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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eguchi et al. (WO 2019/093212 A1; previously cited by Applicant; hereinafter “Eguchi”; note corresponding U.S. published application US 2020/0262241 A1 is being used for the English translation) in view of Thompson (US 2014/0367007 A1; newly cited).
Regarding claim 1, Eguchi discloses a non-pneumatic tire 1 using a resin composition as a skeletal member (Abstract), wherein the resin composition has a bending modulus of elasticity of 247 MPa or less at -200C in accordance with ISO 178 and a bending modulus of elasticity of 32 MPa or more at 600C in accordance with ISO 178 (paragraph [0013] expressly discloses “ISO 178: 2010 Method A” being the testing standard employed; paragraph [0034] teaches the bending modulus of elasticity at -200C being “1600 MPa or less” and “usually 150 MPa or more”; paragraph [0035] teaches the bending modulus of elasticity at 600C being “150 MPa or more” and “usually 1600 MPa or less”; Table 4 shows comparative examples 14-16 and 19 being within the claimed ranges).
Eguchi fails to expressly disclose a tire diameter in a tire radial direction is 35 cm or less.
Thompson, however, expressly teaches a non-pneumatic tire that has a tire diameter in a tire radial direction being 35 cm or less (paragraph [0054] teaches an “outer diameter is around 10 to 13 inches” and paragraph [0122] teaches “tire size of 10 inch diameter” being “a common size for lawn mower and other caster tires”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-pneumatic tire of Eguchi so that it has a tire diameter in a tire radial direction of 35 cm or less, such as taught by Thompson, with a reasonable expectation of success of allowing the tire to be used for lawn mowers and as other caster tires.
Regarding claim 2, Eguchi further discloses the resin composition contains a thermoplastic elastomer having a hard segment and a soft segment in its molecule (paragraphs [0014] and [0018]).
Regarding claim 3, Eguchi further discloses the thermoplastic elastomer is a polyester-based thermoplastic elastomer (paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 4, Eguchi further discloses the hard segment of the polyester-based thermoplastic elastomer is polybutylene terephthalate (paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claims 5-8, Eguchi further discloses the tire comprising: an inner rim 6 mounted on a wheel 2; an outer rim 4 surrounding the inner rim from an outside in the tire radial direction (Fig. 1); a plurality of connecting members 3 arranged between the inner rim and the outer rim along a tire circumferential direction to connect these rims (Fig. 1); and a tread member 5 provided on an outside in the tire radial direction of the outer rim, wherein the inner rim, the outer rim, and the connecting members, as the skeletal member, are made of the resin composition (paragraph [0104]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIP T KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7953. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Samuel (Joe) J 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.
/Kip T Kotter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615