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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase - -the two second connecting holes each- - should be inserted prior to the phrase “having two opposite ends” in line 21, to more clearly define the invention (namely which element of the invention includes the two opposite ends).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 9-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardelle (9,522,570) in view of Koshiyama et al (9,561,685).
Per claim 1, Bernardelle shows a wire wheel for a tubeless tire including a wheel rim 2 with multiple interior protrusions 7-8 extending from the interior surface thereof, and extending circumferentially (i.e. circularly). A mounting hole 10-11 is formed within each protrusion 7-8, extending along the axial direction of the wheel. A thickening portion (see annotated Figure 4 below) is formed on the interior surface between the mounting hole and interior surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
510
475
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Multiple connecting pins 5 are rotatably received in the mounting holes 10-11, and includes a first connecting hole 12. The connecting pins 5 abut the thickening portion of the respective interior protrusions (namely at the shoulder 9). Multiple wire spokes 4 extend between the rim 2 and a hub 13; each spoke 4 including a rim end and hub end having a head 15. The spokes 4 are inclined toward a tangent direction of the hub 13. The rim end of the spokes 4 is received in the first connecting hole 12 of a respective connecting pin 5.
Per claim 2, each pin 5 includes two cylindrical portions having different diameters to form a step structure (at shoulder 9), which each interior protrusion 7-8 having an annular step portion to match the step structure of the pins 5.
Per claim 3, the step structure of the adjacent interior protrusions 7-8 are parallel to the central axis of the wheel.
Per claim 4, each interior protrusion 7-8 includes a recess extending from a radially inner surface thereof towards the interior surface of the rim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Bernardelle does not specify that the step structure of adjacent interior protrusions 7-8 face in opposite directions. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and with a reasonable expectation of success, to form the step structure of Bernardelle in opposing directions, as a substitute equivalent configuration, to equalize axial loads on the interior protrusions.
Regarding claim 1, Bernardelle does not show the hub having multiple connecting protrusions on the periphery thereof. Koshiyama et al teaches the use of a wheel hub 10 including a plurality of connecting protrusions formed circumferentially on the periphery thereof and divided into two groups (18 and 22). Each protrusion includes two second connecting holes (30, 34) defined therethrough and spaced from each other to extend in two different directions. Each second connecting holes (30, 34) are aligned with a first connecting hole in a rim. A containing groove (30a, 34a) is defined in a side of the connecting protrusions (18,22) “away from” the corresponding first connecting hole, and an annular guiding surface that tapers from the containing groove (30a, 34a) toward the other side of the connecting protrusions (18, 22). A hub end of spokes 50 includes an engaging head 50b that engages the containing groove (30a, 34a) of the connecting protrusions (18,22), and a leading portion tapers towards a rim end. Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success, to form the hub of Bernardelle in the manner taught by Koshiyama et al, as a substitute equivalent configuration, dependent upon the desired structure, weight, and type of vehicle on which the wheel is to be used.
Per claims 9-12, Bernardelle as modified by Koshiyama et al shows the hub 10 (of Koshiyama et al) including an annual groove recessed between the two groups (18 and 22) of connecting protrusions.
Per claims 10-16, Bernardelle as modified by Koshiyama et al shows the wire spokes (4 of Bernardelle or 50 of Koshiyama et al) having the same length.
Claim(s) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernardelle in view of Koshiyama et al as applied to claims 1-4 and 9-16 above, and further in view of Urbani et al (2008/0116738).
Bernardelle as modified by Koshiyama et al does not show multiple through holes extending axially through the hub.
Urbani et al teaches the use of a hub 1 having axially extending through holes 32. Therefore, from this teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success, to form the hub of Bernardelle as modified by Koshiyama et al with a plurality of axially extending holes therethrough, for the purpose of reducing the weight of the hub.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that Bernardelle lacks a thickening portion between the inner surface of the rim and the pin-receiving hole; stating that the “thickness of the portion being adjacent to the hole (10,11) on the rim (2) (red area) and the thickness of other portions on the rim (2) (yellow area) are roughly the same”. First, it should be noted that all documents scanned by the Office are in black and white; therefore reference to colors is unhelpful. It should be noted however, that the shading of the areas referred to by the Applicant can be distinguished. Second, these areas indicated by the Applicant, and especially the portion adjacent the hole seems to be arbitrarily chosen and have little correspondence to the language of the claims. Namely, the shape of the Applicant’s rim and that of Bernardelle at the area between the inner surface of mounting hole is virtually identical, and therefore meets the limitations of the claims.
The Applicant argues that each of the connecting pins does not abut the thickening protrusion of the respective interior protrusion. However, this is not the case, as explained in the rejection above and annotated Figure 4 of Bernardelle. The claims lack any actual physical structure that precludes the structure of Bernardelle.
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 JASON R BELLINGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6680. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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) 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.
/JASON R BELLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights