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 .
1) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
2) Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to claims 19 and 20, the subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention (i.e. the new matter) is: (1) THE COMBINATION OF the specific sipe portion described in lines 27-31 of claim 16 AND the specific sipe portion described in claim 19 and (2) THE COMBINATION OF the specific sipe portion described in lines 27-31 of claim 16 AND the specific sipe portion described in claim 20.
Claim 16 is directed to the embodiment shown in FIGURES 14-15 whereas claim 19 is directed to the embodiment shown in FIGURE 16 and claim 20 is directed to the embodiment shown in FIGURES 20, 21A-C. The original disclosure fails to reasonably convey modifying the embodiment of FIGURES 14-15 using the embodiment of FIGURE 16 or FIGURES 20, 21A, 21B and 21C.
3) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
4) Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 18 (dependent on claim 16) fails to further limit claim 16 since the subject matter described in claim 18 is required by the subject matter described in claim 16 lines 27-31.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER
5) Claims 1-3, 6-8, 13 and 15-17 are allowed.
As to claim 1 (directed to embodiment shown in FIGURES 11-12), the prior art fails to render obvious a tire having the COMBINATION OF the subject matter at lines 9-16 of claim 1 AND the subject matter at lines 17-21 of claim 1 AND the subject matter at lines 22-26 of claim 1 AND the subject matter at lines 27-32 of claim 1.
As to claim 16 (directed to embodiment shown in FIGURES 14-15), the prior art fails to render obvious a tire having the COMBINATION OF the subject matter at lines 9-16 of claim 16 AND the subject matter at lines 17-21 of claim 16 AND the subject matter at lines 22-25, 32-33 of claim 16 AND the subject matter at lines 27-31 of claim 16 AND the subject matter at line 26 of claim 16. It is noted support for the amendment in claim 16 is found in FIGURE 15 instead of FIGURES 2 and 21.
As to claim 17 (directed to embodiment shown in FIGURES 20, 21A-21C),
the prior art fails to render obvious a tire having the COMBINATION OF the subject matter at lines 9-16 of claim 17 AND the subject matter at lines 17-21 of claim 17 AND the subject matter at lines 22-27 of claim 17 AND the subject matter at lines 28-34 of claim 17.
Remarks
6) Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 18-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection and the reasons presented therein.
7) 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.
8) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN D MAKI whose telephone number is (571)272-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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 B Smith (Whatley) 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.
/STEVEN D MAKI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
February 6, 2026