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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dodani et al. (US 2021/0370726, hereafter Dodani)
With respect to claim 1, Dodani teaches an apparatus, comprising: a sensor (electronic tire sensor module 24) positioned in an interior of a tire, the sensor including a power source housing (power supply 26); at least a portion of the sensor interlocking with a rubber portion of a tire, wherein the sensor is at least partially embedded in an innerliner of the tire; the power source housing disposed on an interior surface of the tire. (par. 28-29, Figs. 1-4)
Dodani also teaches the power supply may be disposed outside the tire dock body. (par. 29)
Therefore, although Dodani does not explicitly teach the power source housing being fastened to the portion of the sensor through the rubber portion and at least one electrical conductor between the power source housing and the portion of the sensor, the at least one electrical conductor extending through the rubber portion, this modification would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed such that the power source housing is outside, as taught, and communicates with the sensor through the rubber portion using an electrical conductor so that the power can be supplied to the sensor.
With respect to claim 2, Dodani teaches the sensor is a component of a tire pressure monitoring system. (par. 7)
With respect to claim 3, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the portion of the sensor is a printed circuit board, this would be an obvious arrangement, as the elements of a sensor are commonly located on a printed circuit board and this would be the portion of the sensor which would require power in order to function.
With respect to claim 4, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one electrical conductor extends between a terminal of a battery and an electrical contact on the portion of the sensor, a battery is a common type of power source for a tire sensor and therefore it would have been an obvious modification of the structure in order to supply power to the sensor.
With respect to claim 5, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the power source housing includes a removable cover, the removable cover attaching to the power source housing via a fastener, this would have been an obvious modification to the housing in order to be able to replace a battery as it becomes less powerful.
With respect to claim 6, Dodani teaches an antenna disposed on a surface of the sensor. (par. 6)
With respect to claim 7, Dodani teaches an apparatus, comprising: a sensor (electronic tire sensor module 24) interlocked in rubber, the sensor including a power source housing, (power supply 26) wherein the sensor is at least partially embedded in the rubber. (par. 28-29, Figs. 1-4) Dodani also teaches the power supply may be disposed outside the tire dock body. (par. 29)
Therefore, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein at least a portion of the power source housing protrudes through the rubber, this would be an obvious modification of the structure where the power source housing is outside, as taught, and communicates with the sensor through the rubber portion so that the power can be supplied to the sensor.
With respect to claim 8, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the rubber comprises green rubber, it is well-known to include sensors in a tire using green rubber before vulcanization and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the structure to include green rubber so that the sensor can be firmly attached to the material of the tire.
With respect to claims 9-10, although Dodani does not explicitly teach the physical manner of interlocking between the sensor and the rubber, the claimed structures appear to be obvious structural changes having no particular impact on the function of the sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include either of these structural modifications.
With respect to claim 11, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the power source housing includes a removable cover, the removable cover attaching to the power source housing via a fastener, this would have been an obvious modification to the housing in order to be able to replace a battery as it becomes less powerful.
With respect to claims 12-13, it is well-known to supply removable covers with threaded connections or other fasteners and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include these types of connectors in order to securely hold the removable cover.
With respect to claim 14, Dodani teaches an antenna disposed on a surface of the sensor. (par. 6)
With respect to claim 15, Dodani teaches a method, comprising: providing a sensor (electronic tire sensor module 24) comprising a power source housing (power supply 26) attached to a printed circuit board; interlocking a portion of the sensor with rubber within a tire, wherein the sensor is at least partially embedded in an innerliner of the tire; such that at least a portion of the power source housing is exposed in an axially inward direction of the tire. (par. 28-29, Figs. 1-4)
Although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the rubber comprises green rubber inside a green tire, and does not explicitly teach the step of curing the green tire after the interlocking of the portion of the sensor with the green rubber, it is well-known to include sensors in a tire using green rubber before vulcanization and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the method to include green rubber in a green tire and curing the tire after interlocking so that the sensor can be firmly attached to the material of the tire.
With respect to claims 16-17, although Dodani does not explicitly teach the physical manner of interlocking between the sensor and the rubber, the claimed structures appear to be obvious structural changes having no particular impact on the function of the sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include either of these structural modifications.
With respect to claim 18, although Dodani does not explicitly placing a battery into the portion of the power source housing, a battery is a common type of power source for a tire sensor and therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a battery in order to supply power to the sensor effectively.
With respect to claim 19, although Dodani does not explicitly teach wherein the power source housing includes a removable cover, the removable cover attaching to the power source housing via a fastener, this would have been an obvious modification to the housing in order to be able to replace a battery as it becomes less powerful.
With respect to claim 20, Dodani teaches an antenna disposed on a surface of the sensor. (par. 6)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the sensor dock and the sensor unit of Dodani are mounted on the tire innerliner and are not embedded in the innerliner. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The sensor dock and sensor unit 24, 26 of Dodani are located below a rubber layer, 14, which effectively teaches them embedded in the rubber of the tire. Applicant defines the “innerliner” as “the layers or layers of elastomer or other material that form the inside surface of a tubeless tire. Where it is installed, the rubber layer, 14, of Dodani, becomes the inner surface of the tubeless tire and is therefore a part of the innerliner of the tire.
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 Jill E Culler whose telephone number is (571)272-2159. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/JILL E CULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853