DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
2. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
· “Y-shaped architecture composed of: a first side comprising a first leg and a second leg extending along the same plane in a radial direction of the non-pneumatic tire.” as set forth in claim 11
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “Y-shaped architecture composed of: a first side comprising a first leg and a second leg extending along the same plane in a radial direction of the non-pneumatic tire.” as described in para [0006] and [0078] of the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
4. Each distinct part, including modified parts, should be labeled with a distinct reference character to be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4). Note at least the following informalities:
· The elements represented by reference character 102 in the embodiments shown in Figs. 2A and 2B are distinct from one another and therefore should not be designated by the same reference character.
· The elements represented by reference character 502 in the embodiments shown in Figs. 5D and 5E are distinct from one another and therefore should not be designated by the same reference character.
· The elements represented by reference character 504 in the embodiments shown in Figs. 5D and 5E are distinct from one another and therefore should not be designated by the same reference character.
5. The drawings are objected to because:
· The reference character “112” in Fig. 2A should be amended to read “212”.
· The reference character “116” in Fig. 2B should be amended to read “216”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
6. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
· The element “a first side 124” should be amended to read “a first side 224” in para [0056], line 12.
· The element “the first side 124” should be amended to read “the first side 224” in para [0056], line 13.
· The element “the middle mold portion 2020” should be amended to read “the middle mold portion 1020” in para [0063], line 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
7. Claim 1, 11, and 15 objected to because of the following informalities:
· “the shearband” should be amended to read “the shear band” in claim 1
· “comprise” should be amended to read “comprises” in claim 4
· “each have” should be amended to read “each having” in claim 11
· “a axial direction” should be amended to read “an axial direction” in claim 15
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. 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.
9. Claims 3, 5, and 10 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.
Claims 3, 5, and 10 are unclear due to insufficient antecedent basis. Please note the following limitations:
· Claim 3: “the interface”
· Claim 5: “the intersection point”
· Claim 10: “the third leg”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Claims 1-5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lettieri et al (US20220194129A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lettieri et al discloses a non-pneumatic tire (Fig. 2), comprising: a spoke (400 “spoke disk”; Fig. 2) comprising a first leg (Refer to the first leg in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Lettieri et al) extending from a shear band (“The shear band together with the spoke disks 400” per para [0028]; “each spoke disk is connected to the shear band” per claim 1; Fig. 2) to a hub (“the spoke disk has an outer hub and an inner hub” per claim 3; Fig. 2), wherein the spoke (400) further comprises a second leg extending from the shearband to the first leg (Refer to the second leg in the below annotated Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
576
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Lettieri et al
Regarding claim 2, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke (400) further comprises a first foot (Refer to the foot locations designated as the first foot in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 4 of Lettieri et al) secured to the first leg (The first leg in the above annotated Fig. 2) at a position adjacent to the shear band to provide surface area to an interface between the shear band and the spoke (Figs. 2 and 4).
PNG
media_image2.png
408
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4 of Lettieri et al
Regarding claim 3, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke (400) further comprises a second foot (Refer to the foot locations designated as the second foot in the above annotated Fig. 4) secured to the second leg (The second leg in the above examiner’s annotated Fig. 2) at a position adjacent to the shear band so as to provide further surface area to the interface between the shear band and the spoke (Figs. 2 and 4).
Regarding claim 4, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke (400) further comprise a third leg (Refer to the third leg in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 2) and a third foot (Refer to the third foot in the below annotated Fig. 4) cured to the third leg (The third leg in the below annotated Fig. 2) at a position adjacent to the hub to provide surface area to an interface between the hub and the spoke (Figs. 2 and 4).
PNG
media_image3.png
579
527
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Lettieri et al
PNG
media_image4.png
412
713
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4 of Lettieri et al
Regarding claim 5, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 4, wherein the third foot (The third foot in the above annotated Fig. 4) is positioned at a side of the third leg (The third leg in the above annotated Fig. 2) that is nearest the intersection point (Refer to the intersection point in the above annotated Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke (400) further comprises a bridge that extends from the first leg to the second leg (Figs. 11A-C).
Regarding claim 9, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 8, wherein the spoke (400) is fixed to the shear band via an interface between a side surface of the bridge and an inner surface of the shear band (Figs. 2 and 11A-C).
Regarding claim 10, Lettieri et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 8, wherein the spoke (400) further comprises: a first foot positioned adjacent to a first portion of the bridge that meets the first leg, wherein the first foot is fixed to the shear band (Refer to the first foot, bridge, first leg, and shear band in the below annotated Fig. 2); a second foot positioned adjacent to a second portion of the bridge that meets the second leg, wherein the second foot is fixed to the shear band (Refer to the second foot, bridge, second leg, and shear band in the below annotated Fig. 2); and a third foot positioned adjacent to the third leg and the hub, wherein the third foot is fixed to the hub (Refer to the third foot, third leg, and inner hub in the below annotated Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image5.png
458
768
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Lettieri et al
13. Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al (CN113199909A).
Regarding claim 1, Yang et al discloses a non-pneumatic tire, comprising: a spoke (Refer to the highlighted portion on page 4 of the attached English translation of Yang et al; Fig. 4a) comprising a first leg (Refer to the first leg in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al) extending from a shear band (Refer to the outer ring in the below annotated Fig. 4a; The outer ring disclosed in Fig. 4a corresponds to the claimed shear band, as the outer ring is a circumferentially continuous structural element positioned radially outward of the spokes and carries loads transmitted through the spokes, which is consistent with the function of a shear band; Refer to the highlighted portions of the first paragraph on page 2 of the attached English translation of Yang et al) to a hub (Refer to the inner ring in the below annotated Fig. 4a; The inner ring that serves as a central annular member to which the spokes are attached, corresponding to the claimed hub; “end of the first support arm and the other end of the second support arm are both fixedly connected to the hub” as described in the highlighted first paragraph on page 2 of the attached English translation of Yang et al), wherein the spoke further comprises a second leg (Refer to the second leg in the below annotated Fig. 4a) extending from the shearband to the first leg (Refer to the below annotated Fig. 4a).
PNG
media_image6.png
758
805
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al
Regarding claim 2, Yang et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke further comprises a first foot (Refer to the first foot in the above annotated Fig. 4a) secured to the first leg (Refer to the first leg in the above annotated Fig. 4a) at a position adjacent to the shear band to provide surface area to an interface between the shear band and the spoke (Refer to the above annotated Fig. 4a).
Regarding claim 3, Yang et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke further comprises a second foot (9 “second supporting piece”; Refer to the second foot in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al) secured to the second leg (Refer to the second leg below examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al) at a position adjacent to the shear band so as to provide further surface area to the interface between the shear band and the spoke (Refer to the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al).
PNG
media_image7.png
743
809
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al
Regarding claim 4, Yang et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke further comprise a third leg (Refer to the third leg in the above annotated Fig. 4a) and a third foot (Refer to the third foot as shown in the above annotated Fig. 4a) cured to the third leg at a position adjacent to the hub (Refer to the inner ring in the above annotated Fig. 4a) to provide surface area to an interface between the hub and the spoke (Refer to the above annotated Fig. 4a).
Regarding claim 6, Yang et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 1, wherein the spoke further comprises a dampener (Refer to the 5 “center piece” in the below annotated Fig. 4a) positioned adjacent an intersection point (The center piece (5) corresponds to the intersection point) of the first leg and the second leg (Refer to the below annotated Fig. 4a).
PNG
media_image8.png
749
809
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 4a of Yang et al
14. Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (CN106394127B).
Regarding claim 11, Liu discloses a non-pneumatic tire, comprising: a plurality of spokes (Refer to the spokes in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 8 of Liu) positioned between a shear band (Refer to 21 “spoke outer ring” in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 8 of Liu; The outer ring disclosed in Fig. 8 corresponds to the claimed shear band, as the outer ring is a circumferentially continuous structural element positioned radially outward of the spokes and configured to carry loads transmitted through the spokes, which is consistent with the function of a shear band) and a hub (Refer to 22 “spoke inner ring” in the below annotated Fig. 8; The inner ring that serves as a central annular member to which the spokes are attached, corresponding to the claimed hub), wherein the plurality of spokes each have a Y-shaped architecture (Refer to the below annotated Fig. 8) composed of: a first side comprising a first leg and a second leg extending along the same plane in a radial direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Refer to the first side, first leg, and second leg in the below annotated Fig. 8), and a second side comprising a third leg that is oriented at an angle to the second leg (Refer to the second side and the third leg in the below annotated Fig. 8), and wherein a first spoke from the plurality of spokes and a second spoke from the plurality of spokes are orientated likewise along a circumferential direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Refer to the first spoke and the second spoke in the below annotated Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image9.png
777
822
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 8 of Liu
Regarding claim 12, Liu discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 11, wherein the second side of the first spoke and the second spoke face clockwise along the circumferential direction (Refer to the second side, first spoke, and second spoke of the rear portion in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 5), and wherein the second side of a third spoke from the plurality of spokes faces counter-clockwise along the circumferential direction (Refer to the third spoke of the front portion and the second side in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image10.png
793
871
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 5 of Liu
Regarding claim 13, Liu discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 11, wherein the second side of the first spoke and the second spoke face counter-clockwise along the circumferential direction, and wherein the second side of a third spoke from the plurality of spokes faces clockwise along the circumferential direction (The above examiner’s annotated Fig. 5 illustrates that, when the structure is viewed from an opposite side, the circumferential orientation of the spoke sides corresponds to the claimed clockwise and counter-clockwise directions).
Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 11, wherein the non-pneumatic tire is a top loader non-pneumatic tire (Each of the non-pneumatic tire embodiments disclosed in Figs. 5 and 8 receives load at an outer region of the tire and transmits the load inward through the supporting structure).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al (CN113199909A) in view of Li et al (CN216761358U) as applied to claims 1 and 6 above.
Regarding claim 7, Yang et al discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 6, wherein the first leg and the second leg are composed of a first elastomer material (Refer to the highlighted portion on page 6 of the attached English translation of Yang et al), but fails to disclose the dampener is composed of a second elastomer material having a different material composition than the first elastomer material.
Li et al, however, teaches the dampener (20 “spoke connecting body; Fig. 4) is composed of a second elastomer material (Refer to the highlighted portion on page 5 of the attached English translation of Li et al) having a different material composition than the first elastomer material (Refer to the highlighted portion on pages 4 and 5 of the attached English translation of Li et al).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the non-pneumatic tire of Yang et al by including the material of the dampener, such as taught by Li et al, with the motivation to use an alternative material to accommodate different functional requirements of the center piece relative to the spoke legs.
19. Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al (CN 114801591A) in view of Liu (CN106394127B).
Regarding claim 15, Wang et al disclose a non-pneumatic tire, comprising: a first set of spokes (Front portion of the spokes as shown in Fig. 1) extending between a shear band (3 “shear band” in highlighted portions on page 4 of the attached English translation of Wang et al; 1 “shear band” in Figs. 1 and 2; The cited wheel hub and shear band are identified based on their respective positions and functions, notwithstanding discrepancies in the reference) and a hub (1 “Wheel hub” in highlighted portions on page 4 of the attached English translation of Wang et al; 3 “wheel hub” in Figs. 1 and 2; The cited wheel hub and shear band are identified based on their respective positions and functions, notwithstanding discrepancies in the reference) and a second set of spokes (Rear portion of the spokes as shown in Fig. 1) extending between the shear band (1) and the hub (3), wherein the second set of spokes is positioned adjacent to the first set of spokes along a axial direction that is perpendicular to a radial direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Fig. 1), but fails to disclose wherein the spokes of the first set have three legs positioned in a Y-shaped architecture; wherein the spokes of the second set also have three legs positioned in the Y-shaped architecture.
However, Liu, teaches a Y-shaped architecture (Fig. 4) between a shear band (21) and a hub (22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the non-pneumatic tire of Wang et al by substituting its spoke structure for a Y-shaped spoke structure, such as taught by Liu, with the motivation to distribute loads more evenly and reduce stress concentrations by providing multiple load paths.
Regarding claim 16, Wang et al, as modified by Liu, discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 15, wherein a first spoke from the first set of spokes is positioned adjacent to a second spoke from the second set of spokes along the axial direction (Wang et al: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Wang et al, as modified by Liu, discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 16, wherein the first spoke is aligned with the second spoke along the axial direction (Wang et al: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 18, Wang et al, as modified by Liu, discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 16, wherein the first spoke is offset from the second spoke along the axial direction (Wang et al: Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, Wang et al, as modified by Liu, discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 16, wherein a first side of the first spoke comprises two legs of the first spoke oriented at an angle to each other (Refer to the first side and first spoke in the below examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Wang et al), and wherein a second side of the second spoke comprises two legs of the second spoke oriented at an angle to each other (Refer to the second side and second spoke in the below annotated Fig. 2), wherein the first side of the first spoke faces clockwise along a circumferential direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Refer to the below annotated Fig. 2), and wherein the second side of the second spoke faces counter-clockwise along the circumferential direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Refer to the below annotated Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image11.png
826
988
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Wang et al
20. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al, as modified by Liu, and further in view of Xu et al (CN113442644A) as applied to claims 15 and 16 above.
Regarding claim 20, Wang et al, as modified by Liu, discloses the non-pneumatic tire of claim 16, wherein a first side of the first spoke comprises two legs of the first spoke oriented at an angle to each other, and wherein a second side of the second spoke comprises two legs of the second spoke oriented at an angle to each other (Refer to the above examiner’s annotated Fig. 2 of Wang et al), but fails to disclose wherein the first side of the first spoke face and the second side of the second spoke are likewise oriented along a circumferential direction of the non-pneumatic tire.
Xu et al, however, teaches wherein the first side of the first spoke face and the second side of the second spoke are likewise oriented along a circumferential direction of the non-pneumatic tire (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified the non-pneumatic tire of Wang et al, as modified by Liu, by reorienting the spoke structures such that the spoke structures on opposite sides are oriented in the same circumferential direction, such as taught by Xu et al, with the motivation to allow the use of identical spoke components on both sides and thereby simplify manufacturing and assembly.
Conclusion
21. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references disclose relevant spoke structures for non-pneumatic tires.
22. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAEKWON CHOI whose telephone number is (571) 272-5805. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9 am to 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel (Joe) Morano, can be reached at telephone number (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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/TAEKWON CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615