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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/06/2024 and
04/29/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, each IDS is being considered by the examiner.
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Response to Amendments
This Office Action is in response to applicant's preliminary amendments filed on 02/06/2024. Examiner has acknowledged and reviewed applicant's addition of new claims 16 – 30, and the cancellation of previously presented claims 1 - 15. Examiner has reviewed newly added claims 16 – 30, and those claims do not constitute new matter issues.
Drawing Objections
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because no numerical values are presented on both the horizontal and vertical axes of Figures 2 - 5 and 6A; on the vertical axis of Figure 6b; and on the horizontal axis of Figure 7. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because “Figure for the abstract. Fig. 1” is presented as a separate line at the end of the abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 26 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form. Claim 26 is dependent upon cancelled claim 10. Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(i).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are at least a second variable as defined by “bijective function” as cited in the next-to-the-last line of the claim.
Dictionary.com defines bijective as an adjective that means
“maths (of a function, relation, etc.) associating two sets in such a way that every member of each set is uniquely paired with a member of the other. Example: mapping from the set of married men to the set of married women is bijective in a monogamous society"
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 16 - 22, 26 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 14 – 18, 20 – 22 of copending Application No. 18/681,555 (reference application), in view of Alff (WO 2021136892 A1), hereafter referred to as “Alff 892”. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the table below presents a comparison between the claim limitations of the instant application with corresponding claim limitations of the reference application. The bold-faced type identifies claim limitation language which is common to both the instant application and the reference application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Application No. 18/681,555
Instant Claim
14. A method for ascertaining a deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load when mounted on a wheel so as to constitute a pneumatic mounted assembly in rolling state with rotation speed W, the tire casing having a crown, intended to be in contact with a ground, and in revolution about a natural rotational axis, comprising the following steps:
fastening at least one sensor to the tire casing at the crown of the tire casing so as to generate at least one output signal sensitive to acceleration, in a direction normal to the crown, applied to the at least one sensor in the tire casing;
acquiring (201) at least one first temporal signal Sig comprising at least an amplitude of the at least one output signal while rolling;
delimiting the first signal Sig over a number N.sup.TdR of wheel turns so as to construct a wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR, N.sup.TdR being greater than 1;
determining at least one reference speed W.sup.reference (202) associated with at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR;
normalizing (203) the at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR by a variable which is a function F proportional to a square of the reference speed W.sup.reference, over a number of wheel turns N′.sup.TdR, N′.sup.TdR being greater than or equal to 1;
angularly resampling (204) the at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR;
defining at least one first energy density S (205) from the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR, S+ when the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR is greater than a threshold A or S− when the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR is less than or equal to the threshold A; and
identifying a deformation Def % (206) of the tire casing as a function G of the at least one first energy density S.
16. (New) A method for ascertaining a load applied to a tire casing when mounted on a wheel SO as to constitute a pneumatic mounted assembly in rolling state with rotation speed W, the tire casing having a crown in contact with a ground and in revolution about a natural rotational axis, the method comprising the following steps:
fastening at least one sensor to the tire casing at the crown of the tire casing so as to generate at least one output signal sensitive to acceleration, in a direction normal to the crown, applied to the sensor in the tire casing;
acquiring at least one first temporal signal Sig comprising at least an amplitude of the at least one output signal while rolling;
delimiting the first signal Sig over a number Nᵀᵈʳ of wheel turns so as to construct a wheel-turn signal SigᵀᵈR, wherein Nᵀᵈʳ is greater than 1;
determining at least one reference speed Wreference associated with at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal SigᵀᵈR;
normalizing the at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal SigᵀᵈR by a variable which is a function F proportional to a square of the reference speed Wreference , over a number of wheel turns Nᵀᵈ, wherein Nᵀᵈʳ is greater than or equal to 1;
angularly resampling the at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR;
defining at least one energy density S from the at least one angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR by means of a threshold A or, if an angular pitch is fixed, at least one spectral variable from a spectral signal spect(Sig) of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR;
identifying a deformation Def% of the tire casing as a function G of the at least one first energy density S or the at least one spectral variable; and
defining a load Z applied to the mounted assembly by means of a bijective function H comprising at least, as a variable, the deformation Def% of the tire casing.
15. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14,
wherein the step of determining the reference speed W.sup.reference (202) consists of establishing a ratio of an angular variation to a temporal duration separating two azimuthal positions of the at least one sensor in the tire casing around the natural rotational axis, from the first signal Sig or from a signal in phase with the first signal Sig, according to the following formula:
WReference=Δ(α)Δ(t)
[Math1]
wherein α is an angular position and t is a temporal abscissa associated with the angular position.
17. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 16,
wherein the step of determining the reference speed W.sup.reference consists of establishing a ratio of an angular variation to a temporal duration separating two azimuthal positions of the at least one sensor in the tire casing around the natural rotational axis, from the first signal Sig or from a signal in phase with the first signal Sig, according to the following formula:
WReference = (α) (t)'
[Math 1]
wherein α is an angular position and t is a temporal abscissa associated with the angular position.
16. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14, wherein an angular pitch is less than 18 degrees.
18. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 16, wherein the angular pitch is less than 18 degrees.
17. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14, further comprising a step of aggregating data from the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR over at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR, the at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR becoming the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR.
19. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 16, further comprising a step of aggregating data from the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal SigᵀDR over at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal SigᵀDR, the at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sigᵀ becoming the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR.
18. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 17, wherein the at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR is one wheel turn.
20. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 19, wherein the at least one sub-portion of the at least one portion of the wheel-turn signal Sigᵀ is an integral multiple of the wheel turn.
20. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14, wherein having phased the first signal Sig with respect to an angular position of the tire casing, a correction Corr is made to the first signal Sig to take account of an effect of terrestrial gravity before the normalization step.
21. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 16, wherein having phased the first signal Sig with respect to an angular position of the tire casing, a correction Corr is made to the first signal Sig to take account of an effect of terrestrial gravity before the normalization step.
21. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14, further comprising a step of filtering the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal Sig.sup.TdR.
22. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 16, further comprising a step of filtering the at least one portion of the angularly resampled normalized wheel-turn signal SigTDR
22. The method for ascertaining the deformation of a tire casing subjected to a load according to claim 14, wherein the threshold A is between 0.5 and 0.9.
26. (New) The method for ascertaining the load applied to a tire casing according to claim 10, wherein the threshold A is between 0.5 and 0.9.
Regarding instant claim 16, claim 14 of the reference application does not disclose the limitation:
“defining a load Z applied to the mounted assembly by means of a bijective function H comprising at least, as a variable, the deformation Def% of the tire casing.”
However, regarding instant claim 16, Alff ”892” teaches (in the English translation; last paragraph on page 3, and the first line of the first paragraph of page 4):
“Finally, the method determines the load Z that the measured assembly undergoes, and consequently the load Z which is subjected to the pneumatic casing when the wheel is considered to be rigid with respect to the pneumatic casing, to using a bijective function F linking the load Z to the deformation of the pneumatic casing Def.sub.%."
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant filed for the invention, that a method for ascertaining a load applied to a tire casing when mounted on a wheel so as to constitute a pneumatic mounted assembly in rolling state with rotation speed W, the tire casing having a crown in contact with a ground and in revolution about a natural rotational axis, the method comprising a combination of steps as claimed claim 16 of the instant application, for the method can be modified with the addition of a last step comprising the use of a bijective function F linking the load Z to the deformation of the pneumatic casing Def.sub.%, as taught by Alff “892”, for the method to effectuate a more accurate determination of a load imposed on a tire pneumatic casing as function of the deformation of the tire pneumatic casing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 - 25, 28 - 30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding 23 - 25, 28 - 30, the prior art made of record neither shows nor suggests the claimed limitations.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WARREN K FENWICK whose telephone number is (571)270-3040. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Friday.
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, Walter L. Lindsay, Jr. can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
WKF