TYRE FOR VEHICLE WHEELS

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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/21/2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment This action is in response to applicant’s amendments and arguments filed on 8/21/2026. Claims 17-23, 25-27, 29, 33, 34, 36-38, and 40 are pending for examination. 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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 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. Claims 17-23, 25-27, 29, 34, 36-38 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda (US 2015/0239296 A1 – of Record) in view of Document 1 (GB 1549347 A – of Record), and Schildhauer (DE 10311430 A1 – of Record). Regarding claim 17, Fukuda teaches a tire (Para. [0043])) comprising a tread band comprising a radially external tread surface and a plurality of recesses, a tread band and a plurality of recesses (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 4) defining a plurality of blocks (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 5) where each block comprises a tread surface portion and a first lateral wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 52) and a second lateral wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 52) that extend toward the bottom of the recess and that each block has a circumferential length at least 15 mm (Para. [0037]). Fukuda teaches connection surfaces (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 511) on each lateral wall that connect the lateral wall to the tread surface by an entirely curvilinear profile. Fukuda teaches that the angle formed between the tangent line of the connection surface and a line perpendicular to the groove wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. A) is greater than 20 degrees (Para. [0066]). That would mean that the angle between the tangent line of the connection surface and the tangent line of the groove wall would be 90 – A or less than 70 degrees, which overlaps with the claimed range of greater than 20 degrees which is a prima facie case of obviousness. Fukuda does not teach a belt made of two crossing bands; however, that is a fundamental feature of pneumatic tires. However, Fukuda does not teach the width of the connection surface. In an analogous art, Document 1 teaches a tire where the tread elements have a curved, chamfered (connection surface) surface (Fig. 7, Ref. Num. 59, 61) where the width of the chamfered surface is between 0.15L and 0.5L (Page 4, Lines 111-115) where L is the circumferential length of the block. Based on the block length of at least 15 mm taught by Fukuda, that would make the connection surface length be greater than 2.25 mm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 to 2.5 mm which is a prima facie case of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Fukuda with Document 1 to have the chamfer widths be 15% to 50% of the block length. This modification will decrease the amount of edge wear on the tread elements (Document 1; Page 3, Lines 81-97). The modified Fukuda teaches that all of the blocks have the connection surfaces (Fukuda; Fig. 1) which would include both the central and the shoulder region. The connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall at a first depth (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. Re) in the central and the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall at a second depth (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. Re), but does not teach that those depths are different. In an analogous art, Schildhauer teaches a tire where the depth of the lateral grooves consistently increases from the center of the tire towards the outsides (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 14; Para. [0006]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Fukuda with Schildhauer to consistently increase the depth of the lateral grooves from the center of the tire towards the outsides. This modification will improve water drainage (Schildhauer; Para. [0014]). Since the depth of the lateral grooves increases from the center of the tire to the outside (Schildhauer; Fig. 3) and the first and second depth are dependent on the groove depth (Fukuda; Fig. 2), the second depth will be smaller than the first depth. Regarding claims 18 and 19, Fukuda teaches that the height of the connection surface (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. G) is 0.2 to 2 mm (Para. [0065]) and the height of the blocks is 10 mm (Para. [0101]). That would mean the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall at a depth of 2% – 20% of the groove depth. Regarding claim 20, Fukuda teaches that the connection surface (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. G) is joined to the first lateral wall at a depth of 0.2 to 2 mm (Para. [0065]). Regarding claim 21, Fukuda teaches that the connection surface (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. G) is joined to the first lateral wall at a depth of 0.2 to 2 mm (Para. [0065]). Regarding claim 22, Fukuda teaches that the connection surface (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. G) is joined to the first lateral wall at a depth of 0.2 to 2 mm (Para. [0065]), which overlaps the claimed range of 0.4 to 1.5 mm which is a prima facie case of obviousness. Regarding claim 23, modified Fukuda teaches that the connection surface is connected to the first lateral wall at a height that is related to the groove depth (Fukuda; Fig. 2)) and Schildhauer teaches that the depth of the lateral grooves consistently increases from the center of the tire towards the outsides (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 14; Para. [0006]). Since the depth of the point where the connection surface and the first lateral wall meet taught by Fukuda is dependent on the groove depth, when the lateral grooves are modified to have a consistently increasing depth across from the inside of the tire to the outside, the depth at where the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall will also increase along the extent of the first lateral wall. Regarding claim 25, Fukuda teaches that the angle formed between the tangent line of the connection surface and a line perpendicular to the groove wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. A) is greater than 20 degrees (Para. [0066]). That would mean that the angle between the tangent line of the connection surface and the tangent line of the groove wall would be 90 – A or less than 70 degrees, which overlaps with the claimed range of 30 to 75 degrees which is a prima facie case of obviousness. Regarding claim 26, Fukuda teaches that the height of the blocks is 10 mm (Para. [0101]), that the length is at least 15 mm (Para. [0037]), and the width is 10 mm (Para. [0101]). Using these numbers for height, length and width of the blocks, the blocks will have a volume of 1500 mm3 or more. The connection surface has a width of 2.25 mm (Claim 1), a length of 10 mm (Para. [0101], and a height of 0.2 to 2 mm (Para. [0065]). The removed portion will have a volume of 45 mm3 or less, which for these two combinations would mean the removed portion is 3% or less of the block volume. Regarding claim 27, Fukuda teaches that the connection surface extends along the entire length of the first lateral wall (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 521). Regarding claim 29, modified Fukuda teaches that the depth of the lateral grooves is 10 mm (Para. [0101]) and that the depth where the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall is based on the groove depth (Fig. 1]), which means that the depth will increase by the same percentage that the groove depth will. Schildhauer teaches that the increase in depth of the lateral grooves towards the outside of the tire should be at least 1.5 mm (Para. [0014]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Fukuda with Schildhauer to increase the lateral groove depth at the outside of the tire by at least 1.5 mm to improve water drainage (Schildhauer; Para. [0014]). Modified Fukuda does not expressly disclose that the depth of the lateral groove in the shoulder is larger than the depth of the groove in the center by 30% to 50% (less than 4 mm based on the groove depth taught by the modified Fukuda); however, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure the amount that the shoulder lateral grooves are greater than the center lateral grooves within the claimed range since modified Fukuda discloses the increase in groove depth from the center of the tire towards the outside as greater than 1.5 mm (Schildhauer; Para. [0014])), said range overlapping the claimed range. Since the depth where the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall is dependent on the groove depth, this depth should also increase by the same percentage. Regarding claim 34, Fukuda teaches that the blocks are made at least in the central region of the tread (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 36, Fukuda teaches that each block has a front edge (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 521). Regarding claim 37, Fukuda teaches that the connection surface (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 511) have a first section (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 511; lower half of connection surface) joined to the lateral wall and a second section (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 511, upper half of connection surface) joined to the tread surface. Regarding claim 38, Fukuda teaches that the connection surfaces are arranged at the block edges (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 521, 531). Regarding claim 40, Fukuda teaches a tire (Para. [0043])) comprising a tread band comprising a radially external tread surface and a plurality of recesses, a tread band and a plurality of recesses (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 4) defining a plurality of blocks (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 5) where each block comprises a tread surface portion and a first lateral wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 52) and a second lateral wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 52) that extend toward the bottom of the recess and that each block has a circumferential length at least 15 mm (Para. [0037]). Fukuda teaches connection surfaces (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 511) on each lateral wall that connect the lateral wall to the tread surface by an entirely curvilinear profile. Fukuda teaches that the angle formed between the tangent line of the connection surface and a line perpendicular to the groove wall (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. A) is greater than 20 degrees (Para. [0066]). That would mean that the angle between the tangent line of the connection surface and the tangent line of the groove wall would be 90 – A or less than 70 degrees, which overlaps with the claimed range of greater than 20 degrees which is a prima facie case of obviousness. Fukuda also teaches that there can be no sipes in the blocks (Fig. 4) which would make the tread surface have an uninterrupted, continuous surface extending between the respective connection surfaces. Fukuda does not teach a belt made of two crossing bands; however, that is a fundamental feature of pneumatic tires. However, Fukuda does not teach the width of the connection surface. In an analogous art, Document 1 teaches a tire where the tread elements have a curved, chamfered (connection surface) surface (Fig. 7, Ref. Num. 59, 61) where the width of the chamfered surface is between 0.15L and 0.5L (Page 4, Lines 111-115) where L is the circumferential length of the block. Based on the block length of at least 15 mm taught by Fukuda, that would make the connection surface length be greater than 2.25 mm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 to 2.5 mm which is a prima facie case of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Fukuda with Document 1 to have the chamfer widths be 15% to 50% of the block length. This modification will decrease the amount of edge wear on the tread elements (Document 1; Page 3, Lines 81-97). However, neither Fukuda nor Document 1 teach the angle between the connection surface and the first lateral wall. The modified Fukuda teaches that all of the blocks have the connection surfaces (Fukuda; Fig. 1) which would include both the central and the shoulder region. The connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall at a first depth (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. Re) in the central and the connection surface is joined to the first lateral wall at a second depth (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. Re), but does not teach that those depths are different. In an analogous art, Schildhauer teaches a tire where the depth of the lateral grooves consistently increases from the center of the tire towards the outsides (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 14; Para. [0006]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Fukuda with Schildhauer to consistently increase the depth of the lateral grooves from the center of the tire towards the outsides. This modification will improve water drainage (Schildhauer; Para. [0014]). Since the depth of the lateral grooves increases from the center of the tire to the outside (Schildhauer; Fig. 3) and the first and second depth are dependent on the groove depth (Fukuda; Fig. 2), the second depth will be smaller than the first depth. Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda (US 2015/0239296 A1) in view of Document 1 (GB 1549347 A), and Schildhauer (DE 10311430 A1) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Fischer (DE 10-2009-003565 A1 -of Record). Regarding claim 33, modified Fukuda does not teach the radius of curvature of the connection surface. In an analogous art, Fischer teaches a connection surface (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 23) that has a radius of curvature (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. R1) of 1 mm to 5 mm (Para. [0005]). Fischer does not expressly disclose a value of 2 mm to 6 mm; however, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure the radius of curvature of the connection surface within the claimed range since Fischer discloses the radius of curvature of the connection surface as between 1 mm and 5 mm (Para. [0005]), said range overlapping the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Fukuda with Fischer to have the radius of curvature of the connection surface be between 1 mm and 5 mm. This modification will enable good road contact during handling (Fischer; Para. [0005]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J WEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-2664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:30pm. 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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at (571) 270-5545. 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. /N.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1749 /JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749