Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/270,672

MIDDLE DRUM ASSEMBLY OF BUILDING DRUM, BUILDING DRUM, AND METHOD FOR REPLACING MIDDLE DRUM BLOCK OF MIDDLE DRUM ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 30, 2023
Examiner
PAQUETTE, SEDEF ESRA AYALP
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Qingdao Mesnac Machinery & Electric Engineering Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
261 granted / 415 resolved
-2.1% vs TC avg
Strong +46% interview lift
Without
With
+46.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
456
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
§112
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 415 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 10-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected building drum (Group II) and a replacement method (Group III), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/21/2025. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims are linked so as to form a single general inventive concept and there would be no undue burden to search the claimed invention. Applicant also argues that Cao discloses a belt layer drum, and not a middle drum assembly of a building drum as claimed, wherein the drum shoe structures of the two are different and the structures and connection relationships between the two fasteners and the mounting grooves are also different. This is not found persuasive because the matter of search burden is not germane to restriction under Unity of Invention and because the technical features are known in the prior art as evidenced by the prior art rejection below. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because undue length (i.e., exceeds 150 words). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections Claims 1-9 are objected to because of the following informalities: the examiner suggests Applicant remove the reference to figures in the claims for ease of reading the claims. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “is abutting joint” in line 6 should be written as –abuts— for grammatical clarity. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “is abutting joint” in line 3 should be written as –abuts— for grammatical clarity. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “is abutting joint” in line 5 should be written as –abutting— for grammatical clarity. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 8, it is unclear how both sides of the mounting groove are arranged on at least one fixing hole as there are two sides disclosed and only one fixing hole required for the two sides to be arranged on. It is also unclear which sides are being referenced (i.e., axial sides, radial sides, circumferential sides, lateral ends, etc.). Moreover, it is unclear what is required by the sides of the groove being arranged on the fixing hole(s). Are they meant to be in contact such that the groove opens into the fixing hole(s), or merely abutting each other, or some other configuration? The examiner notes that in Applicant’s Figure 3, the mounting groove has two sides extending in the axial direction with fixing holes provided on both sides in the circumferential direction. However, the groove sides are not arranged on the fixing hole(s), but adjacent to them. Further clarification is requested. For the purposes of examination, the examiner assumes any of the aforementioned interpretations will satisfy the claim limitation, including the configuration of Figure 3. 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. Claim(s) 1-2 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (SU 994300, see machine translation) and Mancini et al. (WO 2014091387). Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a middle drum assembly of a building drum, comprising: a drum shoulder (Figs. 1-2: 2, 3); a middle drum block (Figs. 1-2: 1, 6, 10) having a mounting groove (Fig. 2: 7); a first fastener (Figs. 1-2: 4, 5, 8) movably disposed in the drum shoulder (Figs. 1-2: 2, 3) and capable of moving along the axial direction of the building drum ([0002], [0009]), the first fastener has a step surface (Figs. 1-2: see outer surface of 4, 5, 8 in contact with 6), and the middle drum block (Figs. 1-2: 1, 6, 10) is abutting joint the drum shoulder (Figs. 1-2: 2) in the radial direction of the building drum, the mounting groove (Fig. 2: 7) is aligned with the first fastener (Figs. 1-2: 4, 5, 8), the middle drum block (Figs. 1-2: , 1, 6, 10) presses the step surface (Figs. 1-2: see surface of 4, 5, 8 in contact with 6) and a part of the first fastener (Figs. 1-2: 4, 5, 8) stretches into the mounting groove (Fig. 2: 7) ([0009]). However, Kim does not expressly recite the middle drum block having a fixing hole, or a second fastener, a part of the second fastener passing through the drum shoulder, wherein after the part of the first fastener stretches into the mounting groove, the fixing hole is aligned with the second fastener, the middle drum block is close to the drum shoulder along the axial direction of the building drum, and a part of the second fastener exposed out of the drum shoulder stretches into the fixing hole. Mancini discloses a building drum comprising a middle drum block (Figs. 4a, 4b: 50) having a fixing hole (Figs. 4a, 4b: 68), and a second fastener (Figs. 2, 4a, 4b: 67), a part of the second fastener passing through a drum shoulder (Figs. 4a, 4b: 60), wherein the fixing hole is aligned with the second faster and the second fastener is used to center and calibrate the two sector faces when they are brough together (Page 24 lines 5-22; Page 27 lines 26-32). In this manner, when the middle drum block (Figs. 4a, 4b: 50) is brought close to the drum shoulder (Figs. 4a, 4b: 60) along the axial direction of the building drum, a part of the second fastener (Figs. 4a, 4b: 67) exposed out of the drum shoulder (Figs. 4a, 4b: 60) stretches into the fixing hole (Figs. 4a, 4b: 68). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Kim in order to provide second fasteners in the drum shoulder and corresponding fixing holes in the middle drum blocks so as to center and calibrate the two as they are brought together in the axial direction, as taught by Mancini. Accordingly, Kim in view of Mancini discloses that after the part of the first fastener stretches into the mounting groove (i.e., after brining the middle drum block and drum shoulder together in the axial direction), the fixing hole is aligned with the second fastener, the middle drum block is close to the drum shoulder along the axial direction of the building drum, and a part of the second fastener exposed out of the drum shoulder stretches into the fixing hole. Regarding claim 2, Kim further discloses the middle drum block must be arc-shaped (Figs. 1-2: the fact that the sectors 1 form a toroidal tire shape necessarily requires them to be arc-shaped), and the mounting groove (Fig 2: 7) is in communication with both an inner side wall of the arc shape and an end surface of the arc shape (Figs. 1-2: see how the groove 7 is formed in the middle drum block and thereby must communicate with both the inner side wall of the arc-shaped block and an end surface of the arc-shaped block). Regarding claim 8, Mancini discloses providing two pins (Figs. 2, 4a, 4b: 67) at the circumferential ends of the sectors (Figs. 2, 4a, 4b), wherein the number of pins and positioning of the pins can be modified as desired (Page 24 lines 5-22). Kim illustrates providing a mounting groove in the circumferential center of a sector (Figs. 1-2). Accordingly, Kim in view of Mancini discloses providing a plurality of fixing holes and a plurality of second fasteners, wherein both sides of the mounting groove may be respectively arranged on at least one fixing hole of the plurality of fixing holes. Regarding claim 9, Kim further discloses that the first fastener is a screw having a screw head (Figs. 1-2: 5) ([0009]). Mancini further discloses the second fastener is a pin (Figs. 4a, 4b: 67) (Page 24 lines 5-22; Page 27 lines 26-32). While Kim does not expressly recite the shape of the mounting groove, case law holds that changes in shape are matters of design choice that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed invention is significant. See MPEP 2144.04. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the groove shape of Kim as desired. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 3, no prior art of record is considered to teach or suggest the combination of limitations of claims 1 and 3. In particular, the limitation “the small diameter section stretches into the drum shoulder, and the large diameter section is able to stretch into the mounting groove.” Claim 4 would be allowable by dependence on claim 3. Regarding claim 5, no prior art of record is considered to teach or suggest the combination of limitations of claims 1 and 5. In particular, the limitation “an outer edge of the mounting groove is provided with an inclined surface, along a direction in which the middle drum block is abutting joint the drum shoulder in the radial direction of the building drum, the inclined surface is inclined in a direction away from the drum shoulder, when the middle drum block is abutting joint the drum shoulder in the radial direction of the building drum, the inclined surface presses the step surface, and enabling the first fastener to move in a direction of protruding from the drum shoulder, and to stretch into the mounting groove.” Regarding claim 6, no prior art of record is considered to teach or suggest the combination of limitations of claims 1 and 6. In particular, the limitation “the middle drum assembly further comprising an elastic member, wherein two ends of the elastic member are respectively abutted against the drum shoulder and the first fastener, and provide with an elastic force for the first fastener moving in a direction stretching into the drum shoulder.” Regarding claim 7, no prior art of record is considered to teach or suggest the combination of limitations of claims 1 and 7. In particular, the limitation “the middle drum block comprises: a tooth portion located on an outer side of the middle drum block; a connecting portion located on an inner side surface of an end portion of the tooth portion, wherein the mounting groove and the fixing hole are both provided on an end surface of the connecting portion.” The closest prior art of record is considered to be Kim et al. (SU 994300, see machine translation) and Mancini et al. (WO 2014091387). Kim in view of Mancini discloses the limitations of claim 1 as discussed in the detailed rejection above. Kim further discloses the first fastener (Figs. 1-2: 4, 5, 8) comprises a large diameter section (Figs. 1-2: 5 or 8) and a small diameter section (Figs. 1-2: 4) which are sequentially connected, the step surface (Figs. 1-2: see surface of 4, 5, 8 in contact with 6) is formed between the large diameter section (Figs. 1-2: 5 or 8) and the small diameter section (Figs. 1-2: 4), the small diameter section stretches into the drum shoulder, and the large diameter section is able to stretch into the mounting groove. However, Kim does not expressly recite the small diameter section stretches into the drum shoulder, and the large diameter section is able to stretch into the mounting groove. Instead, Kim discloses that the small diameter section is extended with the large diameter section into the mounting groove and not the drum shoulder. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not have found it obvious to modify the prior art of record contrary to express disclosures, especially without a motivation or teaching to do so. Kim does not expressly recite the claimed inclined surface structure. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not have found it obvious to modify Kim with the specific claimed structure without a motivation or teaching to do so. Kim discloses the middle drum assembly comprising a nut (Figs. 1-2: 8) with the screw and bolt (Figs. 1-2: 4, 5). However, Kim does not expressly recite the middle drum assembly further comprising an elastic member, wherein two ends of the elastic member are respectively abutted against the drum shoulder and the first fastener, and provide with an elastic force for the first fastener moving in a direction stretching into the drum shoulder. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not have found it obvious to modify Kim with the specific claimed structure without a motivation or teaching to do so. Kim does not expressly recite the claimed tooth structure of the middle drum. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not have found it obvious to modify Kim with the specific claimed structure without a motivation or teaching to do so. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEDEF PAQUETTE (née AYALP) whose telephone number is (571) 272-5031. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST - 4:00 PM EST. 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 (née WHATLEY) can be reached on (571) 270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. The fax phone number for the examiner is (571) 273-5031. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SEDEF E PAQUETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589566
AIR BARRIER FILM TUBING TO REPLACE INNER-LINER (BUTYL)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583195
MOLD FOR FORMING A TIRE AND TIRE PRODUCTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576605
TIRE CURING MOLD HAVING A REMOVABLE INSERT, AND ASSOCIATED MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576607
SPLICE-MATCH BUILDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576606
MOLD FOR FORMING A TIRE AND TIRE PRODUCTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+46.2%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 415 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month