DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information disclosure statement has been received and considered.
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-is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murata 12,515,596 in view of Leiber 12,005,870 and DE 10232219 A1
Regarding claim 1 Murata shows in figures 1-4:
A motor vehicle comprising: a chassis 12; a body portion 10,14 which delimits a wheelhouse region 16 from a body inner region; wherein a wheel 20 with an associated electromechanical wheel brake (probably 28) is arranged on the part of the wheelhouse region 16 ; a control unit 18 of the motor vehicle; an electrical line, an the electromechanical wheel brake is connectable to the control loop via the electrical line; a first line portion 50 or 50a of the electrical line in the wheelhouse region and a second line portion 60 or 60a of the electrical line in the body inner region 16 and an electrical connecting device 58 or 70 which is arranged in the body inner region, connecting the first line portion 50,50a and the second line portions 60,60a to each other.
Note that Murata is broad in the description regarding several of the components such as 18 and 28. For example Murata states in col 5 lines 1-40+:
The vehicle body-side device 18 is provided on the vehicle body 10, and the wheel-side device 28 is provided on the wheel 20. The wheel-side device 28 is a device that is incorporated into the wheel 20, and moves together with the wheel 20 in the up-down direction with respect to the vehicle body 10. It is envisioned that the wheel-side device 28 is a sensor, an electric-powered brake, a traveling motor, or the like. The sensor is, for example, a sensor for detecting the rotational speed of the wheel. The electric-powered brake is a brake that includes a motor and the like, and brakes the rotation of the wheel 20 using electricity as power. The electric-powered brake may be an electric-powered parking brake that is used when the automobile is stopped and parked, or a brake that is used when the automobile is travelling. The traveling motor is a so-called in-wheel motor that is incorporated into the wheel 20 and rotates the wheel 20. The vehicle body-side device 18 is a device that transmits and receives signals to and from the wheel-side device 28, and supplies power to the wheel-side device 28. For example, the vehicle body-side device 18 is an ECU (Electronic Control Unit) that receives a signal from the sensor and controls the electric-powered brake or the traveling motor. The vehicle body-side device 18 may be provided inside the vehicle body 10, or may be provided outside the vehicle body 10. Here, the vehicle body-side device 18 is provided inside the vehicle body 10.
(26) In the present embodiment, an example is given in which the vehicle body-side device 18 is provided inside the vehicle body 10, and two wheel-side devices 28 are provided on the wheel 20. A plurality of vehicle body-side devices 18 may also be provided on the vehicle body. One or three or more wheel-side devices may also be provided on the wheel. Also, in the present embodiment, an example is given in which one end portion of the wire harness 40 is connected to the vehicle body-side device 18, and the other end portion thereof is connected to the wheel-side devices 28. One end portion of the wire harness 40 may also be connected to the vehicle body-side device via another wire harness.
Lacking in Murata is a specific statement that the ECU, which could be one of the elements at 18, is both an open loop and closed loop control unit. Also lacking is a specific showing of the electromechanical brake – presumably one of elements at 28.
However Leiber shows an electromechanical wheel brake device in figures 1 and 1a and states in col 17 lines 15-20 with reference to Figure 4:
FIG. 4 shows a brake system according to FIG. 3, but without a mechanical actuation unit, that is to say without a brake pedal for an application for AD level 5. Additionally, a superordinate open-loop and closed-loop control unit Master ECU is provided, which is connected to the open-loop and closed-loop control unit Slave ECU of the brake system via redundant data lines DS1 and DS2.
Also note the connector (not labeled) for the motor at the right side of the drawing.
DE ‘219 may be slightly redundant with Leiber but shows how such an EMB device would be connected to an ECU type component via a plug 48,49 in a wheelhouse. Note the two connection lines at 41,46. See figures 2A and 2B.
One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have made one of the ECU components at 18 in Murata both an open and closed loop controller so that it can perform both sets of operations where needed (a 2 in 1 type of controller). For example cruise control vs. simple control of motor vehicle actuators.
Also it would have been obvious that the device of Murata must incorporate a braking device of some type in the wheelhouse. It would have been obvious to have used an EMB type brake in Murata, as taught by Leiber and connected as generally taught by DE ‘219 since Murata seems to indicate this is possible in the broad description of the system therein.
Regarding claims 1-3, as broadly claimed, these limitations are capable of being met.
Regarding claim 4,5 as broadly claimed, note the grommets at 51,61. These could be broadly interpreted as a ‘seal’ since they hold the lines 50,60.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murata/Leiber/DE ‘219 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of DE 19826373 A1.
Regarding claims 6 Murata, as modified, lacks specifically showing a ventilation line from the EMB.
However the EMB brake of DE ‘373 shows such a ventilation line at 70. Specifically DE ‘373 states:
As can be seen in FIG. 6, the cable 66 with the integrated ventilation line 70 from the wheel brake device 10 according to the invention, which is mounted in the interior of a rim 76 of a vehicle wheel 78 , is a little upwards along a spring strut 80 and then through a splash guard 82 led into a water and dirt-protected space, for example an engine compartment or a passenger compartment of a motor vehicle. The ventilation line 70 ensures that there is always ambient pressure inside the electric motor 24 . At the same time, the ingress of water or dirt is reliably prevented.
One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to have provided a ventilation line in the EMB of Murata, as modified above, as taught by DE ‘373 for the reasons above.
Regarding claim 7 it would have been obvious to have provided the ventilation line in a protective sheathing to shield it from heat and/or debris and dirt.
Regarding claim 8 it would have been obvious to have ended the ventilation hose ‘in an opening’ (as broadly claimed) since it would obviously be inserted into an electrical connection device/plug of some type.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7123. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 A.M.-7:00P.M..
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, Rob 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
6/24/26
Prosecution Insights