Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/561,114

TIRE RUBBER COMPOSITION, TREAD RUBBER, AND TIRE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 15, 2023
Priority
May 28, 2021 — JP 2021-090704 +1 more
Examiner
SALAMON, PETER A
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Bridgestone Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
720 granted / 833 resolved
+26.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
850
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 833 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. 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 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 202045073A to Maekawa, Tetsuya hereinafter “Maekawa” and as referenced by EP 3176001 A1 to Nakajima, Hiroki hereinafter “Nakajima”. EP 3626482 A was used as the English language equivalent of Maekawa. Maekawa is directed to pneumatic tires having a tread (Abstract, [0005]). Regarding claims 1 – 4, 7 and 9, Maekawa teaches a composition at least at Ex 3 of Table 1 which comprises 30 parts SBR1, 50 parts SBR2, 20 parts BR, 10 parts carbon black, 80 parts silica and 2 parts of Resin 1. SBR-1 is a solution polymerized styrene-butadiene rubber, Sprintan SLR-6430 with a styrene content of 40% by mass [0153]. The silica level to total silica + carbon black level is 80 / 90 = 88.8 %. This is within the required level. Maekawa is silent as to a trial using a rubber with an isoprene skeleton however, Maekawa teaches that the diene based rubber can comprise isoprene based rubber [0045]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill to add or substitute isoprene rubber for the BR (butadiene rubber) as this is directly taught by Maekawa. Maekawa is silent as to a trial using Resin 2 and the MW of Resin 2 but teaches the use of aromatic modified terpene resins where the aromatic modification can comprise styrene [0109 – 0110]. Additionally, Maekawa discloses that Resin 2 is CLEARON M125, a hydrogenated aromatic modified terpene resin with a softening point of 125C manufactured by Yasuhara Chemical Co. [0153]. This is the same resin used in the trials in Table 2. The Examiner take the position the MW is >1200 and less than 1600 g/mol. The evidentiary reference to Nakajima discloses that M125 is a reaction product of a heptane compound and styrene [0030]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill to add or substitute Resin 2 for Resin 1 as this is directly taught by Maekawa for the same purpose. As to claims 5 – 6, 8 and 10 – 18, Maekawa discloses that pneumatic tires comprising the tread for said tires was extruded and vulcanized from the compounds in Table 1 and then evaluated for driving performance. See the bottom of Table 1. Prior Art of Record WO 2022249637 A1 JP 2020249637 A1 EP 3176001 A1 Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER A. SALAMON whose telephone number is 571-270-3018. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 6PM. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. PAS 7/24/26 /PETER A SALAMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 15, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12703802
ANTIMICROBIAL COATING COMPOSITIONS AND RESIDUAL ANTIMICROBIAL COATINGS RESULTING THEREFROM
3y 10m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12698350
Photopolymerizable Dental Composites With Rapid Curing And Low Shrinkage Stress
3y 3m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12692334
COPOLYMERIZED SUPERABSORBENT POLYMERS
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12692341
CURABLE COMPOSITION
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12679954
LIGHT-TRANSMISSIVE FILM, MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, AND DISPLAY DEVICE COMPRISING SAME
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+5.5%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 833 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month