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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “Paragraph 31 recites “the modulus of rigidity G’ 1% RPA”, a notation having unknown meaning (Para 31 recites this notation but offers not further description, context, from which to ascertain its meaning (claims 6 and 16 recite the same notation, see paragraph 5 of this document).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 9, 10, 18 and objected to because of the following informalities: described below:
Claim 3 recites “pheonolic resin”, which Examiner believes is a typographical error and interprets the limit as “phenolic resin”.
Claims 9, 10 and 18 recite “editorial plane”, (the specification in paragraph 43 recites “equatorial plane) thus Examiner believes the claim recitations are typographical errors and interprets the limit as “equatorial plane”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 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.
Claim 6, and 16 are 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 6 and 16 recite “ a shear modulus G’ 1% RPA” which is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by it. The specification in paragraph 31 includes the same notation. For the purposes of examination, Examiner interprets the recitation as “a shear modulus G”. Additionally, Examiner suggests the notation of G’ 1% RPA, may related to specific a method and device used to dynamic measure the elasto-viscosity of rubber material, (see NPL U and V in Notice of References cited), and as such are considered as “product by process”[ i.e. method limits in a product claim] , thus not limiting per MEPE 2113.1?It is notable that a RPA method or device is not disclosed in the specification to give context and meaning to this notation. Examiner suggests the limit “a shear modulus G’ 1% RPA” be changed to “ a shear modulus G “, and the recited notation will appear stricken through in this document.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8, 11, 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by KR-20230126278-A to Kim (“Kim”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim (English Translation “ET” pages 1-9, Figs 1-4) discloses a non-pneumatic tire (Fig 1-4) comprising: a central rim (500) for coupling the tire to a vehicle wheel (Fig 4); a connecting web (400) including a plurality of spokes (400) coupled to (Fig 3) the central rim and extending radially outward therefrom (); and a shear band (200: including 210 “textile part”, 220 “carbon fiber part”, and 230 “reinforcing rubber part” ) circumscribing (Fig 4) the connecting web and coupled thereto (Fig 4), the shear band comprising a plurality of oblong cords (220 “carbon fiber part”) arranged in parallel layers (2 layers: outer/upper and inner/lower Fig 1-3), each of the oblong cords having a cross section (“220 having a thickness of 1.6mm and a width of 80mm”, ET Page 5, Para 4 beginning “In addition, the carbon fiber portion 220…”;) defining a greater lateral width (lateral width 80 mm) than a radial height (radial thickness 1.6 mm).
Regarding Claim 2, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein each of the oblong cords are multifilament cords (220) elongated glass, carbon fiber and/or aromatic polyamide filaments embedded in a resin matrix (“The carbon fiber part 220 includes…”,”…a plurality of carbon strands [i.e. multifilament]… impregnated with epoxy resin..”, ET Page 3 para 8).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 2, wherein the resin matrix includes at least one of an epoxy (epoxy resin as described in previous paragraph), nylon, polyurethane, polyester, vinyl ester, phenolic resin, resorcinol/formaldehyde/latex (RFL) resin.
Regarding Claim 5, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the shear band further comprises an elastomeric compound (230 “reinforcing rubber part”, described in paragraph 8 of this document) interspacing (shown Fig 1-3) the oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 8, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the shear band further comprises at least one inner belt layer (inner/lower belt layer of 220 Fig 1 as described in paragraph 9 of this document) disposed radially between the connecting web and the plurality of oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 11, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the shear band further comprises at least one outer belt layer (outer/upper belt layer of 220 Fig 1 as described in paragraph 9 of this document) disposed radially outwardly of the plurality of oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 13, Kim (English Translation “ET” pages 1-9, Figs 1-4) discloses a shear band (200: including 210 “textile part”, 220 “carbon fiber part”, and 230 “reinforcing rubber part” ) circumscribing (Fig 4) the connecting web and coupled thereto (Fig 4), the shear band comprising a plurality of oblong cords (220 “carbon fiber part”) arranged in parallel layers (2 layers: outer/upper and inner/lower Fig 1-3), each of the oblong cords having a cross section (“220 having a thickness of 1.6mm and a width of 80mm”, ET Page 5, Para 4 beginning “In addition, the carbon fiber portion 220…”;) defining a greater lateral width (lateral width 80 mm) than a radial height (radial thickness 1.6 mm).
Regarding Claim 14, Kim discloses the shear band of claim 13, wherein the oblong cords include either a nylon material, polyester material and/or a plurality of elongated glass, carbon fiber and/or aromatic polyamide filaments embedded in a resin matrix (“The carbon fiber part 220 includes…”,”…a plurality of carbon strands [i.e. multifilament]… impregnated with epoxy resin..”, ET Page 3 Para 8).
Regarding Claim 15, Kim discloses the shear band of claim 14, wherein the oblong cords (220) are embedded within (shown Fig 1) an elastomeric compound (230 “reinforcing rubber part”, as described in paragraph 8 of this document).
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7-11, 13, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by EP-4108474-A1 to Misaki (“Misaki”).
Regarding Claim 1, Misaki discloses a non-pneumatic tire (Para 17, 23) comprising: a central rim (“normal rim”, Para 17) for coupling the tire to a vehicle wheel (Para 20); a connecting web including a plurality of spokes coupled to the central rim and extending radially outward therefrom (italicized limits: are known in the art to connect rim to axle of vehicle) ; and a shear band (including: ”belt layer”:7 with two plies: 7a ,7b each formed of a single steel cord and elastomer composition 7g; and 9 “band layer” of one ply 9a, Para 33, 34, 36, Fig 1, 2 ) circumscribing (Fig 2) the connecting web and coupled thereto (), the shear band comprising a plurality of oblong cords (9a, 7a, and 7b have a “flattened cross-section” Para 39, Fig 2) arranged in parallel layers (Fig 1,2), each of the oblong cords having a cross section) defining a greater lateral width (Ld) than a radial height (Sd, d2, aspect ratio is between 1.05 and 1.25, Para 39, 46, 47, 56 Fig 2).
Regarding Claim 4, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein each of the oblong cords (9a) are monofilament cords constructed of a nylon or polyester material (“heat shrinkable organic fiber: nylon etc., Para 58, 59).
Regarding Claim 7, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the oblong cords in each of the parallel layers (9a) are laterally staggered (9a are laterally staggered from 7a and 7b, Fig 2) from the oblong cords in adjacent layers (7a, 7b) .
Regarding Claim 8, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the shear band further comprises at least one inner belt layer (7a, 7b, Fig 2) disposed radially between the connecting web and the plurality of oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 9, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 8, wherein the at least one inner belt layer (7a, 7b) includes a plurality of elongated steel wire cords inclined between about -25 to about 25 degrees (at angles approximately 20 degrees, shown Figs 3, 4 Para 63,) with respect to an (BRI: circumferential plane of tire in radial direction “a”) of the non-pneumatic tire.
Regarding Claim 10, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 8, wherein the at least one inner belt layer (9) includes a plurality of aromatic polyamide cords (nylon, [known in art to be aromatic polyamide], Col 4, lines 40-52) inclined between about -25 to about 25 degrees (at angles approximately 20 degrees, shown Figs 3, 4 Para 63,)) with respect to an editorial plane (BRI: circumferential plane of tire in radial direction “a”) of the non-pneumatic tire.
Regarding Claim 11, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the shear band further comprises at least one outer belt layer (7a is radially outward of 7b, Fig 2) disposed radially outwardly of the plurality of oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 13, Misaki discloses a shear band (including: ”belt layer”:7 with two plies: 7a ,7b each formed of a single steel cord and elastomer composition 7g; and 9 “band layer” of one ply 9a, Para 33, 34, 36, Fig 1, 2 ) circumscribing (Fig 2) the connecting web and coupled thereto , the shear band comprising a plurality of oblong cords (9a, 7a, and 7b have a “flattened cross-section” Para 39, Fig 2) arranged in parallel layers (Fig 1,2), each of the oblong cords having a cross section) defining a greater lateral width (Ld) than a radial height (Sd, d2, aspect ratio is between 1.05 and 1.25, Para 39, 46, 47, 56 Fig 2).
Regarding Claim 17, Misaki discloses the shear band of claim 13, further comprising a lower belt layer (7b, Fig 2) disposed radially inward of the plurality of oblong cords (of 7a, Fig 2) and an upper belt layer (9a, Fig 2) disposed radially outward of the plurality of oblong cords.
Regarding Claim 18, Misaki discloses the shear band of claim 17, wherein the lower belt layer comprises at least one of elongated steel wire cords (7a, 7b) and/or aromatic polyamide cords inclined between about ±25 degrees (between ±10 to ±30 degrees, Para 40) with respect to an editorial plane (BRI: circumferential plane of tire in radial direction “a”) of the shear band.
Claims 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by EP-3770319-A1 to Matsuoka (“Matsuoka”).
Regarding Claim 19, Matsuoka discloses a method of manufacturing (Para 85-111) a shear band (87 “belt layers”, Para 101) for a non-pneumatic tire (81), the method comprising: pressing (Fig 7, Para 88-92) a plurality of filaments (four 11 “ element wires”, Fig 2) together to form oblong cords (91 “steel cord”, Fig 2, Para 85, 109) having a cross section (Fig 2) defining a greater lateral width than a radial height; heat treating (Para 111, heat to embed cords in rubber 92) the oblong cords; installing the oblong cords in a plurality of parallel circumferential layers (two 87 belt layers, Para 105, 110-112) to form the shear band.
Regarding Claim 20, Matsuoka discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising embedding the plurality of oblong cords within an elastomeric compound (Para 109).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as applied to claim 1,5, and 15 above, and further in view of US-20230173845-A1 King (“King”).
Regarding Claim 6, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 5, but does not disclose wherein the elastomeric compound has a shear modulus G
King discloses a non-pneumatic tire (100) wherein the elastomeric compound (302 “elastomeric matrix material/rubber”, Para 57, has a shear modulus G G MPa (Para 108 “shear modulus G of “ “at least 3 MPa”- Para 108, “at least 5 MPa or at least 8 MPa”-Para 107 [thus in range of 0.5 to 15 MPa]”; Para 42 “referring to rubber, shear modulus measured by dynamic shear testing; Para 108).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the non-pneumatic tire and the elastomeric compound having a shear modulus G G MPa, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the non-pneumatic tire of Kim and teaching of the elastomeric compound having a shear modulus G G MPa of King, to modify the elastomeric compound of Kim such that has a shear modulus G G MPa (like King), with the motivation to ensure the cords of shear band are protected from buckling (King, para 96-107), having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 16, Kim discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 5, but does not disclose wherein the elastomeric compound has a shear modulus G
King discloses a non-pneumatic tire (100) wherein the elastomeric compound (302 “elastomeric matrix material/rubber”, Para 57, has a shear modulus G G MPa (Para 108 “shear modulus G of “ “at least 3 MPa”- Para 108, “at least 5 MPa or at least 8 MPa”-Para 107 [thus in range of 0.5 to 15 MPa]”; Para 42 “referring to rubber, shear modulus measured by dynamic shear testing; Para 108).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the non-pneumatic tire and the elastomeric compound having a shear modulus G G MPa, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the non-pneumatic tire of Kim and teaching of the elastomeric compound having a shear modulus G Gabout 0.5 to about 15 MPa of King, to modify the elastomeric compound of Kim such that has a shear modulus G G MPa (like King), with the motivation to ensure the cords of shear band are protected from buckling (King, para 96-107), having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Misaki as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US-5082713-A to Gifford (“Gifford”).
Regarding Claim 12, Misaki discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the shear band further comprises a pair of end belts overlying lateral edges of the outer belt layer.
Gifford discloses a tire (10) having a shear band (3 layers of 16 “oblique reinforcing cords” Fig 2) that further comprises a pair of end belts (30, “curving ends” , Col 3 lines 43-64, Fig 2) overlying lateral edges of the outer belt layer.
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the non-pneumatic tire and the pair of end belts overlying lateral edges of the outer belt layer, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined non-pneumatic tire of Misaki and teaching of the pair of end belts overlying lateral edges of the outer belt layer of Gifford, to modify the shear band of Misaki, such that it includes a pair of end belts overlying lateral edges of the outer belt layer (like Gifford), with the motivation reinforce the shoulder portion and protect from shear stresses (Col 3, lines 52-64), having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Miller (US-20230061674-A1), Misaki (EP-4108474-B1), Tetsu 磯部 哲 (JP-5527003-B2), Kusaba (JP-2001055676-A), Rimai (WO-2022147398) and Reiter (US 20050205185 A1) disclose one or more of: tires and or shear bands with reinforcement cords of various materials, embedded in an elastomer, the cords having an oblong cross section, or an elastomeric having a G modulus between specified range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615A
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615