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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “parking brake unit” in claims 1-20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 5-12 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitations “the parking motor” and "the parking brake actuator" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claims 6-9, 11-12 are also rejected by virtue of dependence.
Claim 10 recites the limitations “the parking motor” and "the parking brake actuator". There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations 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) 1-7, 9-11, 13-15, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onfroy et al (US2014/0116821A1).
Regarding claim 1, Onfroy teaches a wheel brake apparatus (Figure 1) with a function of over-temperature protection for a brake motor, capable of use in an electric vehicle, wherein the wheel brake apparatus comprises a service brake unit comprising a brake motor (7) and a brake actuator, wherein the brake motor is capable of outputting a torque to drive the brake actuator to brake a brake disc of the vehicle (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0024-0035); and a parking brake unit (8) is capable of locking the brake motor (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0024-0035), wherein in a braking process of the vehicle, in response to a temperature of the brake motor being greater than or equal to a preset temperature or a torque output by the brake motor being greater than or equal to a preset torque for first preset duration (e.g., zero), the parking brake unit is capable of locking the brake motor, and the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque (Paragraphs 0032-0033; Figures 2A-C).
Regarding claim 2, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in the braking process of the electric vehicle, in response to the temperature of the brake motor being greater than or equal to the preset temperature and a rotation speed of a drive motor, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, or a wheel speed of the vehicle being less than a preset speed, the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque, and the parking brake unit is capable of locking the brake motor (Paragraphs 0032-0033; Figures 2A-C).
Regarding claim 3, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in the braking process of the electric vehicle, in response to the temperature of the brake motor being greater than or equal to the preset temperature and the rotation speed of the drive motor, the vehicle speed of the vehicle, or the wheel speed of the vehicle being zero, the parking brake unit is capable of locking the brake motor and the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque (Paragraphs 0032-0033).
Regarding claim 4, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that the brake actuator is capable of outputting a clamping force to the brake disc, wherein the clamping force is used to generate a brake force between the brake actuator and the brake actuator (See previously cited sections for disclosure of capability of the structure), and in the braking process of the vehicle, in response to that a travel of a brake pedal is greater than or equal to a preset travel for a second preset duration, the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque, and a parking motor is capable of driving a parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor; or in response to that the clamping force output by the brake actuator is greater than a preset clamping force for the first preset duration, the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque, and a parking motor is capable of driving a parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor (See previously cited sections for disclosure of capability of the structure).
Regarding claim 5, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches a wheel controller (e.g., control means 10 or the controller which sends control signals to control means 10), wherein, in the braking process of the vehicle, the wheel controller is configured to: control the brake motor to reduce the output torque, and control the parking motor to drive the parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor (Paragraphs 0004, 0024-0035, 0063).
Regarding claim 6, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that the wheel controller is further configured to: control the parking motor to drive the parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor, and control the brake motor to reduce the output torque (Paragraphs 0032-0033).
Regarding claim 7, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in a process in which the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque and the parking motor is capable of being controlled to drive the parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor, a higher temperature of the brake motor indicates a larger amount by which the torque output by the brake motor is capable of being reduced (See previously cited sections for disclosure of capability of the structure).
Regarding claim 9, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that the wheel controller is further configured to: in response to no longer receiving a brake signal in a process in which the parking brake actuator locks the brake motor, control the parking motor to drive the parking brake actuator to unlock the brake motor, and control the brake motor to stop outputting the torque, wherein the brake signal indicates the wheel brake apparatus to output a brake force, and the brake signal comprises at least one of a travel signal of the brake pedal, a brake signal from an autonomous driving system, or a brake signal from a vehicle stability system (See previously cited sections [this limitation corresponds to a situation where braking is no longer requested in the system of Onfroy]).
Regarding claim 19, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in response to the torque output by the brake motor being greater than or equal to a first preset torque for the first preset duration and a rotation speed of the drive motor, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, or a wheel speed of the vehicle being less than a preset speed, the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque, and the parking brake unit is capable of locking the brake motor (See previously cited sections for disclosure of capability of the structure).
Regarding claim 20, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in response to the torque output by the brake motor being greater than or equal to the first preset torque for the first preset duration and the rotation speed of the drive motor, the vehicle speed of the vehicle, or the wheel speed of the vehicle being zero, the brake motor is capable of reducing the output torque, and a parking motor is capable of driving a parking brake actuator to lock the brake motor (See previously cited sections for disclosure of capability of the structure).
Regarding claim 13, Onfroy teaches an electromechanical brake system with a function of over-temperature protection for a brake motor (Figure 1), capable of use in an electric vehicle, wherein the electromechanical brake system comprises four wheel brake apparatuses and a central controller (the central controller sends braking control/instruction signals to control means "10" as described throughout the specification) (Paragraphs 0004, 0024-0035, 0063; Figure 1); at least one of the four wheel brake apparatuses comprises a service brake unit (including 7) and a parking brake unit (including 8), the service brake unit comprises a brake motor (7) and a brake actuator (Paragraphs 0024-0035; Figure 1), the brake motor is capable of: when the vehicle is in a braking state, outputting a torque to drive the brake actuator to output a brake force to a brake disc (See previously cited sections), and the parking brake unit is capable of locking the brake motor (See previously citing sections); and in a braking process of the vehicle, the central controller is configured to: in response to a temperature of the brake motor being greater than or equal to a preset temperature, control the at least one wheel brake apparatus to reduce the output torque and to lock the brake motor; or in response to a torque output by the brake motor being greater than or equal to a preset torque for first preset duration, control the at least one wheel brake apparatus to reduce the output torque and to lock the brake motor (Paragraphs 0032-0033; Figures 2A-C).
Regarding claim 14, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 13 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that in the braking process of the vehicle, the central controller is configured to: in response to the temperature of the brake motor being greater than or equal to the preset temperature and a rotation speed of the drive motor, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, or a wheel speed of wheels of the vehicle being less than a preset speed, control the at least one wheel brake apparatus to reduce the output torque and to lock the brake motor; or in response to the torque output by the brake motor being greater than or equal to a first preset torque for the first preset duration and a rotation speed of the drive motor, a vehicle speed of the vehicle, or a wheel speed of wheels of the vehicle is less than the preset speed, control the at least one wheel brake apparatus to reduce the output torque and to lock the brake motor (Paragraphs 0032-0033; Figures 2A-C).
Regarding claim 15, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 13 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches that the wheel brake apparatus comprises a wheel controller (10), and the central controller is further configured to: in response to a brake signal, output a control signal to the wheel controller; and the wheel controller is further configured to: in response to the control signal, control the brake motor to reduce the output torque, and control the parking unit to lock the brake motor, the brake signal indicates that the vehicle is in a braking state, and the brake signal comprises at least one of: a travel signal of a brake pedal, a brake signal from an autonomous driving system, or a brake signal from a vehicle stability system (See previously cited sections).
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onfroy et al (US2014/0116821A1) in view of official notice.
Regarding claim 10, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, but Onfroy does not describe the structure of the parking brake actuator comprising a pawl and a ratchet wheel sleeved on a rotor of the brake motor, and the parking motor is capable of driving the pawl to work with the ratchet wheel to lock the brake motor.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the vehicle braking art for a parking brake actuator to comprise a pawl and a ratchet wheel sleeved on a rotor of the brake motor, and the parking motor to be capable of driving the pawl to work with the ratchet wheel to lock the brake motor, in order to achieve the predictable result of efficient and reliable parking brake functioning. Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Onfroy of such that the parking brake actuator comprises a pawl and a ratchet wheel sleeved on a rotor of the brake motor, and the parking motor is capable of driving the pawl to work with the ratchet wheel to lock the brake motor, since it is old and well known in the vehicle braking art.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onfroy et al (US2014/0116821A1) in view of Eshima et al (US2024/0391403A1).
Regarding claim 11, Onfroy discloses the invention of claim 5 as discussed above, and Onfroy teaches a temperature sensor, wherein the wheel controller is configured to receive a brake motor temperature signal from a temperature sensor, the brake motor temperature signal indicates the temperature of the brake motor (See "the control means 10 detecting that the temperature of one or more electric motors 7 exceeds a certain threshold." in Paragraph 0033 [note "detecting" rather than "calculating", "estimating", etc.]).
Onfroy does not teach a clamping force sensor which the wheel controller receives a signal from, where the clamping force signal indicates the clamping force output by the brake actuator.
Eshima teaches a wheel brake apparatus wherein the wheel brake apparatus (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 0031+) comprises a service brake unit comprising a brake motor (25) and a brake actuator, wherein the brake motor is configured to output a torque to drive the brake actuator to brake a brake disc (See Figure 2 diagram; Paragraphs 0041-0045), wherein the wheel brake apparatus comprises a temperature sensor; and a clamping force sensor, wherein a wheel controller is configured to receive a brake motor temperature signal from the temperature sensor and a clamping force signal from the clamping force sensor, the brake motor temperature signal indicates the temperature of the brake motor, and the clamping force signal indicates the clamping force output by the brake actuator, in order to provide precise control of the braking system on the basis of current conditions of the braking system (Paragraphs 0043-0045, 0052-0054, 0061).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Onfroy, such that the wheel brake apparatus includes both a temperature sensor and a clamping force sensor, wherein the wheel controller is configured to receive a brake motor temperature signal from the temperature sensor and a clamping force signal from the clamping force sensor, the brake motor temperature signal indicates the temperature of the brake motor, and the clamping force signal indicates the clamping force output by the brake actuator, as suggested and taught by Eshima, in order to provide precise control of the braking system on the basis of current conditions of the braking system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-18 are allowed.
Claims 8 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not teach the limitations recited in each of dependent claims 8 and 12. Additionally, the prior art does not teach the combination of brake motor temperature based control recited claim 16, and a person having ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R STECKBAUER whose telephone number is (571)270-0433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30-7:30 PST.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/KEVIN R STECKBAUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights