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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains a typographical error, namely “vehicleincludes” without a space. Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 14 recites, “the second output port”. Please amend this limitation to read “the second output pressure port” for sake of consistency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 16 is indefinite because claim 16 depends from claim 15, which depends from claim 14, and claim 16 further recites that the pressure chamber is “additionally hydraulically connected to the pressure medium reservoir via a non-return valve.” This recitation is unclear in view of claim 14’s recitation that no further valve in addition to the second isolating valve is arranged in the claimed hydraulic connection, unless the non-return valve is intended to be located in a separate or parallel hydraulic connection. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of the claimed hydraulic valve arrangement are unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 11-12, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Dinkel et al. (WO 2020126344 A1) in view of Leiber et al. (WO 2021151910 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Dinkel discloses a brake system (10) for a motor vehicle, comprising:
a first unit (11) including a first electrically actuable pressure supply device (electrically operated pressure generator / linear actuator 40 driven by electric motor 42) having a hydraulic pressure chamber (pressure chamber of the electrically operated pressure generator / linear actuator 40), wherein the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is hydraulically connected to a first output pressure port (first output connection AA1) and a second output pressure port (second output connection AA2; see Fig. 2);
a second unit (12) including
a first input port (EA1) which is hydraulically connected to at least one first wheel port (wheel brake connection for wheel brakes B1, B2),
a second input port (EA2) which is hydraulically connected to at least one second wheel port (wheel brake connection for wheel brakes B3, B4),
a second electrically actuable pressure supply device (motor 50 driving first pump 51 and second pump 52) hydraulically connected to the at least one first wheel port and the at least one second wheel port, and
at least one inlet valve per first and second wheel port (E1, E2, E3, E4 assigned to wheel brakes B1, B2, B3, B4; see Fig. 2);
wherein the first output pressure port of the first unit is connected to the first input port of the second unit (first connecting line 16 connects first output connection AA1 to input connection EA1) and the second output pressure port of the first unit is connected to the second input port of the second unit (second connecting line 17 connects second output connection AA2 to second input connection EA2); and
a pressure medium reservoir which is under atmospheric pressure (brake fluid container/reservoir 13 arranged on first unit 11).
Dinkel does not expressly disclose wherein the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is the only pressure supply device associated with the first unit; and
wherein the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is hydraulically connected to the second output pressure port without connection of a valve in between.
Leiber teaches wherein the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is the only pressure supply device associated with the first unit (first module including first pressure supply unit 6 with electromotive drive 8, and optional second pressure supply unit 14, such that the second pressure supply unit 14 may be omitted); and
wherein the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is hydraulically connected to the second output pressure port without connection of a valve in between (first pressure supply unit 6 connected to second connection point A2 by a second hydraulic line HL2 configured without a valve. See also page 11 pgh. 4 of the translation, “The isolating valve PD1, if provided”, which suggests it can be omitted, therefore it is “without connection of a valve in between” as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first unit of Dinkel with the simplified first module hydraulic-line arrangement of Leiber, such that Dinkel’s electrically operated pressure generator / linear actuator (electrically operated pressure generator/linear actuator 40) is the only pressure supply device associated with the first unit and is hydraulically connected to the second output connection (AA2) without connection of a valve in between, in order to reduce valves and pressure-supply components, reduce cost and hydraulic complexity, and provide a predictable two-module brake-by-wire system having a valve-free hydraulic connection from the first pressure supply unit to the second output/connection point.
Regarding claim 12, Dinkel discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11, wherein the pressure chamber of the first electrically actuable pressure supply device (pressure chamber of electrically operated pressure generator/linear actuator 40) is hydraulically connected to the first output pressure port (first output connection AA1) via an electrically actuable, normally open circuit isolating valve (V4), and wherein no further valve in addition to the circuit isolating valve is arranged in the hydraulic connection between the pressure chamber and the first output pressure port (as modified, V3 is omitted, therefore V4 is the only valve in the recited location).
Regarding claim 17, Dinkel further discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11, wherein the second unit (12) includes:
a first brake circuit which hydraulically connects the first input port to the at least one first wheel port (first input connection EA1 connected to inlet valves E1, E2 and wheel brakes B1, B2); and
a second brake circuit which hydraulically connects the second input port to the at least one second wheel port (second input connection EA2 connected to inlet valves E3, E4 and wheel brakes B3, B4);
wherein the second electrically actuable pressure supply device includes one pump per brake circuit (first pump 51 associated with inlet valves E1, E2 and second pump 52 associated with inlet valves E3, E4);
one outlet valve is provided per first and second wheel port (outlet valves A1, A2, A3, A4 assigned to wheel brakes B1, B2, B3, B4); and
one low-pressure accumulator is provided per brake circuit, said low-pressure accumulator is connected to output ports of the outlet valves assigned to the brake circuit (first low-pressure accumulator N1 connected to outlet valves A1, A2 and second low-pressure accumulator N2 connected to outlet valves A3, A4).
Regarding claim 20, Dinkel discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11.
Dinkel does not expressly disclose wherein the brake system includes a brake pedal unit connected only electrically to the first and second unit.
Leiber teaches wherein the brake system includes a brake pedal unit (optional second pressure supply unit 14 configured as an electronic pedal) which is connected only electrically to the first and second unit (electronic pedal arrangement used with first control unit 9 of the first module and second control unit 95 of the second module via communitive connection 100/CAN bus for exchanging electrical control signals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the brake system of Dinkel to the electronic-pedal/electrical-control arrangement of Leiber because Leiber teaches using electronic-pedal/electrical-control architecture in a brake-by-wire system, such that the brake pedal unit is connected only electrically to the first and second units, in order to implement Leiber’s electronic-pedal brake by-wire option and transmit the driver’s braking request electrically through the control architecture while reducing hydraulic pedal-interface complexity.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinkel et al. (WO 2020126344 A1) in view of Leiber et al. (WO 2021151910 A1) and further in view of Besier et al. (US 20170274884 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Dinkel as modified discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11, including the first output pressure port (first output connection AA1) and a pressure medium reservoir (brake fluid container/reservoir 13).
Dinkel does not expressly disclose wherein the first output pressure port is hydraulically connected to the pressure medium reservoir via a first electrically actuable isolating valve.
Besier teaches an output pressure port (outlet pressure connection 40, one of wheel specific outlet pressure connections 40-43) is hydraulically connected to the pressure medium reservoir (pressure-medium reservoir 80) via a first electrically actuable isolating valve (outlet valve 16 of electrically actuable outlet valve assembly, selectively connecting outlet pressure connection 40 to reservoir connection 81 and pressure medium reservoir 80; see Fig. 2 and ¶¶ 0066).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the brake system of Dinkel to provide the first output pressure port with Besier’s electrically actuable reservoir isolating outlet valve because Besier teaches using such an electrically actuable outlet valve arrangement to selectively connect an outlet pressure connection to the pressure medium reservoir for controlled pressure discharge. Such a modification would have allowed the first output pressure port to be selectively relieved or discharged to the pressure medium reservoir, thereby providing controlled pressure reduction and pressure relief using a known electrically actuable reservoir outlet valve arrangement.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinkel et al. (WO 2020126344 A1) in view of Leiber et al. (WO 2021151910 A1) and further in view of Feigel et al. (US 20160264113 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Dinkel as modified discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11, including the pressure chamber of the first electrically actuable pressure supply device (pressure chamber of electrically operated pressure generator/linear actuator 40) and the second output pressure port (second output connection AA2).
Dinkel does not expressly disclose wherein the pressure chamber of the first electrically actuable pressure supply device and the second output port are hydraulically connected to the pressure medium reservoir via a second electrically actuable isolating valve, wherein no further valve in addition to the second isolating valve is arranged in said hydraulic connection between the pressure chamber and both the second output pressure port and the pressure medium reservoir.
Feigel teaches a reservoir pressure-equalization and replenishment path from a pressure chamber/output-line side of an electrically controlled pressure source to a pressure medium reservoir. In particular, Feigel teaches an electrically controlled pressure source (pressure source 5) having a pressure chamber (pressure chamber 50 bounded by piston 51), wherein the pressure chamber is connected to an output-line side (port 56 and system pressure line segment 58 connected to brake circuit supply lines I and II), and wherein the output-line side is hydraulically connected to a pressure medium reservoir (4) via an electrically actuable isolating valve (normally open diagnostic valve 13 in pressure equalization line 41a), wherein no further valve in addition to the electrically actuable isolating valve is arranged in the diagnostic-valve branch of said hydraulic connection (pressure equalization line 41a connects system pressure line segment 58 to pressure medium reservoir container 4 through diagnostic valve 13, with non-return valve 14 arranged in parallel rather than as a further series valve in the diagnostic-valve branch; see Fig. 1 and ¶0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the brake system of Dinkel to include Feigel’s reservoir pressure equalization/replenishment path on the pressure chamber/second output pressure port side, in order to allow pressure equalization, pressure relief, and replenishment of pressure medium from the reservoir during retraction of the pressure source piston.
Regarding claim 15, wherein the second electrically actuable isolating valve is normally open (see Feigel, diagnostic valve 13 is a normally open diagnostic valve, ¶ 0037).
Regarding claim 16, wherein the pressure chamber of the first electrically actuable pressure supply device is additionally hydraulically connected to the pressure medium reservoir via a non-return valve closing in the direction of the pressure medium reservoir (see Feigel, pressure chamber 50 connected through port 56, system pressure line segment 58, and pressure equalization line 41a to pressure medium reservoir container 4, with non-return valve 14 arranged in parallel with diagnostic valve 13 and closing toward pressure medium reservoir container 4; ¶ 0037).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinkel et al. (WO 2020126344 A1) in view of Leiber et al. (WO 2021151910 A1) and further in view of Witte et al. (WO 2004110840 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Dinkel as modified discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 11, including the second unit (Dinkel, 12) having a first pressure sensor (see fig. 2) for the first input port (first input connection EA1) and the second input port (second input connection EA2).
Dinkel does not expressly disclose a second pressure sensor for the second input port are provided in the second unit.
Witte teaches wherein a first pressure sensor for the first input port and a second pressure sensor for the second input port are provided in the second unit (ESP hydraulic unit 17 connected to outputs 15 and 16 and including pre-pressure sensor 18 for detecting inlet pre-pressure, with an additional brake pressure sensor installable in the second brake circuit for redundancy, see page 6 pgh. 1, “For safety reasons, a brake pressure sensor can also be installed in the second brake circuit for redundancy, which is used if the first circuit fails.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second unit of Dinkel to include Witte’s inlet pre-pressure sensing arrangement, including pre-pressure sensor 18 and an additional brake pressure sensor in the second brake circuit, in order to detect the pressure supplied at each brake circuit input and provide input-pressure information for circuit-by-circuit pressure control by the second-unit control unit.
Regarding claim 19, Dinkel as modified discloses the brake system as set forth in claim 18, further comprising a first electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit (ECU1 associated with first unit 11) and a second electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit (ECU2 associated with second unit 12), wherein the first electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit is electrically independent of the second electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit (separate ECU1 and ECU2), and wherein the first electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit controls the electrically actuable components of the first unit (ECU1 controlling electrically actuable components of first unit 11), wherein the second electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit controls the electrically actuable components of the second unit (ECU2 controlling electrically actuable components of second unit 12), wherein the first and the second pressure sensor of the second unit are connected in terms of signaling to the second electronic open-loop and closed-loop control unit (As modified, Dinkel includes both the first and second pressure sensors within the second unit 12. Dinkel also states ECU2 controls the second unit 12. Accordingly, each pressure sensor sends its respective signal to ECU2. Additionally, since both pressure sensors as modified send their respective signals to ECU2, the pressure sensors are “connected in terms of signaling” as claimed).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Karem Akram Algarash whose telephone number is (571)272-5789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.A.A./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights