CTNF 18/013,472 CTNF 83145 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-5 are cancelled and claims 6-14 are newly added. Claims 6-14 filed May 26, 2023 are pending and are hereby examined. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 3. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 4. 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. 07-23-aia AIA 5. 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 6. 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. 07-21-aia AIA 7. Claim s 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imamura (US 2013/0275104) in view of Reichling et al (US 2020/0307319) and Kyu (US 2017/0157997) . 8. Re Claims 6, 9, 12: Imamura discloses comprising: (i) providing a tyre acoustic model including modelled pattern features Comprising (see [0022], Fig. 5 tire model): one or more of lateral slots, sipes, and chamfers; a vehicle body part model (see [0077] part 3r of tire model); and one or more sound absorbent material models as inputs to a calculation module (see [0112] noise performance); (ii) identifying, using the calculation module, one or more noise paths at the vehicle body part for each frequency of a predetermined frequency range (see [0107] generating sound to be evaluated corresponding to noise frequencies). However, Imamura fails to explicitly disclose the following. Meanwhile, Kyu teaches: (iii) selecting a position and a material property of a sound absorbent material to be positioned at the vehicle body part in order to minimize Pass-By Noise, wherein step (iii) comprises minimizing Pass-By Noise at one or more frequencies in a range of about 500-2000 Hz (see [0020, 0040, 0041], Fig. 5 and 6 different frequency settings). From the teaching of Kyu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Imamura’s simulation model for tires with Kyu’s different frequencies in order for “… resonance noise reduction… (see Kyu Abstract).” However, Imamura and Kyu fail to explicitly disclose the following. Meanwhile, Kyu teaches: wherein in step (iii) the selected position of the sound absorbent material is one or more specific locations within a vehicle wheel-arch and/or a vehicle underbody (see [0047] specific wheel positioning). From the teaching of Reichling, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Imamura’s simulation model for tires with Kyu’s teaching of frequencies and further with Reichling’s teaching of specific positioning in in order for “… a tire having a low noise tread configuration (see Reichling [0001]).” 9. Re Claims 7, 10, 13: However, Imamura fails to disclose the following. Meanwhile, Kyu teaches comprising wherein the one or more sound absorbent material models include a model of a foam material, of polyurethane (PU), or of an Ethylene-Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM) (see [0041] sound absorbing materials). From the teaching of Kyu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Imamura’s simulation model for tires with Kyu’s sound absorbing materials in order for “… resonance noise reduction… (see Kyu Abstract).” 10. Re Claims 8, 11, 14: However, Imamura fails to disclose the following. Meanwhile, Kyu teaches wherein step (iii) comprises selecting a combination of different sound absorbing materials (see [0041] sound absorbing materials). From the teaching of Kyu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Imamura’s simulation model for tires with Kyu’s sound absorbing materials in order for “… resonance noise reduction… (see Kyu Abstract).” Examiner Notes 11. The Examiner suggests clarifying whether claims 9 and 12 are dependent upon claim 6, or independent claims (if so, they need to recite all elements of claim 6 if independent). The Examiner suggests removing some of the dependent claims as they are redundant. The Examiner suggests incorporating claims 7-8 together into the independent claims together. Finally, the Examiner suggests incorporating more hardware from the Specification and any unique arrangements of hardware, unique hardware, or unique ways the hardware is communicating. The aforementioned claim suggestions, in combination together, is suggested to help advance prosecution forward, although further search, examination, and consideration is required . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAWAAD HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)272-7178. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 AM to 5 PM. 14. 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. 15. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Florian Zeender can be reached on 571-272-6790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 16. 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. /FAWAAD HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627 Application/Control Number: 18/013,472 Page 2 Art Unit: 3627 Application/Control Number: 18/013,472 Page 3 Art Unit: 3627 Application/Control Number: 18/013,472 Page 4 Art Unit: 3627 Application/Control Number: 18/013,472 Page 5 Art Unit: 3627 Application/Control Number: 18/013,472 Page 6 Art Unit: 3627