Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/617,975

RUBBER COMPOSITION FOR TYRES

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 27, 2024
Priority
Mar 27, 2023 — LU LU503746
Examiner
WASHVILLE, JEFFREY D
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Apollo Tyres Global R&D B.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
1008 granted / 1263 resolved
+19.8% vs TC avg
Minimal -5% lift
Without
With
+-4.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
1307
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
32.3%
-7.7% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1263 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement 2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/27/2024 was filed timely. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. 4. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The term preferably regarding ranges makes the claim indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 5. 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. 6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 7. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by (WO 2021/069514 A1) to Mondol et al. (hereinafter Mondol). Mondol is directed to a cross-linkable rubber composition. Mondol discloses at page 2 the cross linkable rubber formulation. Mondol discloses at page 5 the addition of terepene phenolic resins. Mondol discloses at page 6 the rebound is 50% to 70%, which reads on Applicants range of 65% to 75%. Mondol discloses at page 6 the tan delta at 70 °C of > 0.05 to < 0.15, which reads on 0.06 to 0.09. PNG media_image1.png 441 829 media_image1.png Greyscale Mondol discloses above that SSBR is greater than 50 phr, which reads on Applicants range of 80 to 90 phr. Mondol discloses at page 5 that a filler of carbon black or silica may be added at 60 to 130 phr, which reads on Applicants 55 to 75 phr. Mondol discloses at page 4 that PNG media_image2.png 468 888 media_image2.png Greyscale This reads on Applicants ratio first and second coupling agents with a total range of 1 to 15 phr, which reads on 5 to 10 phr. Mondol discloses each and every element of claims 1-13. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (WO 2021/069514 A1) to Mondol et al. (hereinafter Mondol). Mondol is directed to a cross-linkable rubber composition. Mondol discloses at page 2 the cross linkable rubber formulation. Mondol discloses at page 5 the addition of terepene phenolic resins. Mondol discloses at page 6 the rebound is 50% to 70%, which reads on Applicants range of 65% to 75%. Mondol discloses at page 6 the tan delta at 70 °C of > 0.05 to < 0.15, which reads on 0.06 to 0.09. PNG media_image1.png 441 829 media_image1.png Greyscale Mondol discloses above that SSBR is greater than 50 phr, which reads on Applicants range of 80 to 90 phr. Mondol discloses at page 5 that a filler of carbon black or silica may be added at 60 to 130 phr, which reads on Applicants 55 to 75 phr. Mondol discloses at page 4 that PNG media_image2.png 468 888 media_image2.png Greyscale This reads on Applicants ratio first and second coupling agents with a total range of 1 to 15 phr, which reads on 5 to 10 phr. It would be obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the disclosure of Mondol to select each and every element of claims to form a prime facie case of obviousness for claims 1-13. Conclusion 11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY D WASHVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3262. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 12. 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. 13. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-272-1302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 14. 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. /JEFFREY D WASHVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 27, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12701973
STRONG BASE-ASSISTED DIRECT BONDING METHOD
3y 2m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12698242
SAGGER FOR SINTERING LITHIUM COMPOSITE TRANSITION METAL OXIDE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12685985
NANOPARTICLE TEMPLATES AND METHODS OF USE FOR MAKING HOLLOW NANOPARTICLES
3y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12686811
Aqueous Based, Water-Soluble Polymer Slurry System
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12679940
LAMINATED FILM AND FLEXIBLE DEVICE
3y 2m 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
80%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (-4.8%)
2y 8m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1263 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