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 § 103
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 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, 3-4, 16-19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manesh et al. (US 20110079335) (of record) and Lung et al. (US 20200376789) (of record).
Regarding claim 1, Manesh discloses a method of making a non-pneumatic tire, the method comprising: providing a tire structure including: a lower ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 20) having a first diameter, an upper ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 30) having a second diameter greater than the first diameter, the upper ring being substantially coaxial with the lower ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21), and a support structure (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 40) extending between the lower ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 20) and the upper ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 30) ([0065]-[0067]); providing a first disk and a second disk (Figs. 28, 29: 310) ([0120]-[0121]), each of the first and second disks having an upper diameter and a central opening defining a lower diameter (Fig. 28), and each of the first and second disks having a continuous solid surface extending from the upper diameter to the lower diameter (Fig. 28), wherein the upper diameter of the first disk is equal to the second diameter of the upper ring, and wherein the lower diameter of the first disk is equal to the first diameter of the lower ring ([0118]-[0119]: wherein the disk 310 can cover all the side of the interconnected web 40, and the interconnected web 40 is defined at its radially outermost by upper ring 30 and at its radially innermost by lower ring 20, and thereby a disk matching those rings must have the same diameter at its upper diameter as radially outermost upper ring 30 and at its lower diameter as radially innermost lower ring 20); securing the first disk directly to a first side of the tire structure ([0118]-[0121]); securing the second disk directly to a second side of the tire structure ([0118]-[0121]); and providing an elastomeric tread (Figs. 1-2: 70; see also Figs. 33, 33A, 34, 36, 36A, 37) circumferentially about a top of the upper ring (Figs. 1-2: 30).
Manesh discloses that the tire is cured ([0108]-[0110], [0125]). However, Manesh does not expressly recite: securing a curing envelope about the elastomeric tread, including the steps of securing a first end of the curing envelope to the first side of the tire structure at a location below the support structure and securing a second end of the curing envelope to the second side of the tire structure at a location below the support structure; and applying heat within the curing envelope.
Lung discloses a method of making a non-pneumatic tire, the method comprising: providing a tire structure including: a lower ring (Figs. 1, 2B, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 30) having a first diameter, an upper ring (Figs. 1, 2A, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 20) having a second diameter greater than the first diameter (Figs. 2A, 2B), the upper ring being substantially coaxial with the lower ring (Figs. 1, 2A, 3, 9A, 9B, 10), and a support structure (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 40) extending between the lower ring (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 30) and the upper ring (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 20); providing an elastomeric tread circumferentially about a top of the upper ring ([0002], [0044]-[0045], [0048]); securing a curing envelope (Fig. 10: 200) about the elastomeric tread ([0007], [0044]-[0045], [0048], [0072]), including the steps of securing a first end of the curing envelope to the first side of the tire structure at a location below the support structure and securing a second end of the curing envelope to the second side of the tire structure at a location below the support structure (Fig. 10: see how ends of curing bladder 200 extend around the tire structure to underneath the tire, including the support structure) ([0072]); and applying heat within the curing envelope ([0045]). In this manner, within the curing bladder its contents are exposed to a curing operation, where with the application of heat, the plurality of spokes are fixedly connected to each of the inner hub and outer band when the adhesive is vulcanized ([0072]). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to cure the non-pneumatic tire of Manesh using a generally known manner in the substantially similar art, such as the method taught by Lung, in order to fixedly connect the components of the tire during vulcanization.
Regarding claim 3, Lung further discloses the curing bladder (Fig. 10: 200) may be multiple pieces or a single piece ([0072]), and illustrates the first end of the curing envelope (Fig. 10: 200) may be secured to a lower surface of the lower ring (Fig. 10: 30, see how bladder 200 engages inner hub 30 with either the inner portion of a 2-piece structure, or if a 1-piece structure with just the ends of the 1-piece structure), and a second end of the curing envelope (Fig. 10: 200) may be secured to the lower surface of the lower ring (Fig. 10: 30, see how bladder 200 engages inner hub 30 with either the inner portion of a 2-piece structure, or if a 1-piece structure with just the ends of the 1-piece structure).
Regarding claim 4, Manesh further discloses mounting the tire structure on a rim ([0115], [0125]).
Regarding claim 16, Manesh discloses a method of making a non-pneumatic tire, the method comprising: providing a non-pneumatic tire structure (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21 20, 30, 40); providing a first disk and a second disk (Figs. 28, 29: 310), wherein each of the first and second disks has an upper diameter and a central opening defining a lower diameter (Figs. 28, 29), and wherein each of the first and second disks has a continuous solid surface extending from the upper diameter to the lower diameter (Figs. 28, 29); securing the first disk directly to a first side of the non-pneumatic tire structure ([0118]-[0121]); securing the second disk directly to a second side of the non-pneumatic tire structure ([0118]-[0121]); providing an elastomeric tread (Figs. 1-2: 70; see also Figs. 33, 33A, 34, 36, 36A, 37) circumferentially about a top of the non-pneumatic tire structure.
Manesh discloses that the tire is cured ([0108]-[0110], [0125]). However, Manesh does not expressly recite: securing a curing envelope about the elastomeric tread, including the steps of securing a first end of the curing envelope to the first side of the non-pneumatic tire structure and securing a second end of the curing envelope to the second side of the non-pneumatic tire structure; and applying heat within the curing envelope.
Lung discloses a method of making a non-pneumatic tire, the method comprising: providing a tire structure including: a lower ring (Figs. 1, 2B, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 30) having a first diameter, an upper ring (Figs. 1, 2A, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 20) having a second diameter greater than the first diameter (Figs. 2A, 2B), the upper ring being substantially coaxial with the lower ring (Figs. 1, 2A, 3, 9A, 9B, 10), and a support structure (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 40) extending between the lower ring (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 30) and the upper ring (Figs. 1, 2C, 3, 7, 8A, 9A, 9B, 10: 20); providing an elastomeric tread circumferentially about a top of the upper ring ([0002], [0044]-[0045], [0048]); securing a curing envelope (Fig. 10: 200) about the elastomeric tread ([0007], [0044]-[0045], [0048], [0072]), including the steps of securing a first end of the curing envelope to the first side of the non-pneumatic tire structure and securing a second end of the curing envelope to the second side of the non-pneumatic tire structure (Fig. 10: see how ends of curing bladder 200 extend around the tire structure to underneath the tire, including the support structure) ([0072]); and applying heat within the curing envelope ([0045]). In this manner, within the curing bladder its contents are exposed to a curing operation, where with the application of heat, the plurality of spokes are fixedly connected to each of the inner hub and outer band when the adhesive is vulcanized ([0072]). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to cure the non-pneumatic tire of Manesh using a generally known manner in the substantially similar art, such as the method taught by Lung, in order to fixedly connect the components of the tire during vulcanization.
Regarding claim 17, Lung further discloses applying pressure within the curing envelope ([0040], [0060]).
Regarding claim 18, Manesh further discloses mounting the non-pneumatic tire structure on a rim ([0115], [0125]).
Regarding claim 19, Manesh further discloses the non-pneumatic tire structure includes a lower ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 20) having a first diameter, an upper ring (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 30) having a second diameter greater than the first diameter, and a support structure (Figs. 1-10, 14-17, 19-21: 40) extending between the lower ring and the upper ring.
Regarding claim 21, Manesh further discloses the upper diameter of each of the first and second disks (Figs. 28, 29: 310) is equal to the second diameter of the upper ring, and wherein the lower diameter of the each of the first and second disks is equal to the first diameter of the lower ring ([0118]-[0119]: wherein the disk 310 can cover all the side of the interconnected web 40, and the interconnected web 40 is defined at its radially outermost by upper ring 30 and at its radially innermost by lower ring 20, and thereby a disk matching those rings must have the same diameter at its upper diameter as radially outermost upper ring 30 and at its lower diameter as radially innermost lower ring 20).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manesh et al. (US 20110079335) (of record) and Lung et al. (US 20200376789) (of record) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hill (US 4808256) (of record).
Regarding claim 2, modified Manesh does not expressly recite the securing of the curing envelope about the elastomeric tread includes securing each end of the curing envelope with an arc band.
Hill discloses a curing ring device that seals the curing envelope around the tire in its bead area with an annular pressure ring that engages the envelope around the bead ring (Figs. 3-4: 20) (Abstract). In this manner, there is no margin for error and thus no requirement for time consuming adjustments while the arc band presses firmly against the envelope in the tire bead area to provide an effective seal, and automatically stays closed and locked (Col. 4 lines 19-22). After curing, the arc band is quickly and easily removed without special tools or extra labor (Col. 4 lines 22-25). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to further modify Manesh in order to secure the curing envelope with an arc band as is generally known in the similar tire curing art, as taught by Hill for the advantages as discussed above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 9-12 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that when Lung is considered as a whole, it teaches away from the claimed invention. Applicant argues that the intended purpose of Lung is to form a non-pneumatic tire carcass with an inner hub, an outer band, and a plurality of spokes, and in order to do this Lung employs a forming apparatus, which Applicant goes on to explain forces and cures the spokes, inner hub, and outer band by forcing the components into a curing position and then wrapping a curing bladder around the forming apparatus and tire components to cure the tire carcass. Applicant argues the principle of operation of Lung is a forming apparatus with spoke supports that force spokes against the inner hub and outer band while the assembly is cured inside a curing bladder. Applicant further argues that claim 1 requires the disks to be directly secured to the sides of the tire structure, but that if such disks are directly secured to the tire structure, they would prevent spoke supports in a forming apparatus from extending through the spokes as Lung requires.
The examiner does not find it persuasive that Lung teaches away from using the disclosed curing envelope with other types of nonpneumatic tires, even those that do not require a forming apparatus to support the tire during curing. Nowhere in Lung’s disclosure does it teach or suggest that the curing bladder cannot be used without the forming apparatus or that the function and operation of the bladder would be affected if the forming apparatus were not provided. If Applicant disagrees and believes the curing envelop of Lung would absolutely not function or work to cure another nonpneumatic tire without the use of the forming apparatus, then a declaration may be provided. However, as it stands the examiner sees no reason why the curing envelope of Lung may not be wrapped around the nonpneumatic tire of Manesh in order to cure and fix the components of the tire without the use of a forming apparatus, nor does the examiner find it persuasive that Lung teaches away from a combination with Manesh. The examiner also notes that "the prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed.” MPEP 2141.02. In this case, Lung does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage using the curing bladder on a nonpneumatic tire without a forming apparatus.
In response to Applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). The rejection relies on Manesh, which discloses all of the claim limitations except the manner in which the nonpneumatic tire is cured, and Lung is merely relied upon to show that in the nonpneumatic tire art any generally known and desired curing envelope may be used to be wrapped around the nonpneumatic tire so as to seal and create a vacuum that will cure and fix the components within to each other. Applicant is arguing against Lung as if it were relied upon as the primary reference and was being modified to include the claimed structure. However, Manesh already discloses the claimed structure, and Lung merely discloses a known method of curing the claimed structure. Accordingly, Lung does not need to be modified to have the claimed structure, and Applicant has not provided arguments as to why Manesh could not be modified in view of Lung so as to provide the curing of the nonpneumatic tire with a known method in the substantially similar art. Instead, Applicant has only argued against modifications to Lung, which was not discussed or relied upon in the rejection.
Furthermore, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Manesh discloses a nonpneumatic tire having the claimed structure that is to be cured, and Lung discloses curing a nonpneumatic tire using a curing envelope in order to fixedly connect the components of the tire during vulcanization by creating a seal of the components from the outside atmosphere and a vacuum for curing. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious that the curing of the nonpneumatic tire of Manesh could be performed using a known technique in the art, such as the curing envelope of Lung for the advantages discussed above.
On pages 12-13 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that it is the Office’s position that it would have been obvious to employ only the curing bladder of Lung, and not the forming apparatus, to make the tire of Manesh, but that Lung never suggests the curing bladder could be used without the forming apparatus. Applicant argues the forming apparatus is integral to the invention of Lung and the proposed modification would render it unsatisfactory for its intended purpose and would change its principle of operation.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As was discussed in the previous Office Action and the detailed rejection above, as well as Applicant’s acknowledgement in the Remarks, it would have been obvious to employ only the curing bladder of Lung, and not the forming apparatus, to cure the tire of Manesh. Manesh discloses all of the claim limitations of the nonpneumatic tire, including directly securing the first disk to the first side and the second disk to the second side, as well as curing the nonpneumatic tire. However, Manesh does not expressly how the nonpneumatic tire is being cured. Lung discloses a method of curing a nonpneumatic tire, wherein the nonpneumatic tire is wrapped with a curing bladder/envelope and cured. In other words, Lung discloses a generally known method of curing in the nonpneumatic tire art that would have been applicable to and advantageous for the nonpneumatic tire of Manesh as well. Furthermore, Applicant argues that Lung never suggests the curing bladder could be used without the forming apparatus. However, Lung discloses that a curing bladder is optionally used to create a seal separating the nonpneumatic assembly within the bladder and other contents within from the surrounding atmosphere, and that the curing bladder may be any known desired curing bladder ([0072]). Lung further discloses that, once installed, a vacuum is created within the curing bladder to evacuate substantially all the gas or air within the curing bladder, which includes gas or air contained within the curing assembly, and the curing bladder within its contents is exposed to a curing operation, where with the application of heat, the plurality of spokes are fixedly connected to each of the inner hub and outer band when the adhesive is vulcanized ([0072]). In other words, the curing bladder is a generally known method of curing in the art that may be used for a nonpneumatic tire, wherein all that the curing bladder is doing is creating a seal and vacuum within so that the components that are to be fixed to one another are cured. The examiner does not find it persuasive that said curing bladder cannot also be used for the nonpneumatic tire that is to be cured to fix components to one another in Manesh just because there is no forming apparatus disclosed in Manesh. Moreover, the examiner notes that Manesh is the primary reference that discloses that nonpneumatic comprising all of the claimed structure and that Lung is relied on as a secondary reference to merely teach wrapping a nonpneumatic tire with a curing envelope so as to seal it and create a vacuum for curing and fixing the components within. Even if Lung discloses the inclusion of a forming apparatus to support the tire components during curing and Manesh does not, it is not clear why Applicant argues the mere step of using the curing envelope on the tire of Manesh without the additional forming apparatus would not function, especially since Lung does not appear to disclose that the curing envelope requires the forming apparatus to function in some way or that they are inseparably connected to function. Instead, Lung merely discloses wrapping the bladder around the forming apparatus and the tire and creating a seal and vacuum around the entire structure within. Additionally, the intended purpose and principle of operation of Lung is not being affected as the examiner is not suggesting modifying Lung, but instead is merely relying on a general and optional teaching of Lung to provide a curing envelope for the nonpneumatic tire during curing of Manesh.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEDEF PAQUETTE whose telephone number is (571) 272-5031. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST - 4:00 PM EST.
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 on (571) 270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. The fax phone number for the examiner is (571) 273-5031.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SEDEF E PAQUETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights