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 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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 and 11-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan et al. (CN 201626267U) in view of Strang et al. (3,736,975) and Kunau (9,649,897).
In reference to claim 1, Fan discloses a tire changing machine comprising an apparatus for mounting a tire on a respective rim of a wheel of a vehicle, comprising a frame; wherein the frame includes a base unit (1), a column (A in annotated Fig. from Fan below, also including all following reference letters) rising from the base unit along an axial orientation (axis of the column), a first operating arm (B) connected to the column and extending from the column parallel to the axial orientation, a second operating arm (C), and a third operating arm (D), wherein the base unit is provided with pedals (3/10), a chuck (4/5), connected to the frame to rotate about an axis of rotation and connectable to the wheel to entrain it in rotation; wherein the column and the pedals are provided at opposite sides of the chuck, with respect to a first horizontal direction, and wherein the first and the second operating arms are connected to the base unit at opposite sides of the chuck along a second horizontal direction (in the same manner as the disclosed invention), the second horizontal direction being perpendicular to the first horizontal direction; a first working tool (12) configured for removing the tire and connected to the first operating arm and which is movable relative to the frame in the first horizontal direction towards the wheel to come into contact with the tire, wherein the first operating arm is movable towards and away from the column by translation along the first horizontal axis; a second working tool (17) connected to the second operating arm; a third working tool (hook end and of arm D considered to be a working tool for engaging and lifting the wheel/tire) connected to the third operating arm. However, Fan fails to disclose a bead seating device. Strang discloses an air nozzle (24) configures to engage a tire/rim interface for seating a bead and inflating the tire, and teaches that the nozzle may be mounted to a tire changer (abstract). Further, Kunau discloses a hand held nozzle (100), also for engaging a tire/rim interface for seating a bead of a tire, wherein the nozzle of Kunau is substantially smaller in shape and size than the nozzle of Strang and also includes a first branch and second branch that diverge away from a split zone and will direct air around the inside of the tire, as opposed to directly toward the axis of the tire, also being known to improve inflation (as taught by Huang et al. 11,273,677, file 18 September 2018, and provided as extrinsic evidence; Col. 17, lines 42-45). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a bead seating device to the tire changer of Fan, as taught by Strang, to increase functionality of the machine to seat the bead and inflate the tire once the tools are operated to mount the tire on a rim, but to provide the nozzle with the structure taught by Kunau, being smaller, more modern and providing improved inflation due to the diverging outlets. Further, it would have been obvious to provide the bead seating nozzle with a similar configuration taught by Kunau, to provide a small, yet effective tire seating valve (as opposed to the substantially larger nozzle of Strang). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing such a bead seating device would most obviously be completed by mounting a nozzle to the machine in a similar and known manner to the tools disclosed by Fan, wherein a mounting configuration similar to the first tool (12) will provide the bead seating device with the ability to be movable relative to the chuck along a transverse orientation, directed radially perpendicular to the axis of rotation (provided by piston 42 or via motion of the wheel holder, as disclosed in paragraph 110), the bead seating device being movable relative to the chuck along a vertical orientation (via pistons similar to 12 and 14) parallel to the axis of rotation, between a rest position, in which the bead seating device is spaced from the rim (any position not in contact with the wheel/tire, to allow for the other tools to operate, similar to the positions shown for all tools in Fig. 1), and a working position, in which the bead seating device is interposed between the flange of the rim and the bead of the tire (bead seating device would obviously need to be capable of positioning in a working position to operate as intended), the bead seating device including: a rigid element (post 15 for supporting the nozzle), an injection nozzle (100 of Kunau, to be referenced as the preferred nozzle in the art, being smaller and more modern than Strang) connected to the rigid element and configured to be interposed between the flange of the rim and the bead of the tire (as shown in Fig. 1D of Kunau) when the bead seating device is at the working position; and a duct (199 of Kunau), with a duct being necessarily incorporated into the device of Fan to supply air to the nozzle and obviously connected to the injection nozzle to feed the air flow to it, wherein, at the working position, the bead seating device is operatively constrained rigidly to the frame and is configured to remain independently and fixedly stationary at the position (once pistons are actuated to the working position, and deactivated, the nozzle will effectively be held rigidly in position), even when subjected to a force generated by the air flow, wherein the injection nozzle (100) includes: a single body (450; Fig. 15A), the body including a first portion (451), a second portion (464A/B), a split zone (460 at split of 464A/B), the first portion connected to the duct to receive the air flow along a conveying orientation, wherein the rigid element elongates along the conveying orientation (via a piston similar to 9 or 14 of Fan), the split zone receiving the air flow from the first portion, and the second portion provided downstream of the split zone, the second portion including a first branch (464A), having a first orientation with respect to the conveying orientation, and a second branch (464B), having a second orientation with respect to the conveying orientation (both clearly angled away from one another), the second orientation being different with respect to the first orientation, so that the first branch and the second branch are both located downstream of the split zone and diverge away from the split zone, wherein the first orientation and the second orientation are both contained in an injection plane, the injection plane being inclined by the predetermined angle downwards with respect to the tire/wheel as taught by Kunau and to the conveying orientation (as will be discussed next). Lastly, although Kunau fails to disclose a bend in the nozzle portion, Kunau does clearly show the nozzle to be oriented at an angle relative to the rotational axis of the tire/rim during inflation, whereas the actuators taught by Fan are all linear and either perpendicular or parallel to the rotational axis of the wheel. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to provide the nozzle with a bend portion (providing similar orientation to tool 19, also intended to engage the tire/wheel at an angle from the rotational axis) provided downstream of the first portion and upstream of the split zone (when formed as part of the nozzle, the closer the bend portion to the outlet, the shorter the angled run and vertical height of the nozzle will be, thus providing more compact structure than a nozzle with the bend further upstream), the bend portion defining a predetermined angle downwards (to provide the desired contact angle) with respect to the conveying orientation to enable the desired orientation relative to the tire that is taught by Kunau, when mounted on the linear actuators taught by Fan, with such a bend being a minor modification to the flow path that would be understood by anyone of ordinary skill in the art (similar to Prosser et al. 5,884,659, Iori 5,056,576 and Demers 5,456,32, all provided as extrinsic evidence that it is well-known for a nozzle to include some form of bend when desired to enable a specific orientation relative to the tire to be inflated).
Regarding the limitations of claim 1, added in the amendments filed 16 August 2025, the supporting structure for a tool, as disclosed by Fan, includes an axial actuator (11) connected to the frame, a rigid element (E) extending along a conveying orientation between a first end and a second end opposite the first end, a slideway (F) connected to the axial actuator to move parallel to the axis of rotation of the chuck, the rigid element being slidably coupled to the slideway to slide through the slideway along the transverse orientation, the slideway being located in a position intermediate between the first end and the second end of the rigid element, with the injection nozzle taught by Strang and Kunau being connected to the rigid element at the second end thereof in a similar manner to the tool (12) of Fan. Thus, when the bead seating device as discussed above is provided to a similar actuator, it would be obvious to provide the claimed structure thereto.
PNG
media_image1.png
655
581
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, as discussed supra, the actuators disclosed by Fan will provide a slidable motion relative to the frame via pistons (similar to 14), wherein the disclosure of the current application recites that the device is operatively constrained rigidly to the frame by a locking device that is either a piston, which is understood in the art to hold a position once oriented until released or moved out of position, or a threaded member screwed transversely. Thus, the term “locking device” is understood to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), with the structure provided in the spec to be either the piston or threaded member, which is made obvious by Fan.
Regarding claim 3, Fan further discloses a supporting element (G) which is movable relative to the frame along an axial orientation, parallel to the axis of rotation and wherein the rigid element (similar to E) of the bead seating device would obviously be connected to the supporting element.
Regarding claim 4, Kunau further discloses an abutment element (469) configured to come into abutment against the rim of the wheel when the bead seating device is at the working position.
Regarding claim 6, Kunau further discloses that the injection nozzle is oriented along an injection plane and comprises a first opening, provided at an outlet of the first branch of the second portion of the nozzle, and a second opening, provided at an outlet of the second branch of the second portion of the nozzle, to produce a first air flow, directed along the first orientation, and a second air flow, directed along the second orientation, wherein the first orientation and the second orientation are contained in the injection plane.
Regarding claim 7, Fan disclose that the rigid element (E or a comparable structure to support the nozzle) is movable translationally relative to the frame along the transverse orientation (via piston 14).
Regarding claim 8, when the nozzle taught by Kunau is positioned against the tire/rim in the manner shown in Fig. 1D, assuming both sides of the nozzle have equal contact to provide the intended inflation function, the orientation of a rigid element (similar to 15) that supports the nozzle and is effectively aligned with a vertical plane of the nozzle, will be oriented such that an axis of the rigid element will obviously pass through the axis of rotation of the wheel due to the symmetrical shape of the nozzle of Kunau.
Regarding claim 9, as discussed supra, Fan discloses plural actuators (11/14) that would obviously be connected to the bead seating device for movement between rest and working positions.
Regarding claim 11, Strang further discloses an inflator (112) that includes an inflation duct (111) connectable to an inflation valve with which the rim of the wheel is provided, in order to inflate the tire mounted on the rim after the bead has been seated, wherein it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar inflator to the wheel changer of Fan, to add the additional function of completing inflation to the desired pressure of the tire after the bead has been seated.
Regarding claims 12-14, the piston (14) disclosed by Fan may further be considered as a slideway, connected to the supporting element (G), the frame and the rigid element (E) to move along the axial orientation along the transverse direction.
Regarding claims 15-20, the method of using the device taught by the combination of Fan, Strang and Kunau, would obviously include all of the steps set forth in claims 15-20 to operate in the manner intended by each respective reference.
Regarding claim 21, Fan further discloses that the second operating arm (C) extends perpendicularly to the axial direction (clearly extends in a direction ).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan et al. (CN 201626267U) in view of Strang et al. (3,736,975) and Kunau (9,649,897) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Corghi (9,662,946; to be referred to hereinafter as Corghi ‘946).
Fan discloses the tire changer as discussed supra, wherein the design and structure of the device would obviously make the tools of the device usable with tires of different diameters (due to adjustable location of each relative to the axis of rotation). However, Fan fails to disclose that the device is controlled by a controller that receives data relating to the rim prior to generating drive signals for the actuator(s). Corghi ‘946 discloses a similar wheel changer having a control unit, and that the controller is configured to receive configuration data correlated with the diameter of the rim (position or size of the rim; Col. 6, lines 50-52) to generate drive signals to the working tools for centering (properly locating relative to the wheel), which allows for at least partially automated operation of the device, making the device more convenient, more accurate and often faster than manual operation. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar controller to the device of Fan, when the bead seating device is connected thereto, as discussed supra, to also control movement of the bead seating device in response to the configuration data, as taught by Corghi ‘946) and send the drive signals to the actuator(s) of Fan to instruct it to move the bead seating device between the rest position and the working position.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 2 October 2025, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 2 October 2025, regarding the prior art rejections, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As applied above, the interpretation of the Fan references, primarily which arms read on the first, second and third arms, has been modified, such that the combination of references is still considered to read on the amended claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of Barrios et al. (2014/0048215) and Ochoa (9,630,595) provide alternative inflator nozzles having structure similar to the new limitations set forth in the amended claims.
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 BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Brian Keller can be reached on 571-272-8548. 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.
/BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 8 December 2025