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 .
The decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board rendered on February 26, 2026 with regard to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Secondari (EP 1052117) and Kim (KR 100837865) is noted. However, the examiner has specific knowledge of the existence of a particular reference or references which indicate nonpatentability of the appealed claims. In this case, Takahashi (JP 10030113) was cited in the parent application (US Application 16/326,170). The Technology Center (TC) Director has given authorization to reopen prosecution under 37 CFR 1.198 for the purpose of entering the new rejection. See MPEP 1002.02(c) and MPEP 1214.07.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
4. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Secondari (EP 1052117) and further in view of Takahashi (JP 10030113) and Kim (KR 100837865).
As best depicted in Figure 1, Secondari is directed to a tire construction comprising an innerliner (no reference character provided- fundamental component of tires), bead portion 4, sidewall 9, rim cushion layer (no reference character provided- rubber layer axially outside chafer 8 and radially inside sidewall 9), a tread 1, and a chafer 8 that is wrapped around said bead portion and is present/exposed on an interior surface of the tire without being exposed to a tire outside. In such an instance, though, Secondari is silent with respect to the inclusion of an insecticide in a tire component only exposed on a tire interior surface (claimed chemical having extermination characteristics or repellent characteristics).
It is well known, however, that water accumulates in unmounted tires, whether it be in junkyards or landfills or even in tire swings in residential properties, and such results in increased mosquito activity. Takahashi, for example, expressly depicts water accumulation when tires are stacked upon one another, leading to odor issues and mosquito activity (see Figure 3 of Takahashi below).
PNG
media_image1.png
374
478
media_image1.png
Greyscale
One of the known techniques in the tire industry to combat mosquito issues is the inclusion of an insecticide (e.g. pyrethroid-based insecticides) in layers that are exposed to the environment, as shown for example by Kim (Abstract). Given that chafer 8 in Secondari is in fact exposed to the environment (e.g. when a tire is placed in a landfill) and water accumulates as depicted in Figure 3 of Takahashi, it reasons that one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have found it obvious to include an insecticide in layer 8 of Secondari to eliminate the presence of mosquitos (corresponds with claimed anti-insect layer).
Furthermore, while Kim addresses mosquito problems when a tire is mounted on a rim during night driving (interior tire surface is not exposed to environment during normal running), mosquito/insect activity is associated with tires in both a mounted condition and an unmounted condition, as evidenced by Takahashi- one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include an insecticide in any tire component that becomes exposed to the environment and such would include a tire chafer. It is emphasized that all of the interior surfaces, which includes chafer 8 in Secondari, and exterior surfaces of a tire are exposed to the environment (and thus potential mosquito activity) when a tire is in an unmounted condition. See modified Figure 1 of Secondari.
PNG
media_image2.png
920
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Additionally, pyrethroid-based insecticides are analogous to those described by Applicant and would be expected to similarly be “volatile”.
Lastly, regarding claim 1, while Kim teaches an insecticide loading as small 0.5 phr, MPEP 2144.05 states that “a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close”. It is emphasized that MPEP 2144.05 further states that a prima facie case of obviousness has been made when a claimed range and the prior art range are so mathematically close that the difference between the claimed ranges was virtually negligible absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have found it obvious to include an insecticide loading of 0.4 phr, for example, in the tire of Secondari. A fair reading of Kim suggests the general inclusion of an insecticide in a tire rubber component in order to provide mosquito/insect protection and such would be achieved by the inclusion of any loading of insecticide, with greater insecticide loadings being associated with greater protection. Also, Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the claimed loading, it being noted that Applicant’s original disclosure describes preferred insecticide loadings as large as 10 phr (Page 23, Lines 18+).
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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 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.
Justin Fischer
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 March 16, 2026
/ALEXA D NECKEL/Director, TC 1700