DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statement has been received and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-11 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 1 line 6 it is unclear which of the ‘pumps’ claimed on line 3 is being claimed. Is this one or a plurality of pumps?
Claims 6 and 7 contain the same problem.
Claim 3 the limitation beginning with “… by a predetermined distance not to interfere .. in which the bottom becomes higher…” is convoluted and confusing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1-4,6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. 12,054,127 in view of WO2020/185012 to Kim (for which Kim 12,194,968 is relied upon for the description/translation) and Inoue et al. U.S. 2013/0340422.
Regarding claim 1 Kimura shows in figures 1-8:
An electronic control unit 300+ for an electronic brake system, comprising: a housing in which a hydraulic block in which a plurality of valves UB,UC, flow paths (See the fluid lines), and pumps QC are installed to control braking hydraulic pressure supplied to a plurality of wheel cylinders CW is mounted on a front surface; a control unit 121 accommodated inside the housing, and controlling a motor MC providing power to the pump QC, and the plurality of valves UB,UC; and a first connector 123 and provided on the front surface of the housing so as for the control unit 121/ECU to be electrically connected to an external device, wherein the first connector is disposed above a position where the hydraulic block is mounted (see figure 4).
Lacking in Kimura is a specific showing of a second connector disposed below a reservoir RV mounted on a first side surface of the hydraulic block.
However Kim shows it is known to provide first and second ECU arrangements 310,320 in a hydraulic block assembly in figures 1-4. Note the connectors at 301,302. Also note the ECU’S 310,320 and connectors 301,302 may be arranged differently.
The reference to Inoue also shows a hydraulic block arrangement in figure 2 but indicates in figures 2-53, but particularly figures 20-24 that the position of the connectors 99a,99b may be arranged differently.
One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have provided the housing/hydraulic block of Kimura with a second connector disposed below a reservoir RV mounted on a first side surface of the hydraulic block, as taught by both Kim and Inoue, since it is known in the art to provide plural ECU’S for redundancy. Also to have located the first and second connectors, as claimed, would have been obvious since Inoue indicates it is known the positions of the connectors 99a,99b may be changed to improve the versatility/accessibility of the device (paras 0034-0037).
Regarding claim 2 these limitations are capable of being met for the reasons discussed above.
Regarding claim 3, subject to the 112 2nd rejection above, (and as best understood) these limitations are fairly obvious (for the reasons discussed above) and also since minor changes to the shape of the reservoir would not amount to a patentable significance.
Regarding claim 4, as explained above, these limitations are considered to be met.
Regarding claims 6-10, as explained above these limitations are considered to be met.
6. Claim(s) 5,11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura/Kim/Inoue as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiba 2025/0100644.
Regarding claims 5,11 Kimura, as modified above, lacks specifically showing providing a shield for the second connector, as claimed.
Chiba shows a hydraulic pressure controller for a brake device and shows a cover 60 to protect the connector 50 from the environment.
It would have been obvious to have provided a cover/shield element for the second connector in Kimura to protect the second connector from any fluid that may leak into it, as suggested by Chiba.
Conclusion
7. 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
7/19/26
Prosecution Insights