in Witte (DE, ‘901)] configured to interchange data with the trailer brake control unit [e.g., with the control unit 23 in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
the device being configured to send further request signals directly to the trailer brake control unit [e.g., obviously, on subsequent days, in Witte (DE, ‘901), when recuperative braking should be performed at the trailer; see also paragraph [0056] in Witte (DE, ‘901), where “information regarding actuation of the service brake” and “any characteristic curve selection” can also be received (directly) by the control unit 23 from a corresponding control unit on the towing vehicle, where the examiner considers the information regarding actuation of the service brake and/or any characteristic curve selection to be “further request signals”, e.g., since nothing in the claims or specification require that further request signals must come from e.g., the driver, the manual operating unit, etc., and since the further request signal (94) contains a further function request (96) and is generated at a step (162) and not at the operating unit (74)];
per claim 16, depending from claim 13, further comprising a further interface that is a radio interface [e.g., the wireless or wired (“via cable”) connection at paragraph [0055] and FIG. 1 in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
per claim 17, depending from claim 1, wherein at least one of:
(i) said manual operating unit includes a lever having a multiplicity of predefined latching positions, each predefined latching position of said multiplicity of predefined latching positions being associated with a predefined torque request value [e.g., this is an alternative limitation that need not be shown by the examiner]; or
said manual operating unit includes a multiplicity of function keys and each of said multiplicity of function key [e.g., 12, 13 in the paddle switches/shifts of Hyun (‘039)] has at least one of an associated predefined torque request value [e.g., as shown by the regenerative brake torque maps (as characteristic curves) in FIG. 1 off Hyun (‘039)] and an associated predefined function request [e.g., to provide the increasing/decreasing of [regenerative] torque (MB) in FIGS. 2 or 3, etc. in Witte (DE, ‘901); and similarly, in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)];
per claim 18, depending from claim 1, wherein said control unit is a brake control unit [e.g., the brake control device 15 in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
per claim 19, a system comprising the device of claim 1, the electric drive, and a trailer brake control unit [e.g., the brake control device 15 in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
per claim 20, a vehicle/trailer combination having a system as claimed in claim 19 [e.g., as shown in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901)];
per claim 21, a method for controlling an electric drive [e.g., 21 in Witte (DE, ‘901)] of a trailer vehicle [e.g., 20 in Witte (DE, ‘901)] via a device [e.g., FIG. 1 in Witte (DE, ‘901)] for controlling the electric drive of the trailer vehicle, the device including a manual operating unit [e.g., 16 in Witte (DE, ‘901); and the paddle switches/shifts of FIG. 2 in Hyun (‘039)] configured to be arranged in a driver's cab of a towing vehicle [e.g., mounted on the steering wheel (obviously in the cab) as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2; and as shown at 10 in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901)] and to generate and output [e.g., as indicated by the arrow to the brake control device 15 in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901); see e.g., paragraphs [0041], [0043], etc.] a request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), to the brake control device 15 from the input device(s) 16, as shown in FIG. 1 as a dashed line arrow[8]; see also paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0043], claim 7, FIG. 1, etc.; and as shown by the Shift-up and Shift-down signals received by the VCU in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)] for the electric drive in response to a manual selection using said manual operating unit or a manual input into said manual operating unit [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the driver’s selection, by use of the input device(s) 16, of the degree of recuperation on the trailer 20; see e.g., paragraphs [0041], [0043], etc.; and similarly in Hyun (‘039), the input signals for selection and change of the torque maps (as characteristic curves) from the paddle switches/shifts (e.g., paragraph [0030]], etc.]; the device further including a control unit [e.g., the brake control device 15 in Witte (DE, ‘901); and the VCU 20 in Hyun (‘039)] of the towing vehicle configured to: receive said request signal [e.g., as shown by the dashed line arrow in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) between 16 and 15; and by the arrow(s) in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)], generate a control signal on a basis of said request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the obvious signal that is to be transmitted, wirelessly or via cable, by the brake control device 15 to the control unit 23 located on the trailer 20, as shown in FIG. 1, obviously to control the (degree of recuperation in the) electric drive 21, in response to the selection of the input device 16 (e.g., paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0043], claim 7, FIG. 1, etc.); and FIG. 2 and paragraphs [0034], etc. in Hyun (‘039)], and, output said control signal to the electric drive of the trailer vehicle or to a trailer brake control unit of the trailer vehicle [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), as shown in FIG. 1[9], outputting the signal transmitted wirelessly or via cable (in paragraph [0055]) to the control unit 23 (as an obvious trailer brake control unit) of the trailer 20, that controls the degree of recuperative (a.k.a. regenerative) braking of the electric drive 21, in order to control the amount of energy supplied from the electric drive 21 to the electrical energy storage device 22 in accordance with the respective regenerative braking setting(s) of the input device 16; and, in particular, as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2, paragraphs [0034], etc. (e.g., as described above)], the method comprising:
generating and outputting the request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), to the brake control device 15 from the input device(s) 16, as shown in FIG. 1 as a dashed line arrow; see also paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0043], claim 7, FIG. 1, etc.; and as shown by the Shift-up and Shift-down signals received by the VCU in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039)] for the electric drive using said manual operating unit in response to a selection using, or an input into, said manual operating unit [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the driver’s selection, by use of the input device(s) 16, of the degree of recuperation on the trailer 20; see e.g., paragraphs [0041], [0043], etc.; and similarly in Hyun (‘039), the input signals for selection and change of the torque maps (as characteristic curves) from the paddle switches/shifts (e.g., paragraph [0030], etc.)];
receiving the request signal using the control unit of the towing vehicle [e.g., as shown in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) by the depicted (dashed line) arrow between the input device 16 and the brake control device 15];
generating a control signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the obvious signal that is to be transmitted, wirelessly or via cable, by the brake control device 15 to the control unit 23 located on the trailer 20, as shown in FIG. 1[10], obviously to control the (degree of recuperation in the) electric drive 21, in response to the selection of the input device 16; and in accordance with the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input device 16, at paragraph [0018] in Witte (DE, ‘901); and in FIG. 2 of Hyun (‘039), the variable amount of regenerative braking signal (arrow) as transmitted from the VCU to the MCU; see also e.g., paragraphs [0034], etc.] in response to the control unit receiving the request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the brake control unit 15 provides different characteristic curves with respect to the degree of recuperation on the trailer, and the degree of recuperation is selected by the driver via the input means 16, whereby the braking effect caused by the control unit 15’s depicted signal sent to the control unit 23 in the trailer is obviously performed “in response to” the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input means and received by the control unit 15; and with the “in response to” also being expressly taught in FIG. 2 and at paragraphs [0034], etc. of Hyun (‘039), e.g., as described above] and on a basis of the request signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), the brake control device 15 contains various curve profiles for braking torque of the trailer as a function of the actuation of the service brake system, which differ in terms of degree of recuperation of the trailer, and the driver selects an appropriate curve via the input device (e.g., paragraphs [0018], [0043], [0054] to [0056], claim 7, etc.) for allowing the braking effect of the trailer, obviously being effected by means of the depicted signal transmitted to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15, to be adjusted according to and in response to receiving the driver’s selected wishes for degree of recuperation as inputted via the input device 16, and on the basis of the depicted request signal from the input device 16] using the control unit of the towing vehicle [e.g., using the brake control device 15, in accordance with the degree of recuperation selected by the driver via the input device 16, at paragraph [0018] in Witte (DE, ‘901)]; and,
outputting the control signal to an electric drive control unit of an electric drive of the trailer vehicle or to a trailer brake control unit by way of the control unit of the towing vehicle [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), as shown in FIG. 1, outputting the signal transmitted wirelessly or via cable (in paragraph [0055]) to the control unit 23 (as an obvious trailer brake control unit) of the trailer 20, that controls the degree of recuperative (a.k.a. regenerative) braking of the electric drive 21, in order to control the amount of energy supplied from the electric drive 21 to the electrical energy storage device 22 in accordance with the respective regenerative braking setting(s) of the input device 16; and, in particular, as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2, paragraphs [0034], etc. (e.g., as described above)] so as to control operation of the electric drive of the trailer vehicle based on said control signal [e.g., in Witte (DE, ‘901), paragraphs [0053] to [0055], “In a motor vehicle, the aforementioned components, namely a braking torque at idle without actuation of the brake pedal, a braking torque when the brake pedal is actuated, and the load point increase in the towing vehicle 10 when the electric drive 21 is controlled, can be added. . . . If necessary, the driver can be offered a selection of different characteristic curves, which can be selected via appropriate input devices, as already mentioned. . . . The control can be integrated into a brake control device 15 arranged on the towing vehicle using software technology. This communicates, wirelessly or via cable, with a corresponding control unit 23 in the trailer 20, which in turn is connected to the electric drive 21 and the electric energy storage unit 22 in the trailer 20”; and, in particular, as taught by Hyun (‘039) in FIG. 2, paragraphs [0034], etc. (e.g., as described above)];
per claim 22, depending from claim 21, wherein the control unit is a brake control unit [e.g., the brake control device 15 in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witte (Germany, 102020201901; EPO machine translation provided previously) in view of Hyun (2015/0006039) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of DiGioacchino et al. (2021/0139008).
Witte (DE, ‘901) as implemented or modified in view of Hyun (‘039) has been described above.
The implemented or modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination may not reveal the claimed determination of the vehicle state based on vehicle velocity.
However, in the context field of an improved trailer brake gain determination system, DiGioacchino et al. (‘008) teaches e.g., at paragraph [0038] that the trailer brake control module 202 (that is integrated with the brake controller 141 of the tow vehicle) is provided with tow vehicle speed determined e.g., from tow vehicle wheel rotation information from wheel speed sensors 171 at each corner of the tow vehicle, as an obvious vehicle state of the tow/towed vehicle that is determined on the basis of vehicle velocity, with the wheel rotation information being useful in anti-lock brake controls and vehicle stability controls, among others, and also being used to validate predetermined conditions (a predetermined speed of the tow vehicle) and determine the trailer brake gain, wherein the trailer brake gain may (also/either) be accepted (at 417 in FIG. 4) or adjusted (at 307D, 307U), by the driver, e.g., by manual controls 303 provided at a dash pad 305 on the depicted (in FIG. 3) dashboard of the tow vehicle.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or further modify the Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination so that tow vehicle speed and tow vehicle wheel rotation information would have been determined in the brake control device 15 of the tow vehicle for validating predetermined tow speed conditions, as taught by DiGioacchino et al. (‘008), and/or in order to determine a suggested trailer brake gain setting that could be accepted and/or adjusted by the driver, as taught by DiGioacchino et al. (‘008), with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
As such, the implemented or further modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination would have rendered obvious:
per claim 5, depending from claim 1, wherein said control unit is configured to determine at least one of:
(i) a vehicle state on a basis of a vehicle velocity received or detected via said control unit [e.g., the tow vehicle speed (as a vehicle state) determined based on tow vehicle wheel rotation information from wheel speed sensors 171, as determined and used in DiGioacchino et al. (‘008)];
(ii) a slippage of at least one wheel [e.g., claim 3 in Witte (DE, ‘901), “the pre-pressure of a slip control system of the service brake system (12) of the towing vehicle (10) is evaluated to detect the actuation of the service brake system (12)”]; or
(iii) a detected activity of at least one driver assistance system [e.g., paragraph [0016] in Witte (DE, ‘901), “Furthermore, externally induced, i.e. driver-independent, brake applications can also be used, which result, for example, from an adaptive cruise control system, an autonomous driving system or the like, by evaluating a deceleration request generated independently of the tractor unit to detect the application of the service brake system.”];
per claim 6, depending from claim 5, wherein the at least one driver assistance system is an ESP [e.g., paragraph [0038] in Witte (DE, ‘901), “Alternatively or additionally, the pre-printed data of an ESC[11] slip control system of the service brake system 12 of the towing vehicle 10 can be evaluated”] or an ABS [e.g., the anti-lock brake controls taught by DiGioacchino et al. (‘008)];
Claims 8, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witte (Germany, 102020201901; EPO machine translation provided previously) in view of Hyun (2015/0006039) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Boss (Germany, 102020200889; EPO machine translation provided previously).
Witte (DE, ‘901) as implemented or modified in view of Hyun (‘039) has been described above.
The implemented or modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination may not reveal the setting of the traction assistance level, the switching of auxiliary loads, etc.
However, in the context field of an improved remote control arrangement for a trailer driven and braked by its own electric motor, Boss (DE, ‘889) teaches that an input device 111 in the form of e.g., a mobile phone or other suitable input device equipped in the vehicle (e.g., paragraph [0016]), may be used not only to switch the drive system on and/or off (e.g., paragraph [0014]), but also to increase and/or reduce the drive power of the drive system (e.g., paragraph [0015]) and can also influence the trailer’s electrical consumers by switching the consumers on and/or off (e.g., paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or further modify the Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination so that the input device (16) would have additionally been able to switch the drive system (for both driving and braking) on and/or off, to increase and/or reduce the drive power of the drive system, and to also influence the trailer’s electrical consumers by switching the consumers on and/or off, as taught by Boss (DE, ‘889), in order to increase control flexibility, with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
As such, the implemented or further modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination would have rendered obvious:
per claim 8, depending from claim 1, wherein a multiplicity of function requests [e.g., for selected degrees of recuperation, in Witte (DE, ‘901)] containing different operating modes [e.g., which different modes of the electric drive obviously recuperate energy at different degrees of recuperation, in Witte (DE, ‘901) at paragraphs [0018], [0043], etc. and at the correct time based on e.g., detected actuations of the service brake system 12 (e.g., paragraphs [0038], etc.), as described in conjunction with FIGS. 2, 3, paragraphs [0021], [0043], [0051], etc.; and/or at different amounts of regenerative braking, in Hyun (‘039)] are selectable via said manual operating unit [e.g., 16 in FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901); and as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 of Hyun (‘039)], the operating modes including at least one of:
(i) activating, reducing, or deactivating an automatic regeneration mode of the electric drive [e.g., paragraphs [0021], [0043], [0051], FIGS. 2, 3, etc. in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
(ii) activating, reducing, or deactivating automatic driving for the electric drive [e.g., paragraphs [0028], [0030], etc. in Witte (DE, ‘901)];
(iii) setting a torque distribution between retarders of the towing vehicle and the electric drive [e.g., with the retarders in Witte (DE, ‘901) being friction brakes and the distribution between P and MB being shown in FIG. 2]; or
(iv) setting a level of traction assistance [e.g., the increase or reduction in drive power, by the input device in Boss (DE, ‘889)] by the electric drive;
per claim 14, depending from claim 13, wherein the further request signals include further function requests for selecting first operating modes or second operating modes [e.g., different degrees of recuperation for the electric drive, as operating modes for the electric drive selected by means of the input device(s) 16, in Witte (DE, ‘901), where the modes may obviously include different amounts of regenerative braking, in Hyun (‘039)], wherein said second operating modes include at least one of::
(i) switching on or switching off electrical systems of the trailer vehicle [e.g., as taught by Witte (DE, ‘901) at paragraphs [0021], [0051], etc.; and as taught by the “on”/“off” switching in Boss (DE, ‘889)];
(ii) switching on or switching off auxiliary loads of the trailer vehicle [e.g., as taught by the switching on/off of electrical consumers in Boss (DE, ‘889)];
(iii) providing a control signal for controlling a power that can be drawn from a battery of the trailer vehicle by the auxiliary loads [e.g., when the electrical consumer(s) in Boss (DE, ‘889) are turned off, no power can obviously be drawn from the battery/energy storage device by it/them]; or
(iv) setting a desired state for the battery of the electric drive [e.g., a recuperation/regeneration state, where energy is/can be recuperated/regenerated into the battery, as taught by Witte (DE, ‘901) and Boss (DE, ‘889)];
per claim 15, depending from claim 14, wherein the power is a maximum power [e.g., when the electrical consumers in Boss (DE, ‘889) are switched off, the maximum power is obviously zero];
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witte (Germany, 102020201901; EPO machine translation provided previously) in view of Hyun (2015/0006039) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (2021/0394727). .
Witte (DE, ‘901) as implemented or modified in view of Hyun (‘039) has been described above.
The implemented or modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination may not expressly reveal generating the control signal for preventing unstable driving states, although the examiner understands that if a trailer is not braked when the tractor is braked, that is an unstable driving state (e.g., that causes jackknifing, fishtailing, etc. when the trailer pushes the tractor from behind), and thus the trailer braking in Witte (DE, ‘901) necessarily/implicitly/obviously prevents this/these unstable driving state(s).
However, in the context field of an improved method for preventing instability of a vehicle, Lee et al. (‘727) teaches in conjunction with FIGS. 2, 6, etc. that a second wheel-slip monitoring controller 20 is provided, and when a rear-wheel slip value is determined through comparison to be greater than a reference slip value, the rear-wheel regenerative braking torque is reduced (S42), in order to prevent instability of the vehicle.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement or further modify the Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination so that when a rear-wheel slip value (e.g., of the trailer wheels) was determined to be greater than a reference slip value, as taught by Lee et al. (‘727), the rear-wheel regenerative (recuperative) braking torque would have been reduced (S42), as taught by Lee et al. (‘727), in order to prevent instability of the vehicle, with a reasonable expectation of success, and e.g., as a use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
As such, the implemented or further modified Witte (DE, ‘901) brake control device for a vehicle combination would have rendered obvious:
per claim 23, depending from claim 1, wherein the control unit is configured to generate the control signal for preventing unstable driving states [e.g., a control signal to reduce the rear-wheel regenerative braking torque, as taught by Lee et al. (‘727), when the rear-wheel slip value in Witte (DE, ‘901) exceeded the reference slip value, to prevent instability of the vehicle; and as taught by Witte (DE, ‘901) himself, with recuperative braking of the trailer preventing unstable driving states such as jackknifing, etc.];
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 3 are allowed.
Claims 4, 7, and 9 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.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
For example only, Limbacher et al. (2014/0177208) teaches (in the context of controlling recuperation behavior in a motor vehicle) at paragraph [0017] that, “It has proved to be particularly advantageous when as the second operating element, a switch and/or switching lever on the steering wheel and/or on the steering column is utilized, in particular a switching rocker. Particularly preferred are switching rockers, frequently referred to "paddles", that can be placed in the area of the crossbar of the steering wheel, where they are easily accessible for the finger of a driver holding the steering wheel.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David A Testardi whose telephone number is (571)270-3528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, 8:30am - 5:30pm E.T., and Friday, 8:30 am - 12:30 pm E.T.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached at (571) 272-4896. 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 A TESTARDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
1 See the “comprising”, e.g., in line 2 of claim 1.
2 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted request signal:
PNG
media_image2.png
590
1008
media_image2.png
Greyscale
3 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted (control) signal that is shown as being transmitted/outputted wirelessly to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15:
PNG
media_image3.png
516
852
media_image3.png
Greyscale
4 See the “Prior Art” section near the end of this Office action.
5 See the “Prior Art” section near the end of this Office action.
6 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted (control) signal that is shown as being transmitted/outputted wirelessly to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15:
PNG
media_image3.png
516
852
media_image3.png
Greyscale
7 See FIG. 1 in Witte (DE, ‘901) and FIG. 2 in Hyun (‘039) which both read on the “said manual operating unit is connected directly to an interface of said control unit”, with the interface being where the signal line(s) from the manual operating unit (16) join(s)/enter(s) the control unit (e.g., either the brake control device 15 in Witte (DE, ‘901) or the VCU 20 in Hyun (‘039)).
8 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted request signal:
PNG
media_image2.png
590
1008
media_image2.png
Greyscale
9 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted (control) signal that is shown as being transmitted/outputted wirelessly to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15:
PNG
media_image3.png
516
852
media_image3.png
Greyscale
10 The examiner annotates FIG. 1 of Witte (DE, ‘901) below/on the next page to show the depicted (control) signal that is shown as being transmitted/outputted wirelessly to the control unit 23 from the brake control device 15:
PNG
media_image3.png
516
852
media_image3.png
Greyscale
11 Electronic Stability Control, which would have obviously been implemented with a computer “Program”, as was well-known and conventional.
Prosecution Insights