Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/626,625

TIRE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 04, 2024
Examiner
DARBY, BRENDON CHARLES
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Hankook Tire & Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
61 granted / 120 resolved
-14.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 120 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 11-12 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyasaka (JP 2017001437 with English Machine Translation). Regarding claim 11, Miyasaka discloses a tire (title) comprising a plurality of knurling units (40) (see Figs. 1 and 9; [0044]), each of the plurality of knurling units (40) including: a first knurling part (25), a second knurling part (25), a third knurling part (25), and a fourth knurling part (25), the knurling parts (25) formed around a central apex (26) and connected at the central apex (26) (see Modified Figure 8A below; [0044]); a top surface (28) of each of the knurling parts (25) having a shape of an inclined triangle (see Fig. 8B; [0044]), with a first edge of the inclined triangle extending upward from a lowest top surface point to the central apex (26) (see Modified Figure 8B below); wherein a second edge of the inclined triangle of the first knurling part (25) extends upward from the first knurling part lowest top surface point to a first apex (27) (see Modified Figure 8B below); wherein a second edge of the inclined triangle of the second knurling part (25) extends upward from the second knurling part lowest top surface point to a second apex (27) (see Modified Figure 8B below); wherein a second edge of the inclined triangle of the third knurling part (25) extends upward from the third knurling part lowest top surface point to a second apex (27) (see Modified Figure 8A below); wherein a second edge of the inclined triangle of the fourth knurling part (25) extends upward from the fourth knurling part lowest top surface point to a fourth apex (27) (see Modified Figure 8A below); wherein the first edge of the first knurling part (25) continuously contacts the fourth knurling part (25), the first edge of the second knurling part (25) continuously contacts the first knurling part (25), the first edge of the third knurling part (25) continuously contacts the second knurling part (25), and the first edge of the fourth knurling part (25) continuously contacts the third knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8A below); and wherein an inclination with respect to the base surface (22) of the first edge of each knurling part (25) is steeper than an inclination of the second edge of each knurling part (25), respectively (see Modified Figure 8B below). PNG media_image1.png 503 713 media_image1.png Greyscale Modified Figure 8A, Miyasaka PNG media_image2.png 378 746 media_image2.png Greyscale Modified Figure 8B, Miyasaka Regarding claim 12, Miyasaka discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 11. Miyasaka further discloses that each of the first to fourth knurling parts (25) comprises two exposed triangular faces (see Modified Figure 8A above). Regarding claim 14, Miyasaka discloses a tire (title) comprising a plurality of knurling units (40) (see Figs. 1 and 9; [0044]), each of the plurality of knurling units (40) including: a plurality of knurling units (25) formed around a central apex (26) and connected at the central apex (26) (see Modified Figure 8A above; [0044]); wherein each knurling part (25) has an inclined top surface (28) comprising a first edge and a second edge, the first edge extending from a lowest point of the top surface to the central apex (26), and the second edge extending from the lowest point of the top surface to a peripheral apex (27) (see Modified Figures 8A and 8B above). Regarding claim 15, Miyasaka discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 14. Miyasaka further discloses that the first edge of each knurling part (25) continuously contacts an adjacent knurling part (25) (see Modified Figures 8A and 8B above). Regarding claim 16, Miyasaka discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 15. Miyasaka further discloses that the plurality of knurling parts (25) comprises first to fourth knurling parts (25) (see Modified Figure 8A above); wherein the first edge of the first knurling part (25) continuously contacts the fourth knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8B above), the first edge of the second knurling part (25) continuously contacts the first knurling part (see Modified Figure 8B above), the first edge of the third knurling part (25) continuously contacts the second knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8A above), and the first edge of the fourth knurling part (25) continuously contacts the third knurling part (see Modified Figure 8A above); and wherein an inclination with respect to the base surface (22) of the first edge of each knurling part (25) is steeper than an inclination of the second edge of each knurling part (25), respectively (see Modified Figure 8B above). Regarding claim 17, Miyasaka discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 14. Miyasaka further discloses that each of the knurling parts (25) comprises two exposed triangular faces (see Modified Figure 8A above). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-10, 13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyasaka (JP 2017001437 with English Machine Translation) (hereinafter Miyasaka '437) in view of Miyasaka et al. (US 2018/0141390) (Miyasaka '390). Regarding claim 1, Miyasaka ‘437 discloses a tire (title) comprising a plurality of knurling units (40) (see Figs. 1 and 9; [0044]), each of the plurality of knurling units (40) including: a first knurling part (25), a second knurling part (25), a third knurling part (25), and a fourth knurling part (25), the knurling parts (25) formed around a central apex (26) and connected at the central apex (26) (see Modified Figure 8A above; [0044]); wherein each of the knurling parts (25) has an inclined top surface (28) (see Figs. 3B and 8B; [0036]; [0044]), wherein the first knurling part (25) is formed continuously with the second knurling part (25) at one side of the first knurling part (25) and is stepped with the second knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8B above), wherein the second knurling part (25) is formed continuously with the third knurling part (25) at one side of the second knurling part (25) and is stepped with the second knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8A above), wherein the third knurling part (25) is formed continuously with the fourth knurling part (25) at one side of the third knurling part (25) and is stepped with the fourth knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8A above), wherein the fourth knurling part (25) is formed continuously with the first knurling part (25) at one side of the fourth knurling part (25) and is stepped with the first knurling part (25) (see Modified Figure 8B above). Miyasaka ‘437 fails to disclose, however, that the plurality of knurling units (40) are formed continuously with each adjacent knurling unit (40). However, this configuration is known in the art. For instance, Miyasaka ‘390 teaches a similar tire (title) comprising a plurality of knurling units (24, 26) adjacent in the radial direction, each of the plurality of knurling units (24, 26) including a plurality of knurling parts (25, 27) formed around a central apex (O1, O2) and connected at the central apex (O1, O2) (see Figs. 2 and 3; [0080]-[0081]; [0087]-[0088]). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that the knurling units (24, 26) can be configured with connecting portions (34A, 34B) such that the plurality of knurling units (24, 26) are formed continuously with each adjacent knurling unit (24, 26) in the radial direction (see Figs. 12 and 13; [0109]). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that configuring the knurling units (24, 26) in this way enhances the durability of the knurling units (24, 26) ([0015]; [0112]). Therefore, 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 knurling units disclosed by Miyasaka ‘437 to be continuously connected to each other through connecting portions, as taught by Miyasaka ‘390, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would enhance the durability of the knurling units. Regarding claim 2, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the plurality of knurling units (Miyasaka ‘437: 40) are provided on any one or more of a side of the tire (Miyasaka ‘437: see Figs. 1 and 12; [0007]). Regarding claim 3, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the first knurling part (Miyasaka ‘437: 25), the second knurling part (Miyasaka ‘437: 25), the third knurling part (Miyasaka ‘437: 25), and the fourth knurling part (Miyasaka ‘437: 25) are formed in a same shape (see Modified Figure 8A above). Regarding claim 4, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that each of the first to fourth knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘437: 25) comprises two exposed triangular faces (see Modified Figure 8A above). Regarding claim 5, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 4. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the two exposed triangular faces share a third edge (Miyasaka ‘437: 28P) (see Modified Figure 8B below; [0030]; [0044]; see also Fig. 9). Modified Miyasaka ‘437 fails to disclose, however, that one of the two exposed triangular faces is steeper than the other of the two exposed triangular faces. PNG media_image3.png 359 456 media_image3.png Greyscale Modified Figure 8B, Miyasaka ‘437 Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that each of the knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘390: 25, 27) comprises two exposed faces (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WA-1, 23WA-2) that share an edge (Miyasaka ‘390: 23A), and one of the two exposed faces (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WA-2) is steeper than the other of the two exposed faces (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WA-1) (Miyasaka ‘390: see Fig. 7C; [0100]). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that configuring the knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘390: 25, 27) in this way enhances the visibility of the tire (Miyasaka ‘390: [0100]). Therefore, 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 two exposed triangular faces in each knurling part disclosed by modified Miyasaka ‘437 such that one is steeper than the other, as taught by Miyasaka ‘390, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would enhance the visibility of the tire. Regarding claim 6, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 fails to explicitly disclose, however, a length of an edge of a bottom of each of the knurling units (Miyasaka ‘437: 40). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that a spacing (Miyasaka ‘390: P) between the central apexes (Miyasaka ‘390: O1, O2) of adjacent knurling units (Miyasaka ‘390: 24, 26) is from 0.2 mm to 1.0 mm (Miyasaka ‘390: [0089]; see Fig. 3). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that a length (Miyasaka ‘390: L) of an edge of a bottom of each of the knurling units (Miyasaka ‘390: 24, 26) is longer than the spacing (Miyasaka ‘390: P) and thus, greater than 1.0 mm (Miyasaka ‘390: [0089]; see Fig. 3), overlapping the claimed range of 0.1 mm to 5.0 mm. In the case where the claimed range overlaps the range disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP §2144.05. Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that configuring the lengths and spacings of the knurling units (Miyasaka ‘390: 24, 26) in this way helps to further suppress light reflection on the tire, enhancing visibility (Miyasaka ‘390: [0093]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured a length of the knurling units disclosed by modified Miyasaka ‘437 to be within the claimed range, as suggested by Miyasaka ‘390, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would suppress light reflection on the tire and enhance visibility. Regarding claim 7, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that a height (Miyasaka ‘437: H1) of each of the knurling units (Miyasaka ‘437: 40) is from 0.1 mm to 1.0 mm (Miyasaka ‘437: [0028]; see also Fig. 3B), suggesting the claimed range of 0.1 mm to 1.0 mm. Regarding claim 8, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 fails to explicitly disclose an inclination of the inclined top surface (Miyasaka ‘437: 28) of each of the knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘437: 25). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that each of the knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘390: 24, 26) has an inclined top surface (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WA-23WC, 28WA-28WC) having an inclination angle (Miyasaka ‘390: θ) in a range of 5o to 30o with respect to a plane perpendicular to a base surface (Miyasaka ‘390: 22) (Miyasaka ‘390: [0085]; [0087]; see also Figs. 4A and 4B), making an inclination of the inclined top surface (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WB, 28WB) with respect to the base surface (Miyasaka ‘390: 22) be in a range of 60o (90-30) to 85o (90-5), suggesting the claimed range of 60o to 90o. Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that configuring the inclined top surface (Miyasaka ‘390: 23WA-23WC, 28WA-28WC) in this way enhances the visibility of the tire while maintaining the durability of the knurling parts (Miyasaka ‘390: 24, 26) (Miyasaka ‘390: [0085]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the inclined top surface of the knurling parts disclosed by modified Miyasaka ‘437 to have an inclination angle within the claimed range, as suggested by Miyasaka ‘390, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would enhance the visibility of the tire while maintaining the durability of the knurling parts. Regarding claim 9, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the plurality of knurling units (Miyasaka ‘437: 40) form a character (Miyasaka ‘437: 16) (Miyasaka ‘437: see Fig. 1; [0026]). Regarding claim 10, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 9. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the character (Miyasaka ‘437: 16) is located on a sidewall (Miyasaka ‘437: 12) of the tire (Miyasaka ‘437: see Fig. 1; [0024]-[0026]). Regarding claims 13 and 18, Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claims 12 and 17, respectively. Miyasaka ‘437 in view of Miyasaka ‘390 further satisfies all of the limitations in claims 13 and 18 as set forth above for claim 5, which has the same subject matter as claims 13 and 18. Regarding claim 19, Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 14. Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the plurality of knurling units (40) form a character (16) (see Fig. 1; [0026]). Miyasaka ‘437 fails to explicitly disclose, however, that the plurality of knurling units (40) are formed continuously with each adjacent knurling unit (40). However, this configuration is known in the art. For instance, Miyasaka ‘390 teaches a similar tire (title) comprising a plurality of knurling units (24, 26) adjacent in the radial direction, each of the plurality of knurling units (24, 26) including a plurality of knurling parts (25, 27) formed around a central apex (O1, O2) and connected at the central apex (O1, O2) (see Figs. 2 and 3; [0080]-[0081]; [0087]-[0088]). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that the knurling units (24, 26) can be configured with connecting portions (34A, 34B) such that the plurality of knurling units (24, 26) are formed continuously with each adjacent knurling unit (24, 26) in the radial direction (see Figs. 12 and 13; [0109]). Miyasaka ‘390 further teaches that configuring the knurling units (24, 26) in this way enhances the durability of the knurling units (24, 26) ([0015]; [0112]). Therefore, 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 knurling units disclosed by Miyasaka ‘437 to be continuously connected to each other through connecting portions, as taught by Miyasaka ‘390, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would enhance the durability of the knurling units. Regarding claim 20, modified Miyasaka ‘437 discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 19. Modified Miyasaka ‘437 further discloses that the character (Miyasaka ‘437: 16) is located on a sidewall (Miyasaka ‘437: 12) of the tire (Miyasaka ‘437: see Fig. 1; [0024]-[0026]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENDON C DARBY whose telephone number is (571)272-1225. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30am - 5:00pm. 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. /B.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1749 /JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 09, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600173
A NOISE IMPROVING TREAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583265
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570108
MOTORCYCLE TIRE FOR RUNNING ON ROUGH TERRAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12508846
TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12485705
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+16.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 120 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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