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 .
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 7 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 7 recites the limitation "said trailer operating unit" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-3, 6, 7 and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GB 2583533 A to Fry et al.
Re-claim 1, Fry et al. disclose an electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system for a trailer, the electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system comprising:
an electropneumatic trailer parking-brake module 6 for releasing or engaging the electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system in dependence upon an operating signal (such as communicated via bus connections 50/51 and communication circuit 16 from ECU 7 to ECU 17);
the electropneumatic trailer parking-brake module has a reservoir port (such as along from reservoir 3), a parking brake port (such as from shuttle valve 31 to SBMV), a main-valve unit (such as valve 18), a pilot-valve unit (such as part of ECU 17), a pilot-valve arrangement (such as valves 20/26), and an electronic control unit 17;
the reservoir port receives a reservoir pressure (from at least reservoir 3);
the parking-brake port is connected to at least one parking-brake cylinder (35-37);
the main-valve unit 18 receives the reservoir pressure and delivers a spring-actuator pressure at the parking-brake port in dependence upon a control pressure present at a control port;
the pilot-valve arrangement (valve 20) receives the reservoir pressure (reservoir 3) for providing the control pressure;
the electronic control unit 17 is configured to receive the operating signal in a form of an electrical operating signal for releasing or engaging the electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system, and to provide an electrical switching signal to the pilot-valve arrangement in dependence upon the operating signal;
the pilot-valve arrangement provides the control pressure in dependence upon the electrical switching signal.
Re-claim 2, a trailer operating unit 7 provides the operating signal.
Re-claim 3, the trailer operating unit 7 has an electronic operating element (the ECU) that is connected in a signal-carrying manner to the electronic control unit 17 for the providing the electronic operating signal.
Re-claim 6, a pressure sensor (see various sensors adjacent unit 17, at least one of which is connected to the reservoir 3 line) is connected to the reservoir port and senses the reservoir pressure.
Re-claim 7, the trailer operating unit 7 includes the electronic operating element as an integral or modular housing (as indicated in the figure 1).
Re-claim 18, at least one parking brake cylinder is part of a trailer, see figure 1. The parking brake cylinder is the spring operated brake 35-38.
Re-claims 19 and 21, the trailer is a commercial vehicle (broadly interpreted as any tractor-trailer vehicle that transports material).
Re-claim 20, the trailer operating unit 7 is located on the trailer, as shown in figure 1.
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry et al. in view of US 2010/0026084 A1 to Risse et al.
Fry et al. fail to teach the electronic operating element that includes a parking-brake switch.
Risse et al. teach an electropneumatic trailer parking brake valve with a parking-brake switch. This allows a vehicle operator to place the trailer parking brakes into a condition that locks the trailer in place, specifically when disconnected from a towing vehicle. Thus, as per the teachings of Risse et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the trailer parking brake system of Fry et al. with a parking-brake switch of the type taught by Risse et al., thus allowing the operator to lock the trailer in place.
Claim(s) 5, 8-10, 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry et al. in view of DE 10 2015 008 377 A1 to Beier et al.
Re-claim 5, Fry et al. fail to teach the trailer operating unit has a pneumatic operating element pneumatically connected to the electropneumatic trailer parking brake module, thus providing a pneumatic operation signal.
Beier et al. teach an electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system having various methods of actuation, including has a pneumatic operating element 70 (figure 7) pneumatically connected to an electropneumatic trailer parking brake module 2, thus providing a pneumatic operation signal (via line 68). Actuation of this element exhausts control port (of valve 16) leading to an exhaust of spring brake chamber associated with spring brakes 40. This merely provides a manual actuation of the parking brakes when necessary, specifically during emergency release of the spring brake chambers (see pages 7-8 of the translation, and the description of figures 6-7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the electropneumatic trailer parking-brake system of Fry et al. with a user operated pneumatically operated element for emergency actuation of the parking brakes as taught by Beier et al., thus allowing an operator to actuate the trailer parking brakes manually without necessary power requirements.
Re-claims 8 and 10, as per the teachings of Beier et al., the pneumatic operating element is a manually actuated valve 70 (see figures 6 and 7) for providing the pneumatic operating signal, the valve has a first position and a second valve position, a first valve port receives the reservoir pressure (see figure 7) and a second valve port is connected to the control port that provides the pneumatic operating signal in the form of a release pressure, the manually actuated valve 70 when the first valve position connects the first valve port to the second valve port and applies the reservoir pressure as the release pressure (brake release) to the control port; in addition, the actuated valve is a push-pull element. It is noted that the exhaust condition of valve 70 relieves pressure from valve 16 (i.e. from control port), which exhausts pressure from the spring brake chambers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the system of Fry et al. with a manually actuated valve of the type taught by Beier et al., as an alternative means of a parking-brake actuation, specifically during emergency operations, such as lack of electrical power.
Re-claim 9, as per the teachings of Beier et al., the manually actuatable valve is a 3/2-way valve having an exhaust port that exhausts air into an environment; and the 3/2-way valve is configured to be switched over between the first valve position and the second valve position, when in the first valve position the first valve port is pneumatically connected to the second valve port, and when in the second valve position the second valve port is pneumatically connected to the exhaust port (see at least figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the system of Fry et al. with a manually actuated valve of the type taught by Beier et al., as an alternative means of a parking-brake actuation, specifically emergency park-brake application.
Re-claim 14, as per further teachings of Beier et al., at least one of the second valve port of the manually actuatable valve 70 is pneumatically connected to the control port via an anti-compound port (interpreted as the select low valve, as this will prevent compounding of the control pressure).
Re-claim 16, Beier et al. teach a bi-stable valve 14 as part of the pilot-valve arrangement. This locks the valve into a set condition, requiring a further actuation signal for changing positions, and additionally performs the duty of both an application and release valve. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized in the pilot-valve arrangement of Fry et al. a bi-stable valve as taught by Beier et al., as this type of valve would have replaced separate application and release valves.
Re-claim 17, Beier et al. teach a monostable valve 24 as part of the pilot-valve arrangement, the valve switches into a release position in a non-activated state. This type of valve holds the control pressure to the relay valve, thus maintaining the spring brakes in a release condition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized in the pilot-valve arrangement of Fry et al. a monostable valve of the type taught by Beier et al., thus providing a means of holding the control pressure in place, and as an alternative to the arrangement of Fry et al.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry et al. in view of Beier et al. as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of US 2019/0308599 A1 to Schmidt et al.
Fry et al. as modified by Beier et al. fail to teach the manually actuatable valve having a pneumatic actuator with a pneumatic switching inlet for receiving a switch-over pressure via a pneumatic switching path; the pneumatic actuator configured to switch over the manually actuatable valve at least from the first valve position to the second valve position in dependence upon the switch-over pressure.
Schmidt et al. teach a manually operated parking brake release valve with an additional pneumatic actuation means, such as a pneumatic actuator with a pneumatic switching inlet 22/24 for receiving a switch-over pressure via a switching path p1/p2, the actuator switches the manually actuated valve between a first position and a second position. This is an alternative means for actuating the manually operated valve, and allows actuation from a distance or remote actuation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the manually operated parking release valve in Fry et al. as modified by Beier et al. with an additional remote actuation means such as a pneumatic actuation means as taught by Schmidt et al., thus allowing remote operation of the manually actuated parking brake valve.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12, 13 and 15 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Laskawy, Risse, Bensch, Klostermann and Lichtenberg each teach an electropneumatic brake system.
Any inquiries concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Thomas Williams whose telephone number is 571-272-7128.
The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday from 6:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
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.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding
should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-6584.
TJW /THOMAS J WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 August 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights