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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2023 was filed and has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings that were filed on 03/22/2023 have been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-21 are currently pending.
Claims 1 and 20 are currently amended.
Claim 21 is a newly added claim.
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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, 12-14, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna et al. (US 5587698), and herein after will be referred to as Genna, in view of Herzegh et al. (US 3116778), herein after will be referred to as Herzegh, and in further view of Stopczynski et al. (US 20200207162 A1), herein after will be referred to as Stopczynski.
Regarding Claim 1, Genna teaches a computer including a processor and a memory, the memory storing instructions executable by the processor to (Pre-programmed microprocessor and computer data storage; Col 18 lines 48-57):
actuate a compressor to…a spare tire of a vehicle…(The system can service the spare tire through an airline; Col 14 lines 12-15)…by one of providing an open pathway for the spare tire to equalize with atmospheric pressure or reducing the spare tire below atmospheric pressure (The system provides an open pathway for a tire to vent and equalize with atmospheric pressure; Col 19 lines 55-60 ); and
upon receiving data indicating a low pressure of an operating tire of the vehicle while the vehicle is in motion…, actuate the compressor to inflate the…tire… (The microprocessor compares the sensed air pressure to a preset value to deliver air when the pressure is low where the system’s distributor can selectively distribute compressed air to a selected tire and spare tire. The system can be operated while the vehicle is in motion; Col 19 lines 46-51, Col 14 lines 12-15, Col 10 lines 18-19).
Genna does not explicitly teach actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state.
However, Herzegh discloses an inflatable emergency tire designed to be stored in a deflated condition until needed, addressing the problem of reducing the space required for spare tire storage. Herzegh teaches maintaining a spare tire in an uninflated state to occupy a “considerably smaller space than the conventional tire and wheel assembly” to save space within a vehicle (Col 5 lines 61-64). This teaching is equivalent to a spare tire in an uninflated state because the emergency tire is in a deflated condition and is maintained the deflated state for storage purposes until it is needed for an emergency.
Genna and Herzegh are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of managing spare vehicle tires. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Genna by incorporating the teachings of storing an emergency tire in a deflated collapsed condition as taught by Herzegh, such that the system maintains the spare tire in an uninflated state until needed. The motivation for this combination is based from Herzegh’s teaching of storing a spare tire in a deflated condition saves considerable space in the vehicle. It is well within the ordinary skill in the art that integrating Herzegh’s deflated storage concept into Genna’s automated inflation system would yield a predictable system that would actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state and subsequently actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state upon detection of a low-pressure event of an operating tire. This provides the benefit of conserving vehicle storage space while ensuring spare tire availability in emergency scenarios.
Genna and Herzegh does not explicitly teach actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state, beginning while the vehicle is in motion.
However, Stopczynski discloses an integrated tire inflation/deflation adjustment system that automatically adjusts tire pressures in real time based on the detected vehicle operating conditions. Stopczynski teaches detecting vehicle operating conditions and controlling the tire pressure to increase or decrease the pressure as needed in real time during roadway driving scenarios including detecting potholes, roadway shoulder departure, deflating up crash detection, and tire leaks, all of which are in motion scenarios and adjusts the tire pressure according to the scenario ([0030] [0039-0042]). Stopczynski further teaches that the system detects a tire that quickly deflates due to a blowout or a large puncture and sets the inflation mechanism to maximum to keep air in the tire for as long as possible ([0042]). This teaching establishes that the inflation system begins operating while the vehicle is in motion in response to a detected tire condition.
Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicle tire pressure management systems and address the problem of managing tire pressure to improve vehicle safety and performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Genna and Herzegh to incorporate the teachings of the real time inflation/deflation pressure adjustment capability as taught by Stopczynski based on the motivation to inflate the spare tire upon detecting low operating tire pressure while the vehicle is still in motion so that the spare tire is ready when the operator pulls over to change tires. Genna provides a centralized tire pressure control system with a spare tire air line and microprocessor, Herzegh teaches the motivation for keeping a spare tire deflated for space saving purposes, and Stopczynski teaches an automated tire inflation in real time while the vehicle is in motion. This modification would predictably result in a system that maintains the spare tire in a deflated state during normal driving and begin inflating while in motion upon detecting low operating-tire pressure and provides the benefit of reducing roadside time and improved safety.
Regarding Claim 5, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches the compressor communicatively coupled to the computer (Microprocessors controls the entire system including compressor and distributor, thus establishing the required communicated coupling; Col 18 lines 50-55), wherein the compressor includes a first outlet fluidly connected to the spare tire (An airline connecting to the compressor’s distributor system to the spare tire; Col 14 lines 12-15).
Regarding Claim 9, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 5. Genna further teaches a control panel communicatively coupled to the compressor, wherein the control panel is operable to receive input from an operator to actuate the compressor (A control panel with a keyboard and selection keys, allowing the operator to provide input to the system; Col 18 lines 24-34).
Regarding Claim 12, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 5. Genna further teaches a hose fluidly connecting the first outlet with the spare tire (An air line connecting to a spare tire from distributor/compressor; Col 14 lines 10-15).
Regarding Claim 13, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches instructions to, upon inflating the spare tire, actuate the compressor to maintain the spare tire in an inflated state (The system monitors and regulates the spare tire and feeds are to ensure that it is properly inflated when needed; Col 10 lines 25-27).
Regarding Claim 14, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches the data indicating the low pressure of the operating tire indicates that a pressure of the operating tire is below a pressure threshold (The system uses a microprocessor to determine that the sensed air pressure is below a preset value; Col 19 lines 46-51).
Regarding Claim 17, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches the instructions to actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire include instructions to actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire to a recommended pressure of the spare tire.
Genna discloses a system that includes an air compressor that supplies compressed air to a distributor that is fluidly connected to a spare tire via air line (Col 14 lines 12-15) and that the system inflates tires based on a predetermined threshold (Col 19 lines 46-51). The preselected value corresponds to the claimed recommended pressure, as both serve the same function of defining the target inflation level for the spare tire. Additionally, the system is configured to selectively distribute compressed air to a selected tire (Col 14 lines 13-15), thereby confirming that the system is communicatively and fluidly coupled to the spare tire and that the microprocessor can selectively actuate the compressor to inflate the spare to the recommended pressure.
Regarding Claim 19, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches to actuate the compressor to maintain the spare tire in the uninflated state while the vehicle is in motion (The system can be operated while the vehicle is in motion; Col 10 lines 18-19).
Regarding Claim 20, Genna teaches a method comprising:
actuating a compressor to…a spare tire of a vehicle…(The system can service the spare tire through an airline; Col 14 lines 12-15);
by one of providing an open pathway for the spare tire to equalize with atmospheric pressure or reducing the spare tire below atmospheric pressure (The system provides an open pathway for a tire to vent and equalize with atmospheric pressure; Col 19 lines 55-60 ); and
upon receiving data indicating a low pressure of an operating tire of the vehicle while the vehicle is in motion…, actuating the compressor to inflate the…tire…to a fully inflated state (The microprocessor compares the sensed air pressure to a preset value to deliver air when the pressure is low where the system’s distributor can selectively distribute compressed air to a selected tire and spare tire. The system can be operated while the vehicle is in motion; Col 19 lines 46-51, Col 14 lines 12-15, Col 10 lines 18-19). Genna’s system inflates tires to a preselected preset value (Col 12 lines 47-65). A POSITA would understand that inflating to the manufacturer’s recommended preset pressure constitutes a “fully” inflated state.
Genna does not explicitly teach actuating a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state.
However, Herzegh discloses an inflatable emergency tire designed to be stored in a deflated condition until needed, addressing the problem of reducing the space required for spare tire storage. Herzegh teaches maintaining a spare tire in an uninflated state to occupy a “considerably smaller space than the conventional tire and wheel assembly” to save space within a vehicle (Col 5 lines 61-64). This teaching is equivalent to a spare tire in an uninflated state because the emergency tire is in a deflated condition and is maintained the deflated state for storage purposes until it is needed for an emergency.
Genna and Herzegh are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of managing spare vehicle tires. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Genna by incorporating the teachings of storing an emergency tire in a deflated collapsed condition as taught by Herzegh, such that the system maintains the spare tire in an uninflated state until needed. The motivation for this combination is based from Herzegh’s teaching of storing a spare tire in a deflated condition saves considerable space in the vehicle. It is well within the ordinary skill in the art that integrating Herzegh’s deflated storage concept into Genna’s automated inflation system would yield a predictable system that would actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state and subsequently actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state upon detection of a low-pressure event of an operating tire. This provides the benefit of conserving vehicle storage space while ensuring spare tire availability in emergency scenarios.
Genna and Herzegh does not explicitly teach actuating the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state, beginning while the vehicle is in motion.
However, Stopczynski discloses an integrated tire inflation/deflation adjustment system that automatically adjusts tire pressures in real time based on the detected vehicle operating conditions. Stopczynski teaches detecting vehicle operating conditions and controlling the tire pressure to increase or decrease the pressure as needed in real time during roadway driving scenarios including detecting potholes, roadway shoulder departure, deflating up crash detection, and tire leaks, all of which are in motion scenarios and adjusts the tire pressure according to the scenario ([0030] [0039-0042]). Stopczynski further teaches that the system detects a tire that quickly deflates due to a blowout or a large puncture and sets the inflation mechanism to maximum to keep air in the tire for as long as possible ([0042]). This teaching establishes that the inflation system begins operating while the vehicle is in motion in response to a detected tire condition.
Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of vehicle tire pressure management systems and address the problem of managing tire pressure to improve vehicle safety and performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Genna and Herzegh to incorporate the teachings of the real time inflation/deflation pressure adjustment capability as taught by Stopczynski based on the motivation to inflate the spare tire upon detecting low operating tire pressure while the vehicle is still in motion so that the spare tire is ready when the operator pulls over to change tires. Genna provides a centralized tire pressure control system with a spare tire air line and microprocessor, Herzegh teaches the motivation for keeping a spare tire deflated for space saving purposes, and Stopczynski teaches an automated tire inflation in real time while the vehicle is in motion. This modification would predictably result in a system that maintains the spare tire in a deflated state during normal driving and begin inflating while in motion upon detecting low operating-tire pressure and provides the benefit of reducing roadside time and improved safety.
Claim(s) 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna in view of Herzegh, and in view of Stopczynski, as applied in claim 1, and in further view of Tai et al. (US 11052955 B2), herein after will be referred to as Tai.
Regarding Claim 2, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. The prior art combination does not explicitly teach the spare tire is located on an underside of the vehicle.
However, Tai discloses a spare wheel catcher assembly where the spare wheel is mounted underneath the rear frame of the vehicle (Col 2 lines 47-48), which is equivalent to the spare tire located on an underside of the vehicle.
Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Tai are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of managing spare vehicle tires. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base system by incorporating the teachings of placing the spare tire underneath the rear frame of the vehicle as taught by Tai based on the motivation to improve the space efficiency and storage of the spare tire in the vehicle.
Regarding Claim 3, Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Tai remains as applied in claim 2. Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach the spare tire is located directly between a bumper of the vehicle and one of a fuel tank or a high-voltage battery of the vehicle.
However, Tai teaches that the rear axel is positioned between the fuel tank and the spare tire (Col 4 lines 47-48). This teaching is equivalent to the claimed location of the spare tire being between the rear of the vehicle (where the bumper is located) and the fuel tank as shown in FIG. 1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to place the spare tire of the base system between the rear axel and fuel tank of the vehicle based on the motivation to use a standard and well-known location for the spare tire.
Regarding Claim 4, Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Tai remains as applied in claim 3. Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach the spare tire is located at a height overlapping a vertical extent of the bumper and overlapping a vertical extent of the one of the fuel tank or the high-voltage battery.
However, Tai explicitly discloses that the spare wheel has a vertical overlap with the fuel tank (Col 2 lines 55-57). Furthermore, the top-down view of FIG. 1 shows the spare wheel positioned at the rearmost area of the vehicle body frame, which is where a rear bumper is located. The side-view of FIG. 3 further clarifies the vertical positioning of the spare wheel in this location to show the equivalent height that would overlap with the vertical extend of the bumper assembly. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to place the spare tire of the base system to vertically overlap the bumper and fuel tank as taught by Tai based on the motivation to store the spare tire in a well-known and safe location of the vehicle.
Claim(s) 6-8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna in view of Herzegh, and in view of Stopczynski, as applied in claim 5, and in further view of Pamphile et al. (US 20220134811 A1), herein after will be referred to as Pamphile.
Regarding Claim 6, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 5. Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach the compressor includes a second outlet not fluidly connected to the spare tire.
However, Pamphile, in a similar field of endeavor discloses adding auxiliary air outlets to the main compressor system for external use ([0041]). This teaching in Pamphile of “additional air feeders” is equivalent to a second outlet not fluidly connected to the spare tire because these feeders are explicitly described as separate outlets from the main tire inflation system and are used for purposes other than inflating the vehicle’s own tires.
Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Pamphile are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of managing automotive tires. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base system of Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski by incorporating the teachings of adding an external auxiliary air outlet to the compressor system as taught by Pamphile based on the motivation to improve the utility and convenience of the onboard compressor by filling items other than the vehicle’s tires.
Regarding Claim 7, Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Pamphile remains as applied in claim 6. Genna and Herzegh does not explicitly teach in response to a command from an operator, actuate the compressor to dispense pressurized air to the second outlet.
However, Pamphile discloses a system where an operator provides commands to a controller that operates the compressor ([0040]). The teaching in Pamphile of an operator providing input commands to the controller is equivalent to the claim because the driver input system is the mechanism used to activate the compressor to supply air to that outlet. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski to incorporate the operator control for the external outlet as taught by Pamphile based on the motivation to provide the user with the necessary and expected control over the auxiliary function.
Regarding Claim 8, Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Pamphile remains as applied in claim 6. Genna and Herzegh does not explicitly teach the second outlet is accessible from an exterior of the vehicle.
However, Pamphile discloses locating the auxiliary air outlets on the outside in the front left and right side of the car ([0041]). This teaching is equivalent to the outlet being accessible from an exterior of the vehicle because the auxiliary air outlets are located on the outside front left and right side of the car. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski to incorporate the external air outlets as taught by Pamphile based on the motivation to provide user convenience as placing the outlet on the exterior is necessary to easily connect an air hose for its intended auxiliary purpose.
Regarding Claim 11, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 5. Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach the compressor is located in an interior of the vehicle spaced from body panels of the vehicle.
However, Pamphile discloses locating the air compressor in the engine bay ([0035]). This teaching in Pamphile of placing the compressor on a side of the engine is equivalent to the claim because the engine bay is an interior vehicle location and placing a component in the engine bay inherently spaces the component from exterior body panels such as the fenders or hood for protection from external elements. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski to incorporate the teachings of placing the compressor in the engine bay as taught by Pamphile based on the motivation to protect the compressor from external elements and convenient integration to the vehicle’s engine and power systems.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna in view of Herzegh, and in view of Stopczynski, as applied in claim 1, and in further view of McNaught et al. (US 20220371385 A1), herein after will be referred to as McNaught.
Regarding Claim 15, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 1. Genna further teaches a system that includes an air compressor that supplies compressed air to a distributor that is fluidly connected to a spare tire via air line where the system selectively distributes compressed air to a selected tire and spare tire (Col 14 lines 12-15), showing that the spare tire is controllable by the system. Genna further teaches that the system is capable of venting air from a tire when the sensed pressure exceeds a preset value (Col 19 lines 55-57), thereby enabling controlled deflation of any connected tire.
Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach the spare tire is in an inflated state, upon receiving data indicating a high pressure of the operating tire, actuate the compressor to deflate the spare tire.
However, McNaught discloses an attire inflation/deflation management system that includes venturi exhaust deflation coupled to the high-pressure compressed air source for the high-pressure air creating a suction to deflate one or more tires ([0037] [0088]). McNaught further teaches taking pressure measurements and comparing the measurements to target pressures, and deflate the tire if the target pressure is below the actual pressure ([0096]). This teaching is equivalent to the claimed limitation because the system compares the actual vs. target pressure and deflates when the actual pressure exceeds the target pressure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the based system to incorporate the teachings of comparing the target pressure vs. the actual pressure and deflating the tire when the target pressure is below the actual pressure as taught by McNaught based on the motivation to provide a mechanism for returning the spare tire to its uninflated state once the issue is resolved. This modification would predictably result in a self-restoring system from connecting Genna’s bidirectional pressure control, McNaught’s deflation logic, and Herzegh’s space saving motivation to trigger the spare inflation when low operating tire pressure is detected and upon resolving the issue, a high operating tire pressure is detected to return the spare to its uninflated state.
Regarding Claim 16, Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and McNaught remains as applied in claim 15. Genna further teaches the data indicating the low pressure of the operating tire indicates that a pressure of the operating tire is below a pressure threshold (The system compares the sensed air pressure with the preset tire pressure and actives the distributor valve when the sensed air pressure is below a preset value; Col 19 lines 46-51), and
the data indicating the high pressure of the operating tire indicates that the pressure of the operating tire is above the pressure threshold (The system detects when tire pressure exceeds the preselected value; Col 19 lines 55-57).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna in view of Herzegh, and in view of Stopczynski, as applied in claim 17, and in further view of Best Practices and Procedures 2021 Audi e-tron quattro Tire Change/Collapsible Spare Tire. Product Manual [online]. Agero, 2021 [retrieved on 2025-09-29]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: https://f.hubspotusercontent10.net/hubfs/2932510/2021_Audi_etron_TireChange_CollapsibleSpare_Tipsheet_V2[73].pdf>, herein after will be referred to as Agero.
Regarding Claim 18, Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski remains as applied in claim 17. Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski does not explicitly teach a time for the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to the recommended pressure is in a range of 1 minute to 10 minutes.
However, Agero discloses best practices and procedures for preparing a collapsible spare tire and explicitly teaches the time required to inflate the collapsible spare tire of 6-8 minutes (Page 1). This time falls within the claimed range, demonstrating that this is a conventional and expected timeframe for inflating a spare tire.
Genna, Herzegh, Stopczynski, and Agero are considered to be analogous to the claim invention because they are in the same field of managing automotive tires. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the inflation time for the system of Genna, Herzegh, and Stopczynski would fall within the range of 1 to 10 minutes as taught by Agero based on the motivation of selecting a standard automotive compressor to provide a reasonable and acceptable inflation time for the user when inflating a spare tire from a collapsed state to an inflated state.
Claims 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genna in view of Herzegh, and in further view of McNaught.
Regarding Claim 21, Genna teaches a system comprising: a computer including a processor and a memory, the memory storing instructions executable by the processor to (Pre-programmed microprocessor and computer data storage; Col 13 lines 50-58):
actuate a compressor to…a spare tire of a vehicle…(The system can service the spare tire through an airline; Col 14 lines 12-15)…by one of providing an open pathway for the spare tire to equalize with atmospheric pressure or reducing the spare tire below atmospheric pressure (The system provides an open pathway for a tire to vent and equalize with atmospheric pressure; Col 19 lines 55-60 );
upon receiving data indicating a low pressure of an operating tire of the vehicle, actuate the compressor to inflate the…tire…(The microprocessor compares the sensed air pressure to a preset value to deliver air when the pressure is low where the system’s distributor can selectively distribute compressed air to a selected tire and spare tire; Col 19 lines 46-51, Col 14 lines 12-15).
Genna does not explicitly teach actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state and actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state.
However, Herzegh discloses an inflatable emergency tire designed to be stored in a deflated condition until needed, addressing the problem of reducing the space required for spare tire storage. Herzegh teaches maintaining a spare tire in an uninflated state to occupy a “considerably smaller space than the conventional tire and wheel assembly” to save space within a vehicle (Col 5 lines 61-64). This teaching is equivalent to a spare tire in an uninflated state because the emergency tire is in a deflated condition and is maintained the deflated state for storage purposes until it is needed for an emergency.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Genna by incorporating the teachings of storing an emergency tire in a deflated collapsed condition and having the spare ready when needed as taught by Herzegh, such that the system maintains the spare tire in an uninflated state until needed. The motivation for this combination is based from Herzegh’s teaching of storing a spare tire in a deflated condition saves considerable space in the vehicle. It is well within the ordinary skill in the art that integrating Herzegh’s deflated storage concept into Genna’s automated inflation system would yield a predictable system that would actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state and subsequently actuate the compressor to inflate the spare tire from the uninflated state to an inflated state upon detection of a low-pressure event of an operating tire. This provides the benefit of conserving vehicle storage space while ensuring spare tire availability in emergency scenarios.
Genna and Herzegh does not explicitly teach when the spare tire is in an inflated state, upon receiving data indicating a high pressure of the operating tire, actuate the compressor to deflate the spare tire.
However, McNaught discloses an attire inflation/deflation management system that includes venturi exhaust deflation coupled to the high-pressure compressed air source for the high-pressure air creating a suction to deflate one or more tires ([0037] [0088]). McNaught further teaches taking pressure measurements and comparing the measurements to target pressures, and deflate the tire if the target pressure is below the actual pressure ([0096]). This teaching is equivalent to the claimed limitation because the system compares the actual vs. target pressure and deflates when the actual pressure exceeds the target pressure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the based system to incorporate the teachings of comparing the target pressure vs. the actual pressure and deflating the tire when the target pressure is below the actual pressure as taught by McNaught based on the motivation to provide a mechanism for returning the spare tire to its uninflated state once the emergency is resolved. This modification would predictably result in a self-restoring system from connecting Genna’s bidirectional pressure control, McNaught’s deflation logic, and Herzegh’s space saving motivation to trigger the spare inflation when low operating tire pressure is detected and upon resolving the issue, a high operating tire pressure is detected to return the spare to its uninflated state.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent, most relevant, to applicant's disclosure.
Charton (US 5893494)
Frank (US 3116778)
Gardner (US 4057091)
Brown (US 20050160804 A1)
Rosenfield (US 5513524 A)
McQuade (US 6784794 B1)
Jeyasingham (US 12497111 B2)
Narloch (US 20120234447 A1)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed 01/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 15, and 20 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered.
Applicant alleges that Genna nor Herzegh discloses “actuate a compressor to maintain a spare tire of a vehicle in an uninflated state by one of providing an open pathway for the spare tire to equalize with atmospheric pressure or reducing the spare tire below atmospheric pressure.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant is arguing the references individually. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The applicant correctly identifies that Herzegh’s spare tire is manually inflated and not connected to a compressor. However, the rejection does not rely on Herzegh along teaching a compressor maintaining a tire in an uninflated state. Rather, the rejection relies on the combination of Genna teaching a computerize compressor tire pressure management system that is fluidly connected to a spare tire via air line (Col 14 lines 12-15) and that can vent air from a tire when pressure exceeds a preset value (Col 19 lines 55-60). Herzegh teaches the motivation for keeping a spare tire in a deflated collapsed condition to “occupy a considerably smaller space than the conventional tire and wheel assembly” (Col 5 lines 61-64).
The Applicant alleges that Genna nor Herzegh does not teach or suggest the amended limitation of “while the vehicle is in motion” in claim 1 and 20. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Genna teaches the system can be operated while the vehicle is in motion (Col 10 lines 18-19). Furthermore, the rejection introduces Stopczynski as a third reference as a new grounds of rejection that were necessitated by the applicant’s amendment. Stopczynski teaches detecting vehicle operating conditions and controlling the tire pressure to increase or decrease the pressure as needed in real time during roadway driving scenarios including detecting potholes, roadway shoulder departure, deflating up crash detection, and tire leaks, all of which are in motion scenarios and adjusts the tire pressure according to the scenario ([0030] [0039-0042]).
The Applicant alleges that Genna’s system (Col 19 lines 46-51) refers only to sensing and inflating the same tire. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Genna teaches a centralized tire pressure management system that controls a compressor and distributor connected to multiple tires including a spare tire via air line (Col 14 lines 12-15). The microprocessor monitors the sensed air pressure of each tire and delivers air when the pressure drops below the preset value (Col 19 lines 46-51). The system uses a distributor to selectively route compressed air to a selected tire and spare tire (Col 14 lines 13-15).
The Applicant alleges that inflating a spare tire while the vehicle is in motion while the spare tire is still inside the vehicle contradicts Herzegh’s teachings and space-saving motivation and eliminates the reason for combining Herzegh with Genna. The Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons. The spare tire remains deflated for the vast majority of the vehicle’s operating life and is only temporarily inflated during the limited emergency period between low pressure detection and tire change. The space-saving benefit is realized during the extended period of normal operations. A spare tire stored in a trunk saves spare during normal operation and the fact that it must eventually be removed from the trunk to be used does not destroy the space saving benefit of storing it compactly. The applicant’s own specification describes keeping the spare uninflated to reduce stackup during impacts but inflating the tire when low pressure is detected ([0006] [0038]). The specification acknowledges that temporary inflation is an intended and accepted outcome of the system. Furthermore, Stopczynski provides an independent safety motivation of real time “while in motion” tire pressure adjustment as a safety enhancement ([0030]-[0042]) that does not derive from Herzegh. A POSITA would recognize the safety benefit of proactively inflating the spare upon detecting low operating tire pressure while in motion for the spare tire to prepared and ready when the operator pulls over, reducing dangerous roadside time.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 15 has 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.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD ANDREW IZON DIZON whose telephone number is (571)272-4834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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.
/EDWARD ANDREW IZON DIZON/Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights