DETAILED ACTION
The following is a first action on the merits of application serial no. 18/720130 filed 6/14/2024.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 6/14/24 and 10/22/24 have been considered.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the terms “is arranged” should be inserted after the term “source” and before the punctuation (,) on line 4. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 16 recites the limitation “a second structural unit in which a second electrically actuable pressure source,…... The terms “is arranged” should be inserted after the term “source” and before the punctuation (,).
-Claim 17 recites the preamble “The brake system as claimed claim 16…..”. The term “in” should be inserted between the terms “claimed” and “claim”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
-Claim 16 recites the limitation “wherein the first structural unit and the second structural unit are connected to each other by at most one pressure-resistant hydraulic connecting element.”. It is unclear as to what the phrase “at most” is referring to, please clarify and amend accordingly.
-Claim 24 recites the limitation “wherein the second pressure source is connected to the pressure medium reservoir on the suction side without intermediate switching of an electrically actuable valve, in particular via the first hydraulic connection of the second structural unit and a hydraulic connecting line connected to the first hydraulic connection.” The phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16, 20-23, 25, 26 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 102019207088 (IDS cited art with machine translation). As to claim 16, DE discloses a brake system for a motor vehicle having at least four hydraulically actuable wheel brakes (8-11), said brake system comprising: a first structural unit (100) in which a first electrically actuable pressure source (35) is arranged; a second structural unit (200) in which a second electrically actuable pressure source (60 is arranged), an electrically actuable inlet valve per wheel brake (6a-6d), and an electrically actuable outlet valve per wheel brake are arranged (7a-7d); and a pressure medium reservoir (4); wherein the first pressure source and the second pressure source are connected to a brake supply line (12, 13) to which the at least four inlet valves are connected; and wherein the first structural unit and the second structural unit are connected to each other by at most one pressure-resistant hydraulic connecting element (26b can be considered a pressure resistant hydraulic element based on valves being well known in the art to regulate flow and pressure of hydraulic fluid within a system often operating under high pressure conditions).
As to claim 20, wherein the first structural unit includes at least one first hydraulic connection for connecting to the pressure medium reservoir (lines within 100 coupled to 4) and a second hydraulic connection for connecting to the second structural unit (12a, 12b), and wherein the second hydraulic connection is connected to the pressure-resistant hydraulic connecting element (12b).
As to claim 21, wherein the second structural unit includes at least four hydraulic wheel connections for connecting to the wheel brakes (lines within 200 connected to 8-11), a first hydraulic connection for connection to the pressure medium reservoir (12a) and a second hydraulic connection for connection to the first structural unit (12b), wherein the second hydraulic connection is connected to the pressure-resistant hydraulic connecting element.
As to claim 22, wherein the second structural unit does not include a further hydraulic connection (only 12a and 12b to 100 and lines to 8-11).
As to claim 23, further comprising a first hydraulic connection of the first structural unit (any lines within 100 coupled to hydraulic components) and a first hydraulic connection of the second structural unit (any lines within 200 coupled to hydraulic components), which are connected to different chambers of the pressure medium reservoir (lines within 100 are coupled to 40b and lines within 200 are coupled to 41a).
As to claim 25, wherein the first and second pressure sources are the only pressure sources for building up a brake pressure for actuating the wheel brakes (as shown in Figures 1 and 2).
As to claim 26, wherein the first structural unit includes a first electronic control device (110) which controls the first pressure source.
As to claim 29, wherein the second structural unit includes a second electronic control device (210) which actuates the second pressure source and the inlet and outlet valves.
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.
Claim(s) 17, 18, 27, 28 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE in view of Zimmermann 20200276963. As to claim 17, DE discloses the first pressure source (35) connected to the brake supply line via an electrically actuable first isolation valve (26b), but doesn’t disclose wherein the valve arranged in the second structural unit.
Zimmermann discloses a brake system for a motor vehicle having a first power source (35) connected to a brake supply line (13) via an electrically actuated isolation valve (26) and teaches that two or more modules is possible for accommodating the system [0065], wherein 26 can be part of another module based on position closer to line 13).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the isolation valve in DE into the second structural unit in view of Zimmermann to reduce the amount of components assembled together within first unit which reduces assembly time and cost per unit.
As to claim 18, DE discloses wherein the first pressure source is connected to the pressure medium reservoir via an electrically actuable second isolation valve (52 or 70), and wherein the second isolation valve is arranged in the first structural unit.
As to claim 27, DE discloses wherein the first structural unit includes a first electronic control device (110) which controls the first pressure source.
As to claim 28, DE discloses wherein the second isolation valve (52 or 70) is actuated by the first electronic control device (110).
As to claim 32, DE in view of Zimmermann discloses wherein the second structural unit includes a second electronic control device (210 in DE) which actuates the second pressure source, the inlet and outlet valves, and the first isolation valve (Zimmermann teaches that two or more modules is possible for accommodating the system [0065], wherein 26 can be part of another module based on position closer to line 13).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19, 24, 30 and 31 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 prior art of record doesn’t disclose or render obvious a motivation to provide for:
-(as to claim 19 in combination with claim 16 exactly as written)…... an electrically actuable, normally open, circuit isolation valve arranged in the brake supply line such that, with the circuit isolation valve closed, the brake supply line is hydraulically separated into a first line section and a second line section, wherein the first line section is hydraulically connected to the second pressure source and at least two of the at least four inlet valves, and the second line section is hydraulically connected to the first pressure source and the others of the at least four inlet valves, and wherein the circuit isolation valve is arranged in the second structural unit.
-(as to claim 24 in combination with claim 16 exactly as written)….. wherein the second pressure source is connected to the pressure medium reservoir on the suction side without intermediate switching of an electrically actuable valve, in particular via the first hydraulic connection of the second structural unit and a hydraulic connecting line connected to the first hydraulic connection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-DE 102018214564 per the PCT written opinion as filed has been considered. This prior art meets the limitations of claims 16, 20-23, 25, 26 and 29 as recited.
-Grimm et al 20200339086 discloses a brake system for a motor vehicle teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a pressure resistant hydraulic connecting element connecting a first pressure source of a first assembly to a second assembly ([0008]).
-DE 102012205859 discloses a brake system for a motor vehicle and meets the limitations of at least claim 16 as recited (see Figure 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TISHA D LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7093. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30am to 5:00pm.
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, Anna M Momper can be reached at 571-270-5788. 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.
Tdl
/TISHA D LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 May 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights