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 .
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs / columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants’ definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because Fig. 1 appears to show the brake pad [11] and the piston [10] at the same cross-sectional area. Clarification of the drawing is appropriate. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 2-4 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. In substance, claims 2-4 recite wherein “wherein the actuator element reaching the brake disk is ascertained depending . . . (ii) on data of the speed sensor.” It is unclear how a vehicle speed sensor is determining a motor rotor position.
While the recited limitations are provided the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, the scope of the claim is rendered indefinite. For the purposes of the prior art rejection below this term has been interpreted as being a motor angular motion sensor, an RPM sensor, or a hall effect type sensor that is measuring the rotational speed of the recited actuator-motor, not a vehicle speed sensor for determining speed in relation to vehicle or wheel speed.
No further claims are dependent on claims 2-4. Correction or clarification is required.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Georgin et al. (US 20230249846 A1) in view of Beier et al. (US 20220073049 A1) (the combination of which will be referred to as 'combination Georgin' hereinafter) . As regards the individual claims:
Regarding claim 1, Georgin teaches a method for
ascertaining a wear value of an electromechanical wheel brake unit for a motor vehicle, (Georgin: ¶ 004; determining a wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance and a prior linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator.) the wheel brake unit including a displaceable actuator element, which is movable by a controllable actuator against a brake disk of the wheel brake unit to generate a braking force, and the actuator including (Georgin: ¶ 034; brake control unit 250 provides force commands to the electric brake controller 254, which in turn provides a current command to the electric brake actuator 219 to apply force, directing the electric brake actuator 219 to cause the brake assembly 218 to mechanically operate, thereby driving the brake assembly 218 to provide braking power) an electric motor with a rotor rotatably mounted and operatively connected to the actuator element, (Georgin: ¶ 056; linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator 219.) the method comprising: ascertaining, depending on the displacement of the actuator element, the wear value of the wheel brake unit, wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, (Georgin: ¶ 057; calculating a local wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance from step 510 and a prior flight linear travel distance (step 512) . . . the actuator element is subsequently moved against the brake disk, and, when the actuator element is moved from the end stop against the brake disk, (Georgin: ¶ 055; commanding the electric brake actuator 219 to extend from the fully retracted state (step 506) and determine an end position based on receiving a force measurement from the load cell) (Georgin: ¶ 055; Upon contacting the brake stack 150, the force measurement from the load cell 259 may start to increase from zero. In this regard, the end position (e.g., for brake wear calculation purposes) may be determined in response to the force measurement increasing from zero in step 508.) a number of revolutions of the rotor is monitored and, depending on the sensed number of revolutions, (Georgin: ¶ 056; process 500 further comprises calculating a linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator 219 from the reference position to the end position (step 510). In various embodiments, linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator) the wear value of the wheel brake unit is ascertained. (Georgin: ¶ 057; process 500 further comprises calculating a local wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance from step 510 and a prior flight linear travel distance)
Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach: the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop; however, Beier does teach:
the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop, (Beier: ¶ 043; from the first end position E1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Beier with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of ensuring that "the clearance is set to a constant value." (Beier: ¶ 004).
Regarding claim 5, as detailed above, combination Georgin teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Georgin further teaches:
wherein, depending on the number of revolutions, an absolute movement path of the actuator element is ascertained and stored, and, depending on the absolute movement path or a movement path change, the wear value is ascertained. (Georgin: ¶ 057; process 500 may be performed prior to each and every flight cycle and stored in a database (e.g., memory 116 from FIG. 1B). Thus, local wear may be calculated between flights (e.g., current flight vs. immediately prior flight), calculated from a first flight with the braking system 200 (e.g., current flight vs. first flight), or calculated from a designed initial linear length)
Regarding claim 7, Georgin teaches a device for:
operating an electromechanical wheel brake unit of a motor vehicle, wherein the wheel brake unit includes a displaceable actuator element which is movable by a controllable actuator against a brake disk of the wheel brake unit to generate a braking force, (Georgin: ¶ 034; brake control unit 250 provides force commands to the electric brake controller 254, which in turn provides a current command to the electric brake actuator 219 to apply force, directing the electric brake actuator 219 to cause the brake assembly 218 to mechanically operate, thereby driving the brake assembly 218 to provide braking power) wherein the actuator includes an electric motor with a rotor rotatably mounted and operatively connected to the actuator element, the device comprising: (Georgin: ¶ 056; linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator 219.)
a control unit specifically configured to ascertain, depending on the displacement of the actuator element, a wear value of the wheel brake unit, (Georgin: ¶ 004; determining a wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance and a prior linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator.) . . . the actuator element is subsequently moved against the brake disk, and, when the actuator element is moved from the end stop against the brake disk, (Georgin: ¶ 055; commanding the electric brake actuator 219 to extend from the fully retracted state (step 506) and determine an end position based on receiving a force measurement from the load cell) (Georgin: ¶ 055; Upon contacting the brake stack 150, the force measurement from the load cell 259 may start to increase from zero. In this regard, the end position (e.g., for brake wear calculation purposes) may be determined in response to the force measurement increasing from zero in step 508.) a number of revolutions of the rotor is monitored and, depending on the sensed number of revolutions, (Georgin: ¶ 056; process 500 further comprises calculating a linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator 219 from the reference position to the end position (step 510). In various embodiments, linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator) the wear value of the wheel brake unit is ascertained. (Georgin: ¶ 057; process 500 further comprises calculating a local wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance from step 510 and a prior flight linear travel distance)
Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach: wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop; however, Beier does teach:
wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop, (Beier: ¶ 043; from the first end position E1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Beier with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of ensuring that "the clearance is set to a constant value." (Beier: ¶ 004).
Regarding claim 8, Georgin teaches an electromechanical wheel brake unit, comprising:
a displaceable actuator element which is movable by a controllable actuator against a brake disk of the wheel brake unit to generate a braking force, (Georgin: ¶ 034; brake control unit 250 provides force commands to the electric brake controller 254, which in turn provides a current command to the electric brake actuator 219 to apply force, directing the electric brake actuator 219 to cause the brake assembly 218 to mechanically operate, thereby driving the brake assembly 218 to provide braking power) the actuator including an electric motor with a rotor rotatably mounted and operatively connected to the actuator element; and (Georgin: ¶ 056; linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator 219.) a device for operating an electromechanical wheel brake unit, the device including: a control unit specifically configured to ascertain, depending on the displacement of the actuator element, a wear value of the wheel brake unit, (Georgin: ¶ 004; determining a wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance and a prior linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator.) . . . the actuator element is subsequently moved against the brake disk, and, when the actuator element is moved from the end stop against the brake disk, (Georgin: ¶ 055; commanding the electric brake actuator 219 to extend from the fully retracted state (step 506) and determine an end position based on receiving a force measurement from the load cell) (Georgin: ¶ 055; Upon contacting the brake stack 150, the force measurement from the load cell 259 may start to increase from zero. In this regard, the end position (e.g., for brake wear calculation purposes) may be determined in response to the force measurement increasing from zero in step 508.) a number of revolutions of the rotor is monitored and, depending on the sensed number of revolutions, (Georgin: ¶ 056; process 500 further comprises calculating a linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator 219 from the reference position to the end position (step 510). In various embodiments, linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator) the wear value of the wheel brake unit is ascertained. (Georgin: ¶ 057; process 500 further comprises calculating a local wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance from step 510 and a prior flight linear travel distance)
Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach: wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop; however, Beier does teach:
wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop, (Beier: ¶ 043; from the first end position E1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Beier with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "ensuring that "the clearance is set to a constant value."" (Beier: ¶ 004).
Regarding claim 9, Georgin teaches a
brake system for a motor vehicle, the brake system comprising: one or more electromechanical wheel brake units, each including: a displaceable actuator element which is movable by a controllable actuator against a brake disk of the wheel brake unit to generate a braking force, (Georgin: ¶ 034; brake control unit 250 provides force commands to the electric brake controller 254, which in turn provides a current command to the electric brake actuator 219 to apply force, directing the electric brake actuator 219 to cause the brake assembly 218 to mechanically operate, thereby driving the brake assembly 218 to provide braking power) the actuator including an electric motor with a rotor rotatably mounted and operatively connected to the actuator element; and (Georgin: ¶ 056; linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator 219.) a device for operating an electromechanical wheel brake unit, the device including: a control unit specifically configured to ascertain, depending on the displacement of the actuator element, a wear value of the wheel brake unit, wherein, for ascertaining the wear value, (Georgin: ¶ 004; determining a wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance and a prior linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator.) . . . the actuator element is subsequently moved against the brake disk, and, when the actuator element is moved from the end stop against the brake disk, (Georgin: ¶ 055; commanding the electric brake actuator 219 to extend from the fully retracted state (step 506) and determine an end position based on receiving a force measurement from the load cell) (Georgin: ¶ 055; Upon contacting the brake stack 150, the force measurement from the load cell 259 may start to increase from zero. In this regard, the end position (e.g., for brake wear calculation purposes) may be determined in response to the force measurement increasing from zero in step 508.) a number of revolutions of the rotor is monitored and, depending on the sensed number of revolutions, (Georgin: ¶ 056; process 500 further comprises calculating a linear travel distance of the electric brake actuator 219 from the reference position to the end position (step 510). In various embodiments, linear travel distance is directly proportional to a number of rotations of a motor controlling the electric brake actuator) the wear value of the wheel brake unit is ascertained. (Georgin: ¶ 057; process 500 further comprises calculating a local wear depth based on calculating a difference between the linear travel distance from step 510 and a prior flight linear travel distance)
Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach: the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop; however, Beier does teach:
the actuator element is first displaced against an end stop, (Beier: ¶ 043; from the first end position E1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Beier with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of "ensuring that "the clearance is set to a constant value."" (Beier: ¶ 004).
Claims 2-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combination Georgin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim-858 (US 20250065858 A1).
Regarding claim 2, as detailed above, combination Georgin teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein a speed sensor is assigned to the rotor, and the number of revolutions is sensed using the speed sensor; however, Kim-858 does teach:
wherein a speed sensor is assigned to the rotor, and the number of revolutions is sensed using the speed sensor. (Kim-858: ¶ 039; a motor rotation angle sensor).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim-858 with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing better flexibility on when calibration occurs (Kim-858: ¶ 008-009).
Regarding claim 3, as detailed above, combination Georgin teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the actuator element reaching the brake disk is ascertained depending: (i) on an operating current of the electric motor, and/or (ii) on data of the speed sensor; however, Kim-858 does teach:
wherein the actuator element reaching the brake disk is ascertained depending: (i) on an operating current of the electric motor, (Kim-858: ¶ 050; EMB controller 121 may generate the clamping force feedback by detecting the contact point and a home position using the actual stroke and the actual motor current.). and/or (ii) on data of the speed sensor. (Kim-858: ¶ 039; a motor rotation angle sensor)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim-858 with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing better flexibility on when calibration occurs (Kim-858: ¶ 008-009).
Regarding claim 4, as detailed above, combination Georgin teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the actuator element reaching the end stop is ascertained depending: (i) on an operating current of the electric motor, and/or (ii) on data of the speed sensor; however, Kim-858 does teach:
wherein the actuator element reaching the end stop is ascertained depending: (i) on an operating current of the electric motor, (Kim-858: ¶ 050; EMB controller 121 may generate the clamping force feedback by detecting the contact point and a home position using the actual stroke and the actual motor current. Here, the home position means the actual stroke of the piston when the electro-mechanical brake 120 is not activated.) and/or (ii) on data of the speed sensor. (Kim-858: ¶ 039; a motor rotation angle sensor)
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim-858 with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing better flexibility on when calibration occurs (Kim-858: ¶ 008-009).
Regarding claim 6, as detailed above, combination Georgin teaches the invention as detailed with respect to claim 1. Georgin is silent about or does not explicitly teach:
wherein the method is carried out at regular intervals including after each start of operation of a motor vehicle including the wheel brake unit; however, Kim-858 does teach:
wherein the method is carried out at regular intervals including after each start of operation of a motor vehicle including the wheel brake unit. (Kim-858: ¶ 008; electro-mechanical brake apparatus is initialized before start-up of the vehicle.).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim-858 with the teachings of Georgin because doing so would result in the predicable benefit of allowing better flexibility on when calibration occurs (Kim-858: ¶ 008-009).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure Kim-524 (US 20240246524 A1) which discloses a self-calibrating electromechanical braking system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES PALL whose telephone number is (571)272-5280. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30 - 18:30.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on 571-272-1206. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.P./ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663