DETAILED ACTION
This is a first action on the merits. Claims 1-30 are pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 06/11/2025 & 07/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-7, 10-11, 19 and 21-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noller (DE102015121480 A1) in view of Heer (US 11,440,520 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Noller teaches
A method for controlling a brake system of a vehicle see at least the abstract and [0002], wherein the brake system has at least two modulators each configured to modulate a working pressure via a corresponding one of the at least two modulators see at least [0030]-[0031] where a first ABS pressure control valve 32 (i.e., a first modulator) and a second ABS pressure control valve 34 (i.e., a second modulator) are provided and can be controlled independently of each other, depending on a specified braking demand see at least [0031] and [0033]-[0034] where the ABS pressure control valves 32, 34 can be controlled into “pressure holding”, “pressure reduction” and “pressure build-up” states in response to a brake signal representing a target brake pressure, from a supply pressure prevailing in a pressure medium supply assigned to the corresponding one of the at least two modulators and the working pressure is configured to be provided at one or more working connections of the corresponding one of the at least two modulators see at least FIG. 1 and [0026] where an electro-pneumatic braking device 1 of a commercial vehicle is provided and further see at least [0028]-[0030] in which a pressure control module 4 as well as the pneumatic front axle channel 16 of the foot brake module 8 are supplied with compressed air at supply pressure from a compressed air reservoir 22 for the front axle, “from which the pressure control module 4 then modulates the brake pressure (i.e., working pressure) and the brake pressure controlled by the pressure control module 4 may, for example, be directed into an associated brake cylinder 12 by switching the relevant ABS pressure control valve to its open position. Further, see at least [0030] where a first pneumatic brake line 28 is connected between the first outlet 18 of the channel of the pressure control module 4 and the first pneumatic brake cylinder 12 and a second pneumatic brake line 30 is connected between the second outlet 20 of the channel of the pressure control module 4 and the second pneumatic brake cylinder 14, wherein at least one pressure line is connected to the corresponding one of the working connections see at least [0030] where a first pneumatic brake line 28 is connected between the first outlet 18 of the channel of the pressure control module 4 and the first pneumatic brake cylinder 12 and a second pneumatic brake line 30 is connected between the second outlet 20 of the channel of the pressure control module 4 and the second pneumatic brake cylinder 14, the method comprising:
determining whether there is a leak in the brake system see at least [0036]-[0037] where a leak 42 is detected in a section 28b of the first brake line 28 downstream of the first ABS pressure control valve 18;
localizing a detected leak by:
controlling at least one of the at least two modulators with a test control signal such that there is a change in the working pressure provided as a function of a present braking demand at the working connection to be tested of the corresponding one of the at least two modulators see at least [0037] where a method of detecting a leakage in a brake system is provided in which a brake signal is fed into the pressure control module (i.e., test control signal). The brake signal, for example, originates from the electrical channel of the foot brake module due to the driver actuating the foot brake plate. A deviation is determined between the target brake pressure represented by the brake signal and the actual brake pressure detected by the pressure sensor of the pressure control module; and,
determining a deviation between a target value specified as a function of the test control signal and an actual value assigned to the working connection to be tested, which is set as a result of said controlling the at least one of the at least two modulators with the test control signal see at least [0037] where a deviation between the target brake pressure represented by the brake signal (i.e., target value specified as a function of the test control signal) and the actual brake pressure detected by the pressure sensor of the pressure control module (i.e., an actual value assigned to the working connection to be tested) is determined;
wherein, in an event that the determined deviation exceeds a localization threshold, the leak is located in the pressure line which, during the control of the corresponding one of the at 1 least two modulators with the test control signal, has an open flow connection with the working connection to which this localization threshold-exceeding deviation is assigned see at least [0037] where if the determined deviation is greater than or equal to a specified permissible deviation (i.e., localization threshold) this indicates a loss of compressed air and thus a leak in one of the brake lines. The first ABS pressure control valve is controlled to the “pressure build-up” state and the second ABS pressure control valve is controlled to the “pressure holding” state. If it is then determined that the deviation between the target brake pressure represented by the brake signal and the actual brake pressure detected by the pressure sensor of the pressure control module is greater than the specified permissible deviation, then this indicates a leak in the section of the first brake line downstream of the first ABS pressure control valve;
controlling at least one of the at least two modulators of the brake system such that:
a flow connection between the pressure line with the located leak and the pressure medium supply from which the working pressure for the one or more working connections connected to this pressure line is modulated is interrupted see at least [0002] and [0037] where a signal is then generated which represents a first brake line that has a leak in the section downstream of the first ABS pressure control valve and then the first ABS pressure control valve is switched from the “pressure build-up” state to the “pressure holding” state “and thus to the locked state, so that supply of compressed air to the section of the first brake line downstream of the first ABS pressure control valve is prevented and consequently the compressed air supply is prevented from being emptied via leakage during braking; and,
Noller teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except the concept wherein:
at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, an adjusted working pressure is provided, which depends on the specified braking demand and on a deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak. Rather, Noller teaches a braking system configured to detect that a first brake line comprises a leak and switching the first ABS pressure control valve to the “pressure holding” state [0037]. Then, the second brake line is checked for leaks and, if the other brake line is leak-free, the associated other ABS pressure control valve will continue to operate according to the usual ABS control [0014]. Noller further teaches, in [0017], that the brake pressure difference between the sides of the vehicle may be limited in order to ensure vehicle stability.
Noller is modified by Heer to teach that it is known to provide the concept wherein at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, an adjusted working pressure is provided, which depends on the specified braking demand and on a deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak. See at least [0015] and [0081]-[0085] where the electropneumatic brake system is supplied in a redundant way with compressed air by connecting the brake control module both to a compressed air reservoir as well as a backup compressed air reservoir understood to be a permanent pneumatic line connection. In a case of a leakage of a line (i.e., pressure line) arranged upstream or downstream from the reservoir, it is possible to close the connection between the compressed air reservoir and the brake control module and to open up a connection between the backup compressed air reservoir and the brake control module “(e. g. in order to generate a brake pressure at the inlet port of the brake control module correlating with a brake demand or a brake signal, the brake pressure then (in particular with a modulation or an anti-slip-control) being changed by the brake control module).”
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified Noller to incorporate the teachings of Heer and provide the concept wherein at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, an adjusted working pressure is provided, which depends on the specified braking demand and on a deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak. In doing so, the method this “provides an increased operational safety and/or availability of the vehicle in the case of a pneumatic leakage. Furthermore, the present invention proposes a correspondingly improved compressed air processing unit and a new use of a compressed air processing unit” [0039].
Regarding claim 2, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein the actual value assigned to the working connection to be tested is at least one of:
an actual deceleration resulting from the control of the corresponding one of the at least two modulators with the test control signal for the vehicle;
an actual slip which results from the control of the corresponding one of the at least two modulators with the test control signal on a wheel assigned to the respective working connection to be tested; and,
an actual pressure resulting from the control of the corresponding one of the at least two modulators with the test control signal at the working connection to be tested or in the pressure line connected to the working connection to be tested see at least Noller [0011]-[0012] where each brake line may be tested by first generating a brake signal corresponding to a pressure derived from a supply pressure to the brake lines.
Regarding claim 3, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 2, wherein the deviation is at least one of:
a pressure deviation between a test target pressure and the actual pressure see at least Noller [0037];
a slip deviation between a target slip resulting from the test target pressure and the actual slip; and,
a deceleration deviation between a target deceleration of the vehicle resulting from the test target pressure and the actual deceleration of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 4, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 3, wherein the test target pressure is encoded in the test control signal see at least Noller [0037] b).
Regarding claim 5, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein, at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, an adjusted working pressure is provided as a function of the braking demand such that the deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is fully offset or at least reduced See at least Noller [0015] and [0081]-[0085] where the electropneumatic brake system is supplied in a redundant way with compressed air by connecting the brake control module both to a compressed air reservoir as well as a backup compressed air reservoir understood to be a permanent pneumatic line connection. In a case of a leakage of a line (i.e., pressure line) arranged upstream or downstream from the reservoir, it is possible to close the connection between the compressed air reservoir and the brake control module and to open up a connection between the backup compressed air reservoir and the brake control module “(e. g. in order to generate a brake pressure at the inlet port of the brake control module correlating with a brake demand or a brake signal, the brake pressure then (in particular with a modulation or an anti-slip-control) being changed by the brake control module).”
Regarding claim 6, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein, at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, an adjusted working pressure is provided as a function of the braking demand such that a lateral dynamic influence resulting from an interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is fully offset or at least reduced see at least Noller [0017] where in order to ensure stability despite the ABS pressure control valve assigned to one side of the vehicle switching to the “pressure holding” state due to a detected leak in the relevant brake line, “it is advantageous to limit the brake pressure still effective on the other side of the vehicle on the relevant axle in order to limit the brake pressure difference between the sides of the vehicle and thus the yaw moment during braking.”
Regarding claim 7, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 6, wherein the working pressure at the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with a located leak is connected is limited to limit the lateral dynamic influence resulting therefrom see at least Noller [0017] and [0031] where in order to ensure stability despite the ABS pressure control valve assigned to one side of the vehicle switching to the “pressure holding” state due to a detected leak in the relevant brake line, “it is advantageous to limit the brake pressure still effective on the other side of the vehicle on the relevant axle in order to limit the brake pressure difference between the sides of the vehicle and thus the yaw moment during braking.
Regarding claim 10, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein after the localization of the detected leak, the specified braking demand is adjusted depending on the detected deceleration loss see at least Heer Col. 5 lines 9-47 where the brake system is able to provide at least a part of the service brakes of the commercial vehicle which can be operated (for a limited number of braking actions) so that the driver is able to brake the vehicle despite of the leakage with the remaining number of the available service brakes.
Regarding claim 11, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein after the localization of the detected leak, the specified braking demand is reduced depending on the detected deceleration loss such that the deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is configured to be fully offset or at least reduced by providing an adjusted working pressure to the one or more working connections to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected see at least Heer Col. 5 lines 9-47 where the brake system is able to provide at least a part of the service brakes of the commercial vehicle which can be operated (for a limited number of braking actions) so that the driver is able to brake the vehicle despite of the leakage with the remaining number of the available service brakes. Further, see at least Col. 8 lines 2-5 where, depending on the operating state of the two solenoid valves it is possible to increase, decrease or hold the brake pressure at the outlet port which allows a control of the brake pressure in the service brake cylinder.
Regarding claim 19, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein the test control signal is generated such that:
if there is a braking demand of zero, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is increased see at least Noller [0037] where the brake signal is fed into the pressure control module when the vehicle is stationary (i.e., braking demand of zero). The brake signal originates from the electrical channel of the foot brake module due to the driver actuating the foot brake plate (i.e., working pressure is increased at the working connection to be tested); or,
if there is a braking demand of non-zero, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is reduced.
Regarding claim 21, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 19, wherein the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is increased at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to 500 mbar; or, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is reduced at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to ambient pressure see at least Heer Col. 7 lines 49-67 and Col. 8 lines 1-50.
Regarding claim 22, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 19, wherein when the working pressure is reduced at the respective working connection to be tested, a compensation control signal is generated and output to at least one of the modulators such that the working pressure provided at the respective untested working connection is increased to compensate for the reduction of the working pressure at the respective working connection to be tested see at least Heer Col. 7 lines 49-67 and Col. 8 lines 1-50 where, dependent on the operating state of the two solenoid valves it is possible to increase, decrease, or hold the brake pressure at the outlet port which allows a control of the brake pressure in the service brake cylinder.
Regarding claim 23, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein during the localization of the detected leak, the test control signal is generated and output such that a change in the working pressure results from the test control signal only at the working connection to be tested within the brake system see at least Noller [0037] where the method of the brake device localizes a detected leak in a first or right brake line or in a second or left brake line.
Regarding claim 24, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein said determining whether there is a leak in the brake system is carried out by determining, in the presence of a non-zero braking demand, whether a target value specified as a function of the non-zero braking demand is different by more than an indication threshold from an actual value which is set as a result of the control of the respective modulator with the braking demand present see at least Noller [0037] where a brake signal is generated which, for example, originates from the electric channel of the foot brake module due to the driver actuating the foot brake plate (i.e., non-zero braking demand). If it is determined that a deviation between the target brake pressure and the actual brake pressure is greater than a threshold, this indicates a loss of compressed air and thus a leak in one of the brake lines.
Regarding claim 25, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the detection of the leak and the localization of the leak is continuously checked see at least Heer Col. 3 lines 35-55 where brake pressure can be controlled on a closed loop control (i.e., continuously checking the brake pressure) wherein a brake signal is automatically generated by a control unit on the basis of operational parameters.
Regarding claim 26, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the detected leak and the located leak is placed in a non-volatile fault memory of the brake system see at least Noller [0050]-[0051].
Regarding claim 27, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein the braking demand is specified automatically see at least Noller [0037] part a) where the brake signal can be generated automatically be a driver assistance system without any input from the driver.
Regarding claim 28, Noller in view of Heer teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein the braking demand is specified automatically by an automation system see at least Noller [0037] part a) where the brake signal can be generated automatically be a driver assistance system without any input from the driver.
Claim 29 is analogous to claim 1 (except for reciting a processor see at least Noller [0001] electronic control unit and a non-transitory computer readable medium having program code stored thereon see at least Noller [0018]); therefore, claim 29 is rejected under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 30, Noller in view of Heer teaches
A vehicle having a brake system comprising the brake control unit of claim 29 see at least Noller [0017]-[0019].
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noller in view of Heer as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Heitzer (US 6,502,661 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Noller in view of Heer does not expressly disclose:
The method of claim 6, wherein a steering demand is additionally output to a steering system in the vehicle;
the steering demand is generated such that the lateral dynamic influence resulting from an interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is offset or at least reduced.
However, Heitzer teaches that it is known to provide:
The method of claim 6, wherein a steering demand is additionally output to a steering system in the vehicle see at least Col. 2 lines 15-27 where the vehicle comprises a steering system and a control circuit is configured to modulate the pressure non positively to the front wheels;
the steering demand is generated such that the lateral dynamic influence resulting from an interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is offset or at least reduced see at least Col. 1 lines 48-57 where an additional function of an active, dynamic correction of the steering angle may be provided in order to enhance steadiness of driving. Further, see at least Col. 2 lines 17-27 where a control hydraulic circuit transfers the steering movements of the steering wheel to the front wheels and serves as a fallback in the event that the system develops a fault.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have Noller in view of Heer to incorporate the teachings of Heitzer and provide the method of claim 6, wherein a steering demand is additionally output to a steering system in the vehicle; the steering demand is generated such that the lateral dynamic influence resulting from an interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is offset or at least reduced. In doing so, the method is improved by further assuring that the steadiness and steerability of the vehicle is maintained throughout the controlling of the vehicle (Col. 1 lines 48-57).
Regarding claim 9, Noller in view of Heer and Heitzer teaches
The method of claim 8, wherein the steering demand is generated in coordination with the adjusted working pressure see at least Heitzer Col. 1 lines 48-57 where an additional function of an active, dynamic correction of the steering angle may be provided in order to enhance steadiness of driving. Further, see at least Col. 2 lines 17-27 where a control hydraulic circuit transfers the steering movements of the steering wheel to the front wheels and serves as a fallback in the event that the system develops a fault.
Claim(s) 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noller in view of Heer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heil (US 2018/0265068 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Noller in view of Heer does not teach
The method of claim 1 further comprising:
checking a shutdown criterion for the one or more working connections to which the pressure line with the located leak is connected after said localizing the detected leak; and,
wherein the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is only interrupted if the shutdown criterion is met.
However, Heil teaches that it is known to provide
The method of claim 1 further comprising:
checking a shutdown criterion for the one or more working connections to which the pressure line with the located leak is connected after said localizing the detected leak see at least [0033] where a brake system compliance module 230 receives tested brake system parameters over time and determines a deviation between the tested brake system parameters and compares the deviation to a first, second, and third threshold (i.e., shutdown criterion); and,
wherein the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is only interrupted if the shutdown criterion is met see at least [0041] where compliance monitoring may be used to determine whether the braking system is continuing to operate within acceptable design standards or if the brake system has exceeded thresholds and need to be serviced.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified Noller in view of Heer to incorporate the teachings of Heil in order to teach The method of claim 1 further comprising: checking a shutdown criterion for the one or more working connections to which the pressure line with the located leak is connected after said localizing the detected leak; and, wherein the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is only interrupted if the shutdown criterion is met. “This allows the algorithm to gradually monitor the braking system wear and loss of functionality. When the algorithm determines that sufficient deviation from the nominal braking parameters has occurred, the algorithm schedules an active test to more thoroughly evaluate the integrity of the braking system” [0058].
Regarding claim 13, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 12, wherein, in order to meet the shutdown criterion, it is checked whether an adjusted working pressure is providable at the one or more working connections of the respective modulator to which no pressure line with the located leak is connected, such that if there is a braking demand, the deceleration loss resulting from the interruption of the flow connection to the pressure line with the located leak is configured to be fully offset or at least reduced see at least Noller [0037] where the brake device can detect a leak in both the first and second brake lines. If it turns out that the first brake line has a leak and that the other brake line is leak-free, the system holds pressure at the brake line with a detected leak and continues ABS control with the brake line that is leak-free.
Regarding claim 14, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 13, wherein, in order to meet the shutdown criterion, it is additionally checked whether a further working pressure for a further working connection of at least one of the same modulator and another modulator of the brake system is being modulated from the pressure medium supply from which the working pressure is modulated for the one or more working connections connected to the pressure line with the located leak see at least Noller [0014] and [0030]-[0037] where the brake device can detect a leak in both the first and second brake lines. If it turns out that the first brake line has a leak and that the other brake line is leak-free, the system holds pressure at the brake line with a detected leak and continues ABS control with the brake line that is leak-free.
Regarding claim 15, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 14, wherein the shutdown criterion is met if the additional check is affirmed and the deceleration loss is configured to at least be reduced by an adjusted working pressure see at least Heer Col. 5 lines 9-47 where the brake system is able to provide at least a part of the service brakes of the commercial vehicle which can be operated (for a limited number of braking actions) so that the driver is able to brake the vehicle despite of the leakage with the remaining number of the available service brakes. Further, see at least Col. 8 lines 2-5 where, depending on the operating state of the two solenoid valves it is possible to increase, decrease or hold the brake pressure at the outlet port which allows a control of the brake pressure in the service brake cylinder.
Regarding claim 16, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 12, wherein in order to meet the shutdown criterion, it is additionally checked whether the pressure line with the located leak is assigned to a front axle or a rear axle for estimating the deceleration loss see at least Noller [0030] and [0034]-[0037].
Regarding claim 17, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 12, wherein when the shutdown criterion is met, at least one shutdown condition is additionally specified and output see at least Heer [0041] and [0046] where if it is determined that the braking system exceeds the thresholds 361, 362 then it is determined that the brake system needs to be serviced and an active test can be scheduled.
Regarding claim 18, Noller in view of Heer and Heil teaches
The method of claim 17, wherein the shutdown criterion includes at least one of a limitation of the speed of the vehicle, at least a partial lifting of the respective affected vehicle axle, and an adjustment of the trajectory planning see at least Noller [0017] where a brake pressure is limited on the other side of the vehicle on the relevant axle in order to limit the brake pressure difference between the sides of the vehicle and thus the yaw moment during braking (i.e., an adjustment of the trajectory planning).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noller in view of Heer as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Leiber et al. "Leiber" (US 2022/0105918 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Noller in view of Heer does not expressly teach:
The method of claim 19, wherein the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is increased at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to 500 mbar; or, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is reduced at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to ambient pressure.
However, Leiber teaches that it is known to provide:
The method of claim 19, wherein the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is increased at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to 500 mbar; or, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is reduced at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to ambient pressure. See at least [0029]-[0032] where a braking system is provided in which a master brake cylinder can still be utilized for providing pressure in the event of failure of the pressure supply device. The pressure reduction over time can be precisely controlled in open-loop or closed-loop fashion by means of a valve controlled with pulse-width-modulated signal (i.e., pulse-like manner). During the pressure reduction, the master brake cylinder must be separated from the brake circuit by means of a valve until the desired pressure reduction is reached (i.e., reaching an ambient temperature after a pressure reduction).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of claim 19, wherein the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is increased at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to 500 mbar; or, the working pressure at the corresponding working connection to be tested is reduced at least one of in a pulse-like manner and to ambient pressure. In doing so, monitoring of the brake fluid level can be advantageously performed whereby even small leaks in the brake system can be identified and reacted to accordingly [0031].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nakayasu (US 2022/0185254 A1) discloses a by-wire system for motor vehicles.
Haible et al. (US 2022/0135015 A1) discloses a method and control unit for operating a hydraulic braking system, braking system, and motor vehicle.
Wulf (US 2019/0248350 A1) discloses a method for electronically controlling a pneumatic braking system in a vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brittany Renee Peko whose telephone number is (408)918-7506. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30-6:30 PT.
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, Erin Bishop can be reached at 571-270-3713. 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.
/B.R.P./06/25/2026Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights