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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/726,895 filed on 07/05/2024. Claims 19-36 are pending; claims 1-18 are canceled.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/3/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
“DE102018208223A1” and “DE102019207088A1” from IDS filed on 9/3/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding the phrase “reservoir chamber” in various claims, applicant does not have provide any specification definition of the phrase in the specification. Therefore, the phrase should be given its ordinary meaning, as any hydraulic chamber capable of containing or holding hydraulic fluid.
Regarding the phrase “hydraulically connected” in various claims, applicant does not have provide any specification definition of the phrase in the specification. Therefore, the phrase should be given its ordinary meaning, as fluid connection path through which fluid can travel, regardless of how many valves, lines or intermediate reservoirs are in between.
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.
Claim 31 is 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 31 recites “the hydraulic connecting element”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 19-20, 22, 25, 30-31, 34-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DINKEL (WO2020229482A1 cited from IDS)
DINKEL discloses
Claims 19-20, 22, 25, 30-31, 35 (1st interpretation):
Claim 19: A brake system (fig.1) for a motor vehicle (¶[0002]) having at least four hydraulically actuable wheel brakes (8-11), said brake system (fig.1) comprising:
one electrically actuable inlet valve (6a-6d) per wheel brake (8-11);
a first electrically actuable pressure source (5) and a second electrically actuable pressure source (60), wherein the first pressure source (5) and the second pressure source (60) are connected to a brake supply line (12a, 12b) to which the inlet valves (6a-6d) are connected;
a pressure medium reservoir (assembly of 4,104, 304) having a first reservoir chamber (e.g. left chamber of 4) and a second reservoir chamber (304), wherein the first pressure source (5) is hydraulically connected to the first reservoir chamber (e.g. left chamber of 4), and wherein the second pressure source (60a of 60) is hydraulically connected (via 12a, 40a, 4, 104) to the second reservoir chamber (304);
wherein the pressure medium reservoir (assembly of 4,104, 304) includes a third reservoir chamber (e.g. right chamber of 4) and the first pressure source (5) is connected via an electrically actuable first separation valve (52) to the third reservoir chamber (e.g. right chamber of 4).
Claim 20: The brake system as claimed in claim 19, wherein the reservoir chambers (left and right chamber of 4 and 304) are separated from each other by partition walls (see annotated Fig below).
PNG
media_image1.png
758
1122
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 22: The brake system as claimed in claim 19, further comprising one electrically actuable outlet valve (7a-7d) per wheel brake (8-11), wherein the outlet valves (7a-7d) are normally closed (e.g. when these valves are not energized) and are connected to (via 65a, 65b, 60a, 60b, 12a, 12b, 52, 4) the second reservoir chamber (304).
Claim 25: The brake system as claimed in claim 19, further comprising a first structural unit (100', 300), in which the first electrically actuable pressure source (5) is arranged, and a second structural unit (200), in which the second electrically actuable pressure source (60) and the electrically actuable inlet valves (6a-6d) are arranged, wherein the pressure medium reservoir (assembly of 4, 104, 304) is arranged on the first structural unit (300,100’).
Claim 30: The brake system as claimed in claim 25, wherein the first separation valve (52) is arranged in the first structural unit.
Claim 31: The brake system as claimed in claim 25, wherein the second structural unit (200) comprises at least four hydraulic wheel ports (e.g. outlet port from outlet valves 7a-7d) for connection to the wheel brakes (8-11), a first hydraulic port (port from valve 7a) for connection to the second reservoir chamber (304), and a second hydraulic port (e.g. port from 7b) for connection to the first structural unit (100’, 300), the second hydraulic port (e.g. port from 7b) being connected to the hydraulic connecting element (see annotated Fig below).
PNG
media_image2.png
758
1122
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 35: The brake system as claimed in claim 19, wherein the first pressure source (5) is connected to the first reservoir chamber (left chamber of 4) via a non-return valve (53) opening in the direction of the first pressure source (5).
Claims 19, and 34 (2nd interpretation):
DINKEL discloses
Claim 19: a brake system (fig.1) for a motor vehicle (¶[0002]) having at least four hydraulically actuable wheel brakes (8-11), said brake system (fig.1) comprising:
one electrically actuable inlet valve (6a-6d) per wheel brake (8-11);
a first electrically actuable pressure source (5) and a second electrically actuable pressure source (60a), wherein the first pressure source (5) and the second pressure source (60a) are connected to a brake supply line (12a, 12b) to which the inlet valves (6a-6d) are connected;
a pressure medium reservoir (assembly of 4,104, 304) having a first reservoir chamber (e.g. left chamber of 4) and a second reservoir chamber (e.g. right chamber of 4), wherein the first pressure source (5) is hydraulically connected to the first reservoir chamber (e.g. left chamber of 4), and wherein the second pressure source (60a) is hydraulically connected (via 62a, 12a, 40a) to the second reservoir chamber (e.g. right chamber of 4);
wherein the pressure medium reservoir (assembly of 4,104, 304) includes a third reservoir chamber (304) and the first pressure source (5) is connected via (26a, 12a, 52, 4, 104) an electrically actuable first separation valve (52) to the third reservoir chamber (304).
Claim 34: The brake system as claimed in claim 19, further comprising at least four wheel ports (e.g. outlet port from outlet valves 7a-7d) for the at least four wheel brakes (8-11), wherein in a de-energized state of the brake system, both the first reservoir chamber ( e.g. left chamber of 4) is hydraulically separated from the wheel ports (e.g. ports from valve 7a-7b) and the second reservoir chamber (right chamber of 4) is hydraulically separated from the wheel ports (e.g. ports from valve 7c-7d).
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) 21, 23-24, 32-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DINKEL (WO2020229482A1)
Claim 21: DINKEL discloses the brake system as claimed in claim 19, wherein the third reservoir chamber (e.g. right chamber of 4) smaller than the second reservoir chamber (304) as shown in Fig.1
However, DINKEL does not disclose third reservoir chamber is smaller than the first reservoir chamber.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust third reservoir chamber smaller than first reservoir chamber because the right chamber primarily handles the return fluid and does not need same volume as the supply chamber for pressure source. Moreover, relative sizes of pressure chambers are recognized result based on its functions is a routine design choice. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the volume of third chamber in order to save space and weight, improve packaging while preserving adequate braking performance and system functionality. This modification merely involves optimization of known design parameter and would have yield predictable results. Furthermore, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level or ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 23: DINKEL (Fig.1) does not disclose an electrically actuable, normally open, circuit separation valve arranged in the brake supply line such that, when the circuit separation valve is 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 to at least two of the inlet valves, and the second line section is hydraulically connected to the first pressure source and to the other inlet valves, in particular to at least the other two of the inlet valves.
Dinkel (Fig.2) teaches an electrically actuable, normally open, circuit separation valve (70) arranged in the brake supply line (line between 12a and 12b) such that, when the circuit separation valve (70) is closed, the brake supply line is hydraulically separated into a first line section (12b) and a second line section (12a), wherein the first line section (12b) is hydraulically connected to the second pressure source (60b of 60) and to at least two of the inlet valves (6c, 6d), and the second line section (12a) is hydraulically connected to the first pressure source (60a of 60) and to the other inlet valves (6a,6b), in particular to at least the other two of the inlet valves.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include circuit separation valve (70) in the brake supply line such that, when the circuit separation valve is closed, the brake supply line is hydraulically separated into a first line section and a second line section as taught by Fig.2 to hydraulic circuit of Fig.1 to allow isolation of faulty circuit and improve safety and redundancy.
Claim 24: Dinkel (Fig.1) discloses the first pressure source (5) is connected to the brake supply line (12a,12b) via an electrically actuable, normally closed, second separation valve (26b)
However, Dinkel does not disclose second separation valve is normally open valve.
Dinkel (Fig.2) teaches an electrically actuable, normally open, separation valve (70).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace normally close separation valve (26b, Fig.1) with normally open, separation valve (70) from Fig.2 to achieve fail safe operation in event of power loss, the valve remains open and maintain hydraulic communication between pressure source and brake lines.
Claim 32: Dinkel (Fig.1) does not disclose an electrically actuable, normally open, circuit separation valve arranged in the brake supply line such that, when the circuit separation valve is 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 to at least two of the inlet valves, and the second line section is hydraulically connected to the first pressure source and to the other inlet valves, in particular to at least the other two of the inlet valves, wherein the circuit separation valve is arranged in the second structural unit.
Dinkel (Fig.2) teaches an electrically actuable, normally open, circuit separation valve (70) arranged in the brake supply line (line between 12a and 12b) such that, when the circuit separation valve (70) is closed, the brake supply line is hydraulically separated into a first line section (12b) and a second line section (12a), wherein the first line section (12b) is hydraulically connected to the second pressure source (60b of 60) and to at least two of the inlet valves (6c, 6d), and the second line section (12a) is hydraulically connected to the first pressure source (60a of 60) and to the other inlet valves (6a,6b), in particular to at least the other two of the inlet valves.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include circuit separation valve (70) in the brake supply line such that, when the circuit separation valve is closed, the brake supply line is hydraulically separated into a first line section and a second line section as taught by Fig.2 to hydraulic circuit of Fig.1 to allow isolation of faulty circuit and improve safety and redundancy.
Dinkel Fig.1 and Fig.2 does not disclose wherein the circuit separation valve is arranged in the second structural unit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange valve 70 in the second structural unit 200 to provide mechanical redundancy, ensure rapid, reliable axle isolation.
Claim 33: Dinkel (Fig.1) discloses the brake system as claimed in claim 25, wherein the first pressure source (5) is connected to the brake supply line (12a, 12b) via an electrically actuable, normally closed, second separation valve (26b).
However, Dinkel does not disclose second separation valve is normally open valve.
Dinkel (Fig.2) teaches an electrically actuable, normally open, separation valve (70).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace normally close separation valve (26b, Fig.1) with normally open, separation valve (70) from Fig.2 to achieve fail safe operation in event of power loss, the valve remains open and maintain hydraulic communication between pressure source and brake lines.
Dinkel Fig.1 and Fig.2 does not disclose wherein the second separation valve is arranged in the second structural unit. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange valve 70 in the second structural unit 200 to provide mechanical redundancy, ensure rapid, reliable axle isolation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-29, 36 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 26, the prior art of record alone or in combination neither discloses nor renders obvious a brake system for a motor vehicle; specifically, “wherein the first structural unit and the second structural unit are connected to one another by at most one pressure-resistant hydraulic connecting element.” The closest prior art is DINKEL has two connecting elements; and there is no reasons or disclosure from prior art that would led one skills in the art to omit one connecting line because it would destroy circuit redundancy and there is no motivation or safety benefits to do so.
Regarding claim 36, the prior art of record alone or in combination neither discloses nor renders obvious a brake system for a motor vehicle; specifically, “an overflow of pressure medium from the third reservoir chamber is possible only into the first reservoir chamber.” The closest prior art is DINKEL and Biller (US 20200307536 A1) discloses three chambers; however, it is bidirectional overflow. There is no reasons or disclosure from prior art that teaches third reservoir chamber is possible only into the first reservoir chamber.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Brenn (US 20220073048 A1) discloses braking system with three chambers.
Bareiss (US 20190344767 A1) discloses two electrically pressure source, reservoir.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lillian T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-5404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at (571)270-5565. 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.
/LILLIAN T NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3655A
Prosecution Insights