DETAILED ACTION
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 1-20 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 regard to claim 1:
Claim 1 introduces the limitation (emphasis added): “transmitting pedal-sensor data indicative of pedal actuation of an electronic brake pedal from at least one pedal sensor of the brake pedal to at least one brake control unit”; and later in claim 1, clearly recites “the at least one brake control unit” (this limitation is also recited in claims 2, 4, and 5).
However, claim 1 also recites (emphasis added): “transmitting the control information for the at least one electromechanical wheel brake to at least one brake control unit”. It is unclear if the intent for there to be two distinct brake control units, or if the limitation noted immediately above, is intended to be the same as “the at least one brake control unit” previously introduced.
For the purposes of examination, claim 1 is interpreted as reciting a single “at least one brake control unit”.
Claims 2-7 are rejected as they depend from claim 1.
In regard to claim 8:
Claim 8 is unclear, similarly to claim 1, as it introduces “at least one brake control unit” (and later clearly recites “the at least one brake control unit”, but later in the claim introduces (emphasis added): “wherein at least one brake control unit is configured to determine whether the control information received from the vehicle controller falls below a safety threshold”. It is unclear if the intent for there to be two distinct brake control units, or if the limitation noted immediately above, is intended to be the same as “the at least one brake control unit” previously introduced.
For the purposes of examination, claim 8 is interpreted as reciting a single “at least one brake control unit”.
Claims 9-20 are rejected as the depend from claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Should the 35 USC 112 rejections set forth above be overcome, it appears that claims 1-20 would contain allowable subject matter. Examiner notes, especially, the following limitations from claims 1 and 8:
(Claim 1): A method for controlling a braking system comprising:
transmitting pedal-sensor data indicative of pedal actuation of an electronic brake pedal from at least one pedal sensor of the brake pedal to at least one brake control unit;
calculating preprocessing data with the at least one brake control unit,
transmitting the preprocessing data with the at least one brake control unit to a vehicle controller of a motor vehicle via a signal link,
calculating control information for at least one electromechanical wheel brake from the preprocessing data in the vehicle controller;
transmitting the control information for the at least one electromechanical wheel brake to at least one brake control unit;
determining with the at least one brake control unit whether the control information received from the vehicle controller falls below a safety threshold before forwarding the control information to the at least one electromechanical wheel brake; and
overwriting the control information before forwarding it to the at least one electromechanical wheel brake when the control information is below the safety threshold.
(Claim 8): A braking system for a motor vehicle comprising:
a brake pedal having at least one pedal sensor for detecting a braking request from the driver by means of pedal-sensor data;
at least one electromechanical wheel brake;
at least one brake control unit configured to calculate preprocessing data from the pedal-sensor data; and
a vehicle controller of the motor vehicle which receives the preprocessing data from the at least one brake control unit via a signal link and is configured to calculate control information for at least one electromechanical wheel brake on the basis of the preprocessing data and to transmit the control information to the at least one wheel brake via at least one signal link;
wherein at least one brake control unit is configured to determine whether the control information received from the vehicle controller falls below a safety threshold before forwarding the control information to the at least one electromechanical wheel brake; and to overwrite the control information before forwarding it to the at least one electromechanical wheel brake when the control information is below the safety threshold.
Examiner notes the following prior art:
Ishizuka (US Pub No 2011/0314806), which discloses, in general, adjusting a braking rate in response to a component malfunction. See Fig 2 and Paragraph 0084.
Miyazaki et al. (US Pub No 2007/0210647), which discloses, in general, adjusting braking effectiveness to keep braking variation within a desired range. See Figs 4 and 7, along with Paragraphs 0062-0063.
Manosh et al. (US Pub No 2024/0294151), which discloses, in general, applying a correction to requested braking output. See the Abstract and Figs 2-5.
Hurley et al. (US Pub No 2024/0034284), which discloses, in general, selecting between two braking signals to determine which is more correct. See the Abstract, along with Step 350 in Fig 3 and Step 450 in Fig 4.
Oh (US Pub No 2023/0406274), which discloses, in general, performing braking control with a compensated braking force command. See the Abstract and Step S6 in Fig 3.
Ye et al. (US Pub No 2020/0130663), which discloses, in general, imposed safety limits for braking pressure. See Fig 3 and Paragraphs 0021-0023.
The above prior art is considered to be closest prior art; however, all references fail to anticipate, or render obvious, the manner in which data is shared between the at least one brake control unit and the vehicle controller combined with the brake control unit configured to determine whether the control information received from the vehicle controller falls below a safety threshold, as set forth in each of independent claims 1 and 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB M AMICK whose telephone number is (571)272-5790. The examiner can normally be reached Core Hours 10-6 M-F (First Fridays Off).
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/JACOB M AMICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights