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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-6 & 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), because the specification, while being enabling for determining the position of the leak based on the time curve of the tire pressure and receiving acceleration and by an acceleration sensor and determining a rotation angle of the tire based on the acceleration data, the disclosure cannot determine the position of the leak on a segment of the tire based only on pressure data.
Claims 1-6 & 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the scope of enablement requirement. In Applicant' s case the breadth of the claims extends beyond the disclosure of receiving acceleration and by an acceleration sensor and determining a rotation angle of the tire based on the acceleration data, the disclosure cannot determine the position of the leak on a segment of the tire based only on pressure data.
There are many factors to be considered when determining whether there is sufficient evidence to support a determination that a disclosure does not satisfy the enablement requirement and whether any necessary experimentation is “undue.” In this case, the relevant Wand factors Examiner has considered are :
2164.01(a) Undue Experimentation Factors [R-01.2024]
(A) The breadth of the claims;
(B) The nature of the invention;
(C) The state of the prior art;
(D) The level of one of ordinary skill;
(E) The level of predictability in the art;
(F) The amount of direction provided by the inventor;
(G) The existence of working examples; and
(H) The quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure.
The disclosure does not provide working examples or indication determing a specific leakage location on a tire using processed pressure data alone. the inventor has reduced to practice at the time deriving receiving acceleration and by an acceleration sensor and determining a rotation angle of the tire based on the acceleration data, the disclosure cannot determine the position of the leak on a segment of the tire based only on pressure data. Absence of disclosure of locating on a tire a leakage location on the tire places the full scope of Claims 1-6 & 8-15 and over reaches the disclosed concept.
Claims1-6 & 8-15 therefore recites subject matter directed to the broadest level of a concept of leakage position determination on a tire.
Consistent with office policy, Examiner has weighed all the evidence for and against enablement of this invention and has concluded based on guidance provided by the MPEP and case law (including the Wands factors) that there is not enough evidence in favor of the scope of the enablement of this invention.
Applicant may submit factual affidavits under 37 CFR 1.132 or cite references to show what one skilled in the art knew at the time of filing the application. A declaration or affidavit is, itself, evidence that must be considered. The weight to give a declaration or affidavit will depend upon the amount of factual evidence the declaration or affidavit contains to support the conclusion of enablement. In re Buchner, 929 F.2d 660, 661, 18 USPQ2d 1331, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (“expert' s opinion on the ultimate legal conclusion must be supported by something more than a conclusory statement”); cf. In re Alton, 76 F.3d 1168, 1174, 37 USPQ2d 1578, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (declarations relating to the written description requirement should have been considered)”.
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.
Claims 1-15 are 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.
Claims 1 & 15 recites a preamble with method steps included “A method of determining a position of a leak in a tire fitted to a vehicle, which has a sensor unit having a tire pressure sensor for capturing tire pressure data of the tire, the method comprising:” Examiner suggests the “method comprising” cited before the step of using a sensor unit.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “receiving the tire pressure data by a processing device of the vehicle; determining….” where the determining steps should be configured to be performed by the processor ensuring processing steps are distinctly assessed to concrete subject matter.
Claims 1-4, 6-11 & 14-15 recite “a position of a leak in a tire” based on claim 1 & 15 citing the position is fitted to a vehicle. However, there are generally more than one tire on a vehicle and the position of leak seems to be directed to identifying the leaking tire(s) among the plurality of tires fitted on a vehicle.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak based on a suddenly occurring, consistent or substantially consistent tire pressure, for a predetermined period of time” where determining the position of the leak comprises monitoring tire pressure for a predetermined period of time, what is required by the cited relative terms are unclear “suddenly occurring, consistent or substantially consistent tire pressure”.
All dependent claims are rejected for their dependence on a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1-5 & 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Degenhardt (US 20220176758: “Degenhardt”) in view of Xie (CN 105539028: “Xie” translation provided for citations).
Claim 1. Degenhardt discloses a method of determining a position of a leak in a tire [0032-0033] fitted to a vehicle (112), which has a sensor unit (110) having a tire pressure sensor (110) for capturing tire pressure data of the tire [0035], the method comprising: receiving the tire pressure [0028] data by a processing device (130/1102) [0026] of the vehicle (112); determining a time analysis of the tire pressure of the tire (Figs. 3)[0035] based on the tire pressure data [0035]; and determining the position of the leak [0024: location of the tire where the leak is originating from] based on the time analysis of the tire pressure [0020: This slope may be indicative of a rate of change of the tire pressure over time for that particular tire. If the absolute value of a slope associated with one (or more) particular tire (if the tire is experiencing a leak, the slope will be negative) is above a threshold amount larger than the slopes associated with the other tires of the vehicle, then this may provide an indication that the tire is experiencing a slow leak]. Degenhardt does not explicitly disclose:
The time analysis is a time curve
Xie teaches the real-time tire pressure of the four tires is collected at predetermined intervals [0015]. Xie further teaches time analysis is a time curve (Fig. 4)[0075: Based on the real-time transmitted data, the curve is matched to generate a real-time tire pressure curve, as shown in Figure 4. If the curve changes and exceeds a certain limit, it can be determined that one or more tires have a slow leak].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Xie’s pressure curve expression of pressure time analysis to establish Degenhardt’s naming of time pressure analysis because the use of consistent terms improves system efficiency by committing to standard terms of the art of pressure processing.
Claim 2. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt further discloses determining the position of the leak [0024] comprises determining the position of the leak based on a suddenly occurring, consistent or substantially consistent tire pressure, for a predetermined period of time [0024].
Claim 3. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt further discloses determining the position of the leak [0024] comprises determining the position of the leak based on a gradient of the time curve of the tire pressure [0020: This slope (e.g. first derivative) may be indicative of a rate of change of the tire pressure over time for that particular tire. If the absolute value of a slope associated with one (or more) particular tire (if the tire is experiencing a leak, the slope will be negative) is above a threshold amount larger than the slopes associated with the other tires of the vehicle, then this may provide an indication that the tire is experiencing a slow leak] & [0035].
Claim 4. Dependent on the method according to Claim 3. Degenhardt further discloses determining a first derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure [0020], wherein determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak based on a curve of the first derivative over time [0020: This slope (e.g. first derivative) may be indicative of a rate of change of the tire pressure over time for that particular tire. If the absolute value of a slope associated with one (or more) particular tire (if the tire is experiencing a leak, the slope will be negative) is above a threshold amount larger than the slopes associated with the other tires of the vehicle, then this may provide an indication that the tire is experiencing a slow leak].
Claim 5. Dependent on the method according to Claim 4. Degenhardt further discloses the first derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure is equal to or virtually zero [0046: his may be why an average slope value that is closer to the zero point of the y-axis (for example, average slope 814)].
Claim 11. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt further discloses comprising determining a predetermined pressure drop of the tire pressure [0017], wherein determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak in response to determining the predetermined pressure drop of the tire pressure [0017-0019].
Claim 12. Dependent on the method according to Claim 11. Degenhardt further discloses the pressure drop comprises a comparison of a current tire pressure with a predetermined tire pressure threshold [0020] & [0019: If the inflation pressure drop rate is significantly higher than the average inflation pressure drop rate].
Claim 13. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt further discloses receiving tire temperature data from a tire temperature sensor of the tire [0022]; and determining temperature-normalized tire pressure data based on the tire temperature data and the tire pressure data, wherein determining the time curve comprises determining the time curve of the tire pressure of the tire based on the temperature-normalized tire pressure data [0022].
Claim 14. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt further discloses outputting a warning or indicating signal [0024: The alert may include any information that may be relevant to the user, such as the specific tire that is experiencing the slow leak, the rate of leak, a time until the tire pressure will reach a threshold tire pressure level, a location of the tire where the leak is originating from] which indicates the determined position of the leak [0003] & [0019].
Claim 15. Degenhardt further discloses tire pressure monitoring system (100) comprising: a sensor unit (110) comprising a tire pressure sensor (110) for capturing tire pressure data of a tire [0035] of a vehicle (102); and a processing device (130/1102)[0026] configured to receive the tire pressure data [0028], determine a time analysis of the tire pressure of the tire based on the tire pressure data [0020: This slope may be indicative of a rate of change of the tire pressure over time for that particular tire. If the absolute value of a slope associated with one (or more) particular tire (if the tire is experiencing a leak, the slope will be negative) is above a threshold amount larger than the slopes associated with the other tires of the vehicle, then this may provide an indication that the tire is experiencing a slow leak] and determine the position of the leak based on the time analysis of the tire pressure [0024]. Degenhardt does not explicitly disclose:
The time analysis is a time curve
Xie teaches the real-time tire pressure of the four tires is collected at predetermined intervals [0015]. Xie further teaches time analysis is a time curve (Fig. 4)[0075: Based on the real-time transmitted data, the curve is matched to generate a real-time tire pressure curve, as shown in Figure 4. If the curve changes and exceeds a certain limit, it can be determined that one or more tires have a slow leak].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Xie’s pressure curve expression of pressure time analysis to establish Degenhardt’s naming of time pressure analysis because the use of consistent terms improves system efficiency by committing to standard terms of the art of pressure processing.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Degenhardt in view of Xie and in further view of Brown (US 2006122747: “Brown”).
Claim 6. Dependent on the method according to Claim 5. Degenhardt, as modified, does not explicitly disclose:
characteristic feature is a global or local minimum value of the second derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure, and wherein the position of the leak is determined based on the global or local minimum value of the second derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure.
Brown teaches method for providing a warning when tire pressure experiences a very low leak rate or has been below a recommended pressure for a long time [0001]. Brown further discloses characteristic feature is a global or local minimum value of the second derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure [0019], and wherein the position of the leak (e.g. leak is present in tire) is determined based on the global or local minimum value of the second derivative over time of the time curve of the tire pressure [0027-0028].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Brown’s second derivative leak rate processing with Degenhardt’s, as modified, processing of tire pressure data because the leak rate processing improves the tire leak determination by improving accuracy of leakage determination for small leaks [Brown 0027].
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Degenhardt in view of Xie and in further view of Juzswik (US 8498759: “Juzswik”).
Claim 7. Degenhardt, as modified, does not explicitly disclose:
receiving acceleration data captured by an acceleration sensor ; and determining a rotation angle of the tire based on the acceleration data, wherein determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak based on the rotation angle.
Juzswick teaches systems for sensing tire conditions and displaying sensed tire condition information to a vehicle [Abstract]. Juzswick further teaches receiving acceleration data captured by an acceleration sensor (66) and determining a rotation angle of the tire based on the acceleration data (Fig. 10), wherein determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak based on the rotation angle [Col.9 lines 52-67 & Col. 10 lines 1-15].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Juzswik’s accelerometer and position processing tied to pressure measurements with Degenhardt’s, as modified, pressure measurement and leakage processing because the accelerometer provides improves accuracy in position processing with angular measurements tied to the pressure measurements [Col. 2 lines 8-35].
Claims 8-10. Dependent on the method according to Claim 1. Degenhardt, as modified, does not explicitly disclose:
determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak in relation to a position of the sensor unit or the tire pressure sensor and the position of the leak is correlated to a tire-fixed, one-dimensional, tire coordinate system, and wherein the position of the sensor unit or of the tire pressure sensor forms the origin of the tire coordinate system and where the tire coordinate system is scaled by subdividing the tire in the circumferential direction into multiple sections of a same size, and wherein the position of the leak is assigned to a section which corresponds to the position of the leak.
.
Juzswick teaches systems for sensing tire conditions and displaying sensed tire condition information to a vehicle [Abstract]. Juzswick further teaches determining the position of the leak comprises determining the position of the leak in relation to a position of the sensor unit (14, 16, 18 & 20) or the tire pressure sensor [Col.7 lines 13-20: When each tire condition signal is received, the vehicle-based receiver/controller 44 monitors the angular position of each of the four wheels as determined from each associated ABS wheel speed sensors 22, 24, 26, and 28. The tables 94 are the angle values in degrees for the four wheels as determined from the ABS wheel speed sensor signals each time an RF tire condition message is received. These angular values are stored in memory as the angle values that occurred when a message was received having a tire ID=S1] and the position of the leak is correlated to a tire-fixed, one-dimensional (Fig. 8), tire coordinate system, and wherein the position of the sensor unit (14, 16, 18 & 20) or of the tire pressure sensor forms the origin of the tire coordinate system [Col. 9: lines 50-67] and the tire coordinate system (Fig. 8) is scaled by subdividing the tire in the circumferential direction into multiple sections of a same size (Fig. 10: 60 degree sections) , and wherein the position of the leak is assigned to a section which corresponds to the position of the leak [Col.9 lines 52-67 & Col. 10 lines 1-15].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Juzswik’s accelerometer and position processing tied to pressure measurements with Degenhardt’s, as modified, pressure measurement and leakage processing because the accelerometer provides improves accuracy in position processing with angular measurements tied to the pressure measurements [Col. 2 lines 8-35].
Prior Art Considered but not Utilized
The prior art made of record and not relied upon and is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is provided in the following table:
Prior Art Document Identifier
Inventor
Comment
WO 2006090690
ICHIKAWA, HIROMITSU et al.
A pressure value detector detects the pressure value corresponding to an output signal from a pressure sensor
US 20040196149
Dufournier, Arnaud
device proposed allows to identify such advanced decays of the tire by discovering the appearance of characteristic signal
US 20200158591
DOKI; Yuichi et al.
A tire inspection device includes a gas sensor disposed outside of a tire
US 20190162621
Rousseau; Bruno
testing a calibrated leak or passage of pressurized gas from a tire
US 20130274988
REYNES; Jean-Luc
invention relates to a method for detecting air leakage in a tire, whether it be a fast leakage (in the case of burst tire for example) or a slow leakage (through diffusion of the air),
CN 203148636
LI, Cheng-min
l relates to tyre performance detecting technical field, especially claims a tightness detecting device for tyre.
CN 119502613
ELANGOVAN, VIVEKANANDH et al.
slow leakage detection system and method. The invention claims a sy
WO 2006090690
ICHIKAWA HIROMITSU et al.
determination method including a pressure sensor capable of measuring an internal pressure of a pneumatic tire
WO 2006090690
ICHIKAWA, HIROMITSU et al.
detecting gas leakage of vehicle tyre,
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Monica S Young whose telephone number is (303)297-4785. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-05:30 MST.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-273-2375. 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.
/MONICA S YOUNG/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights