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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 16, 2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 10-11, 13-16, 19-20, 22-23, 25-26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greco (US Pub. No. 2020/0148011) in view of Chaya (JP2019-156070; machine translation relied upon), Nakajima (WO 2019/054226; English equivalent US Pub. No. 2020/0247193 relied upon), Adamson II (US Pub. No. 2004/0159383), Pedrinelli (US Pub. No. 2022/0088974) and Battocchio (US Pub. No. 2013/0112324).
Regarding claims 1-2, 23 and 26, Greco teaches a pneumatic tire comprising a tread portion 39 extending in a tire circumferential direction and having an annular shape, a pair of sidewall portions 33 respectively disposed on both sides of the tread portion, and a pair of bead portions 34 each disposed on an inner side of the sidewall portions in a tire radial direction, a bead filler 46 being disposed on an outer circumference of a bead core of each of the bead portions, a carcass layer 37 being mounted between the pair of bead portions, the carcass layer being turned up from a tire inner side to a tire outer side around the bead core, a plurality of belt layers 36 being disposed on an outer circumferential side of the carcass, an inner liner 40 being disposed on an inner surface of the tire along the carcass layer, a transponder 2 being disposed between the carcass layer 37 and the outer sidewall rubber 48 at a position above 55% of the section height and below 5 mm from the radially outer surface of the sidewall rubber (paragraphs [0056]-[0059]; figure 1), overlapping the claimed position range, where the transponder can comprise a substrate 120 and antennas 110 extending from both ends of the substrate (paragraph [0074]; figure 2), and the entire substrate and antenna can be completely covered beyond all sides with a covering layer (paragraph [0075]; figure 3). Greco does not specifically disclose the reinforcing cord material or elongation at break of the reinforcing cord of the carcass layer. Chaya teaches forming a carcass layer of a reinforcing cord 52 made of polyethylene terephthalate (polyester), the elongation at break of the carcass cord ranging from 20% to 30% (machine translation at pages 4-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a carcass cord made of polyester having an elongation at break as taught by Chaya as the carcass cord of the tire of Greco in order to have a cord excellent in high-speed durability and plunger strength (see Chaya machine translation at page 1). Greco does not specifically disclose that the transponder extends in the circumferential direction. Nakajima teaches arranging the antenna portion to extend in an orthogonal direction to the cord of the carcass (paragraph [0074] as well as a specific embodiment having a tire size 195/65R15 (paragraph [0108]), the R indicating a radial carcass, therefore teaching or suggesting that the antenna extend in the circumferential direction (as claimed) or in the axial direction, as well as teaching a specific embodiment with an IC chip of 3 mm x 3 mm x 0.4 mm along with a 30 mm antenna on both sides of the chip (paragraph [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to orient the antenna in the circumferential direction as taught by Nakajima in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to have bending of the antenna portion be kept to a minimum (see Nakajima at paragraph [0074]). Greco does not specifically disclose the ratio of total thickness Gac of the coating layer to a maximum thickness Gar of the transponder. Adamson II teaches a radio component 11 (claimed substrate) and antennas 20 extending from both ends of the substrate and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm measured perpendicular to the antenna (paragraphs [0017]-[0021]; figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a coating having a thickness as taught by Adamson II in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to allow for very high frequency or higher radio transmission from the antenna (see Adamson II at paragraph [0004]). This combination having a transponder thickness of 0.4 mm and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm results in a Gac/Gar ratio of 1.1 (0.44/0.4) or greater, overlapping the claimed ranges of claims 1 and 26. Greco does not specifically disclose a distance L between an end of the antenna in the circumferential direction and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction. Pedrinelli teaches that a coating layer for a transponder is generally 1-2 mm longer than the transponder (paragraph [0033]), overlapping the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a distance L as taught by Pedrinelli for the distance L between an end of the antenna and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction in the tire of Greco (combined) as a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Greco does not specifically disclose spacing a center of the transponder 10 mm or more from all splice portions in the circumferential direction. Battocchio teaches spacing a center of a transponder at least 90° from the circumferential splice portions of a tire, preferably at least 135°, even more preferably greater than 150°, and most preferably equal to 180° (paragraphs [0007]-[0008] and [0055]-[0057]); figures 2-3), such positioning resulting in a distance far greater than 10mm as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the center of the transponder as taught by Battocchio in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to improve the quality of communications with the transponder (see Battocchio at paragraph [0007]).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Chaya teaches an intermediate elongation at 2.0 cN/dtex of 4.5-6% (machine translation at page 5), such teaching an overlapping range for an intermediate elongation at 1.0 cN/dtex of 5.0% or less.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Chaya teaches a fineness range of 1400 to 7000 dtex (machine translation at page 6), overlapping the claimed range.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Chaya teaches a twist coefficient K of 1500 to 2200 (machine translation at page 6), overlapping the claimed range.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Greco teaches that the coating is an elastomer and has a relative dielectric constant of lower than 6.5 (paragraphs [0065]-[0072]).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Adamson II teaches a radio component 11 (claimed substrate) and antennas 20 extending from both ends of the substrate (paragraphs [0018]-[0020]); figure 1), and Nakajima teaches arranging the antenna portion to extend in an orthogonal direction to the cord of the carcass (paragraph [0074] as well as a specific embodiment having a tire size 195/65R15 (paragraph [0108]), the R indicating a radial carcass, therefore teaching or suggesting that the antenna extend in the circumferential direction (as claimed) or in the axial direction.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Adamson II teaches or suggests that the center of the transponder is disposed at a 50% position with respect to the coating thickness (figure 1).
Regarding claims 22, 25 and 28, Greco teaches a pneumatic tire comprising a tread portion 39 extending in a tire circumferential direction and having an annular shape, a pair of sidewall portions 33 respectively disposed on both sides of the tread portion, and a pair of bead portions 34 each disposed on an inner side of the sidewall portions in a tire radial direction, a bead filler 46 being disposed on an outer circumference of a bead core of each of the bead portions, a carcass layer 37 being mounted between the pair of bead portions, the carcass layer being turned up from a tire inner side to a tire outer side around the bead core, a plurality of belt layers 36 being disposed on an outer circumferential side of the carcass, an inner liner 40 being disposed on an inner surface of the tire along the carcass layer, a transponder 2 being disposed between the carcass layer 37 and the outer sidewall rubber 48 at a position above 55% of the section height and below 5 mm from the radially outer surface of the sidewall rubber (paragraphs [0056]-[0059]; figure 1), overlapping the claimed position range, where the transponder can comprise a substrate 120 and antennas 110 extending from both ends of the substrate (paragraph [0074]; figure 2), and the entire substrate and antenna can be completely covered beyond all sides with a covering layer (paragraph [0075]; figure 3). Greco does not specifically disclose the reinforcing cord material or elongation at break of the reinforcing cord of the carcass layer. Chaya teaches forming a carcass layer of a reinforcing cord 52 made of polyethylene terephthalate (polyester), the elongation at break of the carcass cord ranging from 20% to 30% (machine translation at pages 4-5). Further, Chaya teaches an intermediate elongation at 2.0 cN/dtex of 4.5-6% (machine translation at page 5), a fineness range of 1400 to 7000 dtex (machine translation at page 6), overlapping the claimed range of claim 5, and a twist coefficient K of 1500 to 2200 (machine translation at page 6), overlapping the claimed range of claim 6. While Chaya does not specifically disclose the intermediate elongation at 1.0 cN/dtex (as opposed to the disclosed range of intermediate elongation at 2.0 cN/dtex), such a range will inherently be lower than the disclosed range, because a lower tension necessarily leads to less elongation, and given that the cords are made of the same material, have the same elongation at break, have the same fineness, and have the same twist coefficient, it is expected that such cords will meet or overlap the claimed range of 2.0% to 4.0% intermediate elongation at a load of 1.0 cN/dtex. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a carcass cord made of polyester having an elongation at break and an intermediate elongation as taught by Chaya as the carcass cord of the tire of Greco in order to have a cord excellent in high-speed durability and plunger strength (see Chaya machine translation at page 1). Greco does not specifically disclose that the transponder extends in the circumferential direction. Nakajima teaches arranging the antenna portion to extend in an orthogonal direction to the cord of the carcass (paragraph [0074] as well as a specific embodiment having a tire size 195/65R15 (paragraph [0108]), the R indicating a radial carcass, therefore teaching or suggesting that the antenna extend in the circumferential direction (as claimed) or in the axial direction, as well as teaching a specific embodiment with an IC chip of 3 mm x 3 mm x 0.4 mm along with a 30 mm antenna on both sides of the chip (paragraph [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to orient the antenna in the circumferential direction as taught by Nakajima in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to have bending of the antenna portion be kept to a minimum (see Nakajima at paragraph [0074]). Greco does not specifically disclose the ratio of total thickness Gac of the coating layer to a maximum thickness Gar of the transponder. Adamson II teaches a radio component 11 (claimed substrate) and antennas 20 extending from both ends of the substrate and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm measured perpendicular to the antenna (paragraphs [0017]-[0021]; figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a coating having a thickness as taught by Adamson II in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to allow for very high frequency or higher radio transmission from the antenna (see Adamson II at paragraph [0004]). This combination having a transponder thickness of 0.4 mm and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm results in a Gac/Gar ratio of 1.1 (0.44/0.4) or greater, overlapping the claimed ranges of claims 22 and 28. Greco does not specifically disclose a distance L between an end of the antenna in the circumferential direction and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction. Pedrinelli teaches that a coating layer for a transponder is generally 1-2 mm longer than the transponder (paragraph [0033]), overlapping the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a distance L as taught by Pedrinelli for the distance L between an end of the antenna and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction in the tire of Greco (combined) as a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Greco does not specifically disclose spacing a center of the transponder 10 mm or more from all splice portions in the circumferential direction. Battocchio teaches spacing a center of a transponder at least 90° from the circumferential splice portions of a tire, preferably at least 135°, even more preferably greater than 150°, and most preferably equal to 180° (paragraphs [0007]-[0008] and [0055]-[0057]); figures 2-3), such positioning resulting in a distance far greater than 10mm as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the center of the transponder as taught by Battocchio in the tire of Greco (combined) in order to improve the quality of communications with the transponder (see Battocchio at paragraph [0007]).
Claims 21, 24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chaya (JP2019-156070; machine translation relied upon) in view of Destraves (US Pub. No. 2020/0079159), Nakajima (WO 2019/054226; English equivalent US Pub. No. 2020/0247193 relied upon), Adamson II (US Pub. No. 2004/0159383), Pedrinelli (US Pub. No. 2022/0088974) and Battocchio (US Pub. No. 2013/0112324).
Regarding claims 21, 24 and 27, Chaya teaches a pneumatic tire comprising a tread portion 12 extending in a tire circumferential direction and having an annular shape, a pair of sidewall portions 16 respectively disposed on both sides of the tread portion, and a pair of bead portions 18 each disposed on an inner side of the sidewall portions in a tire radial direction, a bead filler 30 being disposed on an outer circumference of a bead core of each of the bead portions, a carcass layer 20 being mounted between the pair of bead portions, the carcass layer being turned up from a tire inner side to a tire outer side around the bead core, a plurality of belt layers 22a and 22b being disposed on an outer circumferential side of the carcass, an inner liner 38 being disposed on an inner surface of the tire along the carcass layer (machine translation at pages 2-3; figure 1), the carcass layer being formed of a reinforcing cord 52 made of polyethylene terephthalate (polyester), the elongation at break of the carcass cord ranging from 20% to 30% (machine translation at pages 4-5). Chaya does not specifically disclose a transponder. Destraves teaches using a transponder 100 being disposed between the carcass layer 87 and the inner liner 90 at a position 40 mm above the free edge 931 (which is above the bead core) (paragraph [0073]; figure 6), falling within the claimed position range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a transponder and locate it as taught by Destraves in the tire of Chaya in order to protect the transponder from any external mechanical attack and from any internal thermomechanical attack (see Destraves at paragraph [0073]). Chaya does not specifically disclose that the transponder extends in the circumferential direction. Nakajima teaches arranging the antenna portion to extend in an orthogonal direction to the cord of the carcass (paragraph [0074] as well as a specific embodiment having a tire size 195/65R15 (paragraph [0108]), the R indicating a radial carcass, therefore teaching or suggesting that the antenna extend in the circumferential direction (as claimed) or in the axial direction, as well as teaching a specific embodiment with an IC chip of 3 mm x 3 mm x 0.4 mm along with a 30 mm antenna on both sides of the chip (paragraph [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to orient the antenna in the circumferential direction as taught by Nakajima in the tire of Chaya (combined) in order to have bending of the antenna portion be kept to a minimum (see Nakajima at paragraph [0074]). Chaya does not specifically disclose the ratio of total thickness Gac of the coating layer to a maximum thickness Gar of the transponder. Adamson II teaches a radio component 11 (claimed substrate) and antennas 20 extending from both ends of the substrate and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm measured perpendicular to the antenna (paragraphs [0017]-[0021]; figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a coating having a thickness as taught by Adamson II in the tire of Chaya (combined) in order to allow for very high frequency or higher radio transmission from the antenna (see Adamson II at paragraph [0004]). This combination having a transponder thickness of 0.4 mm and a coating thickness of at least 0.02 mm results in a Gac/Gar ratio of 1.1 (0.44/0.4) or greater, overlapping the claimed ranges of claims 21 and 27. Chaya does not specifically disclose a distance L between an end of the antenna in the circumferential direction and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction. Pedrinelli teaches that a coating layer for a transponder is generally 1-2 mm longer than the transponder (paragraph [0033]), overlapping the claimed range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a distance L as taught by Pedrinelli for the distance L between an end of the antenna and an end of the coating layer in the circumferential direction in the tire of Chaya (combined) as a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Greco does not specifically disclose spacing a center of the transponder 10 mm or more from all splice portions in the circumferential direction. Battocchio teaches spacing a center of a transponder at least 90° from the circumferential splice portions of a tire, preferably at least 135°, even more preferably greater than 150°, and most preferably equal to 180° (paragraphs [0007]-[0008] and [0055]-[0057]); figures 2-3), such positioning resulting in a distance far greater than 10mm as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the center of the transponder as taught by Battocchio in the tire of Chaya (combined) in order to improve the quality of communications with the transponder (see Battocchio at paragraph [0007]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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. In particular, it is noted that newly cited Pedrinelli specifically discloses a distance L reading on the claimed range, and newly cited Battocchio provides specific motivation for the placement of a center of a transponder greatly farther than 10 mm from all circumferential spliced portions. It is also noted for the record that Downing teaches circumferential splices (paragraph [0073]; figures 20A-20B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP N SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1612. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30.
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.
/P.N.S/ Examiner, Art Unit 1749 March 12, 2026
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749