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The indicated allowability of claims 1-7 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to Minagoshi and Benzing. Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minagoshi (EP 3936660, newly cited) and further in view of Benzing (US 2017/0166002, newly cited) and Gergele (FR 2856635, of record).
As best depicted in Figure 1, Minagoshi is directed to a tire construction including a carcass ply 6, a bead filler 8, a bead core 5, and at least one belt layer 7 disposed in a tread portion. Minagoshi further states that such a tire can be formed as a non-pneumatic tire (Paragraph 23). While Minagoshi fails to expressly disclose what additional structure is necessary to operate the tire of Minagoshi as a non-pneumatic tire, it is well known and conventional to include additional assemblies or shear bands at a radially inside of a carcass ply to form an operational non-pneumatic tire, as shown for example by Benzing (component 30 in Figure 1) and Gergele (component 1 in Figures 1-4). It is particularly noted that the shear band or hoop structure 30 of Benzing includes 4 cord reinforced layers (first and second cord reinforced layers in first membrane and first and second cord reinforced layers in second membrane- Paragraphs 50-54). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the non-pneumatic tire of Minagoshi by including a well-known and conventional shear band or reinforcing assembly, such as those including 4 cord reinforced layers, on a radially inside of a carcass ply. It is emphasized that Minagoshi specifically directs one having ordinary skill to form a non-pneumatic tire and Benzing and Gergele recognize the known manner in which tires suitable for pneumatic applications can be modified to have applicability in non-pneumatic applications.
Regarding claim 2, each of Benzing and Gergele depicts a tire construction in which a shear band extends along a top portion of the carcass (that portion over which the carcass extends substantially in the axial direction) and supports both side portions of the carcass (those portions in which the carcass is curved and extends radially inward from respective shoulder portions) in an axial direction.
As to claim 3, a non-pneumatic tire is commonly formed in the absence of an innerliner since such a tire does not operate with pressurized air. Additionally, if in fact a standard tire designed for pneumatic applications and inclusive of a conventional innerliner is simply modified by the inclusion of a shear band, it is well recognized that tire innerliners are conventionally formed with a wide variety of non-butyl rubbers, including natural rubber and thermoplastic elastomers.
With respect to claim 4, bead core 5 of Minagoshi would have been well recognized as including, for example, multiple wires (consistent with well-known and conventional bead core designs). It is further noted that Gergele expressly depicts a bead core as including multiple wires embedded in a composition (Figures 2-6).
Regarding claim 5, a fair reading of Benzing, for example, suggests that the shear band can have any number of thickness values (Paragraph 56- emphasis on the disclosure of multiple layer structure of alternating steel cord plies or filament plies and rubber shear layers). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use any number of shearband thickness values, including that required by the claimed invention, absent a conclusive showing of unexpected results. It is emphasized that the claims require a broad range of values that appear to be encompassed by the general disclosure of Benzing to include a shearband having a multiple layer structure. Also, it is well recognized that a tire disclosure is not limited to a single tread thickness (a function of tire size and tire intended use), it being evident that smaller tread thickness values would result in a greater ratio.
As to claim 6, the claims are directed to a tire construction and the method of manufacturing the tire fails to further define the structure of the claimed tire article.
Regarding claim 12, the non-pneumatic tire of Minagoshi, as modified by Benzing and Gergele, is substantially the same as that required by the claimed invention and as such, it is believed that the carcass ply of Minagoshi would similarly be resiliently tensioned by the shearband (appears to result from the presence of a shear band radially inside a carcass ply and extending across an axial extent of the crown region and formed with circumferentially oriented cords).
With respect to claim 13, as detailed above, if in fact a standard tire designed for pneumatic applications and inclusive of a conventional innerliner in Minagoshi is simply modified by the inclusion of a shear band, it is well recognized that tire innerliners are conventionally formed with a wide variety of materials, including butyl rubbers.
Claim(s) 7, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minagoshi, Benzing, and Gergele as applied in claim 1 above and further in view of Morival (US 2020/338927, of record).
As detailed above, Minagoshi, as modified by Benzing and Gergele, is directed to a non-pneumatic tire construction including a shearband. More particularly, said shearband comprises a plurality of cord reinforced layers formed with cords embedded in an elastomeric coating layer (Paragraph 54 of Benzing). Gergele also refers to the presence of “elastomers”. While Benzing and Gergele fail to specifically teach types of elastomers, it is well recognized that any number of polymeric materials are commonly used to form elastomeric coating materials, including thermoplastic materials (e.g. thermoplastic elastomers). It is emphasized that thermoplastic elastomers are extensively used in the tire industry (for both cord reinforced and non-cord reinforced components) as they are recognized as providing, for example, weight benefits, processing benefits, and recyclability. Morival provides one example of a non-pneumatic tire and teaches the use of thermoplastic elastomers having a Shore A hardness of at least 70 (Paragraph 28- such a range is substantially encompassed by the claimed range). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use any number of commonly used polymeric materials in the modified tire of Minagoshi and such includes thermoplastic materials having the claimed properties. Lastly, Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the specific use of thermoplastic materials having the claimed hardness values.
Regarding claim 11, the shear assembly taught by Benzing, for example, includes a plurality of cord reinforced layers (cords embedded in elastomeric coating layer).
Conclusion
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 September 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights