CTFR 18/950,039 CTFR 100757 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks Amendments and Remarks filed on 04/13/2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follow: Regarding the Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicants “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the 101 claim rejections are withdrawn. Regarding the Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicants “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant has amended the independent claim and these amendments have changed the scope of the original application and the Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot. However, since the examiner is using the same cited prior art for the claimed subject matter, the examiner will address the remarks that remain relevant. On page 10, applicant submits that “Philpott is monitoring for a friction material wear limit being reached by monitoring wear to determine when brake pads need to be replaced .” The examiner argues that Philpott and Park are still within the same field of invention. They’re both part of a brake pad lifecycle and are measuring wear of the brake pad. Park does teach a first, second, and third clamping force based on driving distance [Park ¶ 0115-0122] which is directly related to the wear level of the brake pads. Philpott is used to explicitly teach a first, second, and third wear limit. It would have been obvious to combine the first, second, and third wear limit as taught by Philpott with the first, second, and third clamping forces taught by Park to more accurately control the brake pressure. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US PGPub 2023/0001894) in view of Philpott (US PGPub 2016/0146279) and in further view of Ozaki (JP2021178591) . Regarding claim 1, Park teaches A computer-implemented method that, when executed by data processing hardware, causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising [Park ¶ 0069 "controller 30"]: determining a status of one or more brake pads of a vehicle [Park ¶ 0070 " The controller 30 is connected to a network bus 50 used for network communication with a vehicle state information providing device 70 that provides a driving distance of a vehicle and whether or when to replace the brake pad 113 of the EPB 10."]; selecting a brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear [Park ¶ 0092 "In the early stage of vehicle release or the early stage of the brake pad replacement, the processor 31 determines that compensation of the clamping force of the EPB 10 is required by determining that the brake pad 113 is close to a new product and thus sufficiently burnishing is not performed."]; applying, via a booster of a vehicle brake system, additional brake pressure based on the selected brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0045 "The EPB 10 is operated by an electric motor M to generate a clamping force. The EPB 10 drives the electric motor M to press a brake pad P of a brake caliper C on the left and right rear wheels against the brake disc D, thereby generating a clamping force." ¶ 0093 "In response to determining that the compensation of the clamping force in the EPB 10 is required, the processor 31 compensates the target clamping force in a manner of increasing the clamping force of the EPB 10."]; Park does not teach evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer, determining whether a wear limit has been met, and generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished. However, in a related field of invention, Philpott does teach determining whether a wear limit has been met [Philpott ¶ 0050 "The vehicle controller 110 may compare the signal indicative of the wear condition of the friction material 52 to the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62. In response to a first brake pad wear level corresponding to wear of the friction material 52 greater than the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62, the vehicle controller 110 may output for display a first indicator."]; and generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished [Philpott ¶ 0039 "In at least one embodiment, the user interface 98 may be provided with a display screen. The display screen may be configured to provide a visual indicator to display the various wear levels of the first and second brake pad assemblies 36, 38."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on drive distance as taught by Park with using a wear level/limit as taught by Philpott in order to more accurately control the brake pressure. Park and Philpott do not teach evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer. However, in a related field of invention, Ozaki does teach Evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer [Ozaki ¶ 0013 "The wear condition acquisition device 12 includes a motor ECU 40 that controls the electric motor 30 of the friction brake 10, a brake ECU 42 equipped with a temperature estimation device 48 that estimates the temperature of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad temperature), a rotation speed sensor 44 that detects the rotation speed of the electric actuator 22, a pressing force sensor 46 that detects the pressing force applied to the pressing member 24, and a notification device 50 that notifies the wear condition of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad wear condition)."]; Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on wear level as taught by Park and Philpott with using a friction model to that uses data from a speed sensor to determine wear as taught by Ozaki in order to more accurately determine the wear amount [Ozaki ¶ 0028]. Regarding claim 2, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 1. Park further teaches wherein determining the status of the one or more brake pads of the vehicle further includes determining whether the one or more brake pads are new based on mileage of the vehicle[Park ¶ 0070 " The controller 30 is connected to a network bus 50 used for network communication with a vehicle state information providing device 70 that provides a driving distance of a vehicle and whether or when to replace the brake pad 113 of the EPB 10."] . Regarding claim 3, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 2. Park further teaches wherein determining the status of the one or more brake pads of the vehicle further includes determining whether the one or more brake pads are new based on a replacement status [Park ¶ 0091 " The processor 31 may determine, from whether or when to replace the brake pad, whether a current time is an early stage of the brake pad replacement that is within a predetermined time period after the brake pad 113 is replaced."]. Regarding claim 5, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 1. Park further teaches wherein selecting the brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear further includes selecting a first brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0117 "The first clamping force is set in a first section in which the driving distance is lower than a first driving distance. The first clamping force may be the maximum clamping force that may be generated in the specification of the EPB 10."]. Regarding claim 6, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 5. Park further teaches wherein determining whether the wear limit has been met further includes determining whether a first wear limit has been met [Park ¶ 0117 "The first clamping force is set in a first section in which the driving distance is lower than a first driving distance. The first clamping force may be the maximum clamping force that may be generated in the specification of the EPB 10."]. Regarding claim 7, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 6. Park further teaches wherein selecting the brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear further includes selecting a second brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0118 "The second clamping force set to be lower than the first clamping force is set in a second section in which the driving distance is between first and second driving distances.]. Regarding claim 8, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 7. Park further teaches wherein determining whether the wear limit has been met further includes determining whether a second wear limit has been met [Park ¶ 0118 "The second clamping force set to be lower than the first clamping force is set in a second section in which the driving distance is between first and second driving distances.]. Regarding claim 9, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 8. Park further teaches wherein selecting the brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear further includes selecting a third brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0119 "A third clamping force set to be lower than the second clamping force is set in a third section in which the driving distance is greater than the second driving distance."]. Regarding claim 10, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 9. Park further teaches wherein determining whether the wear limit has been met further includes determining whether a third wear limit has been met [Park ¶ 0119 "A third clamping force set to be lower than the second clamping force is set in a third section in which the driving distance is greater than the second driving distance."]. Regarding claim 11, Park teaches A system comprising: data processing hardware [Park ¶ 0076 "processor 31"]; and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the memory hardware storing instructions that, when executed on the data processing hardware, cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising [Park ¶ 0078]: determining a status of one or more brake pads of a vehicle [Park ¶ 0070 " The controller 30 is connected to a network bus 50 used for network communication with a vehicle state information providing device 70 that provides a driving distance of a vehicle and whether or when to replace the brake pad 113 of the EPB 10."]; selecting a brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear [Park ¶ 0092 "In the early stage of vehicle release or the early stage of the brake pad replacement, the processor 31 determines that compensation of the clamping force of the EPB 10 is required by determining that the brake pad 113 is close to a new product and thus sufficiently burnishing is not performed."]; applying, via a booster of a vehicle brake system, additional brake pressure based on the selected brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0045 "The EPB 10 is operated by an electric motor M to generate a clamping force. The EPB 10 drives the electric motor M to press a brake pad P of a brake caliper C on the left and right rear wheels against the brake disc D, thereby generating a clamping force." ¶ 0093 "In response to determining that the compensation of the clamping force in the EPB 10 is required, the processor 31 compensates the target clamping force in a manner of increasing the clamping force of the EPB 10."]; Park does not teach evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads, based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer, determining whether a wear limit has been met, and generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished. However, in a related field of invention, Philpott does teach determining whether a wear limit has been met [Philpott ¶ 0050 "The vehicle controller 110 may compare the signal indicative of the wear condition of the friction material 52 to the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62. In response to a first brake pad wear level corresponding to wear of the friction material 52 greater than the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62, the vehicle controller 110 may output for display a first indicator."]; and generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished [Philpott ¶ 0039 "In at least one embodiment, the user interface 98 may be provided with a display screen. The display screen may be configured to provide a visual indicator to display the various wear levels of the first and second brake pad assemblies 36, 38."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on drive distance as taught by Park with using a wear level/limit as taught by Philpott in order to more accurately control the brake pressure. Park and Philpott do not teach evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer. However, in a related field of invention, Ozaki does teach Evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer [Ozaki ¶ 0013 "The wear condition acquisition device 12 includes a motor ECU 40 that controls the electric motor 30 of the friction brake 10, a brake ECU 42 equipped with a temperature estimation device 48 that estimates the temperature of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad temperature), a rotation speed sensor 44 that detects the rotation speed of the electric actuator 22, a pressing force sensor 46 that detects the pressing force applied to the pressing member 24, and a notification device 50 that notifies the wear condition of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad wear condition)."]; Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on wear level as taught by Park and Philpott with using a friction model to that uses data from a speed sensor to determine wear as taught by Ozaki in order to more accurately determine the wear amount [Ozaki ¶ 0028]. Regarding claim 12, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 11. Park further teaches wherein determining the status of the one or more brake pads of the vehicle further includes determining whether the one or more brake pads are new based on one of a mileage of the vehicle and a replacement status [Park ¶ 0099 "The controller 30 determines whether the vehicle is in the stages of vehicle release or brake pad replacement from the received driving distance and/or pad replacement information."]. Regarding claim 14, Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach teach claim 11. Park further teaches wherein selecting the brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear further includes gradually decreasing the additional brake pressure as cumulative wear increases [Park ¶ 0092-93 "In response to determining that the compensation of the clamping force in the EPB 10 is required, the processor 31 compensates the target clamping force in a manner of increasing the clamping force of the EPB 10." and Figure 6] . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16-17, 19, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Philpott in view of Ozaki and in further view of Chopade (US PGPub 2025/0391204) . Regarding claim 16 , Park teaches A vehicle management system of a vehicle, comprising: a vehicle brake system including one or more disc brakes having one or more brake pads [Park ¶ 0047 "the EPB 10 may include a carrier 110 on which a pair of pad plates 111 and 112 are installed to move forward and backward to press a brake disk 100 rotating together with wheels of the vehicle"]; a sensor system including a vehicle status subsystem and a vehicle brake system sensor subsystem [Park ¶ 0080 " The interface circuit 33 may receive signals from various switches and sensors connected to the EPB system. The interface circuit 33 may receive the EPB switch signal and the motor current from the EPB switch 20 and the current sensor 40."]; data processing hardware [Park ¶ 0076 "processor 31"]; and memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the memory hardware storing instructions that, when executed on the data processing hardware, cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising [Park ¶ 0078]: determining a status of the one or more brake pads [Park ¶ 0070 " The controller 30 is connected to a network bus 50 used for network communication with a vehicle state information providing device 70 that provides a driving distance of a vehicle and whether or when to replace the brake pad 113 of the EPB 10."]; selecting a brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear [Park ¶ 0092 "In the early stage of vehicle release or the early stage of the brake pad replacement, the processor 31 determines that compensation of the clamping force of the EPB 10 is required by determining that the brake pad 113 is close to a new product and thus sufficiently burnishing is not performed."]; applying, via a booster of a vehicle brake system, additional brake pressure based on the selected brake pressure calibration [Park ¶ 0045 "The EPB 10 is operated by an electric motor M to generate a clamping force. The EPB 10 drives the electric motor M to press a brake pad P of a brake caliper C on the left and right rear wheels against the brake disc D, thereby generating a clamping force." ¶ 0093 "In response to determining that the compensation of the clamping force in the EPB 10 is required, the processor 31 compensates the target clamping force in a manner of increasing the clamping force of the EPB 10."]; Park does not teach the vehicle status subsystem including a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer, evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads, based on sensor data received from at least one of the wheel speed sensor, the accelerometer, and the odometer, determining whether a wear limit has been met, and generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished. However, in a related field of invention, Philpott does teach determining whether a wear limit has been met [Philpott ¶ 0050 "The vehicle controller 110 may compare the signal indicative of the wear condition of the friction material 52 to the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62. In response to a first brake pad wear level corresponding to wear of the friction material 52 greater than the threshold brake pad friction material wear limit 62, the vehicle controller 110 may output for display a first indicator."]; generating a notification indicating the one or more brake pads are fully burnished [Philpott ¶ 0039 "In at least one embodiment, the user interface 98 may be provided with a display screen. The display screen may be configured to provide a visual indicator to display the various wear levels of the first and second brake pad assemblies 36, 38."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on drive distance as taught by Park with using a wear level/limit as taught by Philpott in order to more accurately control the brake pressure. Park and Philpott do not teach evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer. However, in a related field of invention, Ozaki does teach Evaluating, via a friction model, cumulative wear of the one or more brake pads based on sensor data received from at least one of a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer [Ozaki ¶ 0013 "The wear condition acquisition device 12 includes a motor ECU 40 that controls the electric motor 30 of the friction brake 10, a brake ECU 42 equipped with a temperature estimation device 48 that estimates the temperature of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad temperature), a rotation speed sensor 44 that detects the rotation speed of the electric actuator 22, a pressing force sensor 46 that detects the pressing force applied to the pressing member 24, and a notification device 50 that notifies the wear condition of the pads 16p and 18p (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the pad wear condition)."]; Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on wear level as taught by Park and Philpott with using a friction model to that uses data from a speed sensor to determine wear as taught by Ozaki in order to more accurately determine the wear amount [Ozaki ¶ 0028]. Park, Philpott, and Ozaki do not teach the vehicle status subsystem including a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer. However, in a related field of invention, Chopade does teach the vehicle status subsystem including a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer [Chopade ¶ 0033 “By way of some examples, the vehicle 14 may include: a speed sensor that provides an indication of vehicle speed; one or more accelerometers responsive to vehicle accelerations in various directions and orientations; wheel speed sensors responsive to the rotational speed of the vehicle wheels; … an odometer;”]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the break method based on wear level as taught by Park, Philpott, and Ozaki with using a vehicle subsystem including a wheel speed sensor, an accelerometer, and an odometer as taught by Chopade in order to more accurately determine the wear amount using sensors readily available in most vehicle. Regarding claim 17 , Park, Philpott, Ozaki, and Chopade teach claim 16. Park further teaches wherein determining the status of the one or more brake pads of the vehicle further includes determining whether the one or more brake pads are new based on one of a mileage of the vehicle and a replacement status [Park ¶ 0099 "The controller 30 determines whether the vehicle is in the stages of vehicle release or brake pad replacement from the received driving distance and/or pad replacement information."]. Regarding claim 19 , Park, Philpott, Ozaki, and Chopade teach claim 16. Park further teaches wherein selecting the brake pressure calibration based on the cumulative wear further includes gradually decreasing the additional brake pressure as cumulative wear increases [Park ¶ 0092-93 "In response to determining that the compensation of the clamping force in the EPB 10 is required, the processor 31 compensates the target clamping force in a manner of increasing the clamping force of the EPB 10." and Figure 6]. Regarding claim 21 , Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 1. Park, Philpott, and Ozaki do not teach further including automatically populating, via a vehicle control unit, the notification at one or more of an infotainment system of the vehicle and a mobile application on a mobile device. However, in a related field of invention, Chopade does teach further including automatically populating, via a vehicle control unit, the notification at one or more of an infotainment system of the vehicle and a mobile application on a mobile device [Chopade ¶ 0056 "Information from the system can be provided to a user in any desired way, such as via the IVI system, or via an application or webpage/portal. In this regard, and for the system in general, user interaction can occur via a remote device (e.g. phone, tablet, computer and via an internet interface) or the IVI system 18, and in particular, a head-unit or main console thereof which may include one or more display screens 20 and the user interface 21."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the notification system for brake pad wear as taught by Park, Philpott, and Ozaki with using an infotainment system or mobile device as taught by Chopade in order to more effectively notify the user of brake pad burnishing. Regarding claim 22 , Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 11. Park, Philpott, and Ozaki do not teach further including automatically populating, via a vehicle control unit, the notification at one or more of an infotainment system of the vehicle and a mobile application on a mobile device. However, in a related field of invention, Chopade does teach further including automatically populating, via a vehicle control unit, the notification at one or more of an infotainment system of the vehicle and a mobile application on a mobile device [Chopade ¶ 0056 "Information from the system can be provided to a user in any desired way, such as via the IVI system, or via an application or webpage/portal. In this regard, and for the system in general, user interaction can occur via a remote device (e.g. phone, tablet, computer and via an internet interface) or the IVI system 18, and in particular, a head-unit or main console thereof which may include one or more display screens 20 and the user interface 21."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the notification system for brake pad wear as taught by Park, Philpott, and Ozaki with using an infotainment system or mobile device as taught by Chopade in order to more effectively notify the user of brake pad burnishing. Regarding claim 23 , Park, Philpott, Ozaki, and Chopade teach claim 16. Chopade further teaches further including automatically populating, via a vehicle control unit, the notification at one or more of an infotainment system of the vehicle and a mobile application on a mobile device [Chopade ¶ 0056 "Information from the system can be provided to a user in any desired way, such as via the IVI system, or via an application or webpage/portal. In this regard, and for the system in general, user interaction can occur via a remote device (e.g. phone, tablet, computer and via an internet interface) or the IVI system 18, and in particular, a head-unit or main console thereof which may include one or more display screens 20 and the user interface 21."]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the notification system for brake pad wear as taught by Park, Philpott, and Ozaki with using an infotainment system or mobile device as taught by Chopade in order to more effectively notify the user of brake pad burnishing . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Philpott in view of Ozaki and in further view of Kapanowski (US PGPub 2011/0162919) . Regarding claim 15 , Park, Philpott, and Ozaki teach claim 11. Park teaches wherein determining whether the wear limit has been met further includes determining whether the cumulative wear is greater than or equal to a burnished thickness of the one or more brake pads [Park ¶ 0005 "Accordingly, a clamping force lower than a target clamping force may be generated during parking operation until the brake pads is sufficiently burnishing, so that a slip(backward moving) of vehicle may occur during the parking operation." and Figure 6 Once the driving distance, which indicates a wear limit, is greater than the third driving distance, it is determined that the brake pads are sufficiently burnished and there is no additional clamping force .] Park does not explicitly teach a burnished thickness. However, in a related field of invention, Kapanowski teaches a burnished thickness [Kapanowski ¶ 0030 "The distance Z can be, for example, about 0.020 inches (0.50 mm), which is roughly equal to brake pad wear typically experienced during the burnishing or bedding-in process"]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the breaking calibration method based on wear limit as taught by Park, Philpott, and Ozaki with using a burnished thickness as taught by Kapanowski in order to more accurately control the brake pressure based on burnishing . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Philpott in view of Ozaki in view of Chopade and in further view of Kapanowski (US PGPub 2011/0162919) . Regarding claim 20 , Park, Philpott, Ozaki, and Chopade teach claim 16. Park teaches wherein determining whether the wear limit has been met further includes determining whether the cumulative wear is greater than or equal to a burnished thickness of the one or more brake pads [Park ¶ 0005 "Accordingly, a clamping force lower than a target clamping force may be generated during parking operation until the brake pads is sufficiently burnishing, so that a slip(backward moving) of vehicle may occur during the parking operation." and Figure 6 Once the driving distance, which indicates a wear limit, is greater than the third driving distance, it is determined that the brake pads are sufficiently burnished and there is no additional clamping force .] Park does not explicitly teach a burnished thickness. However, in a related field of invention, Kapanowski teaches a burnished thickness [Kapanowski ¶ 0030 "The distance Z can be, for example, about 0.020 inches (0.50 mm), which is roughly equal to brake pad wear typically experienced during the burnishing or bedding-in process"]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the breaking calibration method based on wear limit as taught by Park, Philpott, Ozaki, and Chopade with using a burnished thickness as taught by Kapanowski in order to more accurately control the brake pressure based on burnishing. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPHINE RICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6384. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm. 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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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. /J.E.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3666 /SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 2 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 3 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 4 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 5 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 6 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 7 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 8 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 9 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 10 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 11 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 12 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 13 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 14 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 15 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 16 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 17 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 18 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 19 Art Unit: 3666 Application/Control Number: 18/950,039 Page 20 Art Unit: 3666
Prosecution Insights