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 § 102
2. 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.
3. Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schurnik (EP 3264491, of record).
As best depicted in Figures 1-5, Schurnik teaches an assembly or apparatus comprising a base 200 including a charger module 209, a power coupling module 204, and a battery (any of these three can be viewed as the claimed electronic device) and a plurality of modulus 300 including a battery 303, a power coupling module 304, and a sensor module 301 (any of these three can be viewed as the claimed electronic device). Furthermore, the claims require base 200 to be mechanically attached to “the tire”; however, the claimed apparatus does not include a tire. It is emphasized that a tire corresponds with the intended use of the claimed apparatus (base and plurality of modules) and it is not require for a base to physically be mechanically attached to a tire. This is particularly evident since the elected claims are directed to an apparatus including a base and a plurality of modules and the non-elected claims are directed to an apparatus including a tire, a base, and a plurality of modulus (disclosure of a tire in the elected invention is intended use and not required by the claimed apparatus- if in fact a tire was positively recited than such a claim would correspond with a non-elected invention).
Regarding claims 2-4, it is emphasized that the claims as currently drafted are directed to an apparatus or assembly “for use with a tire”. This is entirely different from a claim directed to an assembly comprising a tire and an apparatus attached to said tire (this corresponds with non-elected invention).
With respect to claims 5-7, power coupling module 204 (lower electrical contact of base) is connected to power coupling module 304 (point of contact between modulus corresponds with claimed lower electrical contact) such that electrical power can be exchanged between said modulus (Paragraph 56). Similarly, power coupling modules 304 in adjacent non-outlet power packs 300 contact one another and such correspond with lower and upper electrical contacts. Also, with specific respect to claims 6 and 7, respective modules are “configured” to electrically connect modules in series with one another.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed August 1, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Schumik does not teach or suggest a compact system of small electronics attached inside of a vehicle tire. The Examiner agrees with Applicant’s characterization of Schumik. However, as detailed above, the elected invention is directed to an apparatus including a base and a plurality of modulus. More particularly, such an apparatus is “for use with a tire” and this language is clearly directed to the intended use of the claimed apparatus comprising a base and a plurality of modules. It is emphasized that any claim that positively requires a tire corresponds with a non-elected invention.
Conclusion
5. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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.
Justin Fischer
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 October 28, 2025