TIRE

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 . 1) 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. 2) 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. 3) Claims 1, 4 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Europe 129 (EP 3,872,129) in view of Europe 338 (EP 500,338), Miyazaki (US 2014/0228495), Komori et al (US 2022/0251347 or WO 2020/261874) and Japan 017 (JP 2005-082017) and optionally Europe 639 (EP 4,056,639). Europe 129 discloses a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE comprising a cap tread, base tread and a breaker wherein the cap tread comprising a rubber composition comprising silica which one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate from Komori et al, has an ash content well within the claimed range of 7.5% by mass or more. Europe 338 teaches a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE comprising a tread having an acetone extraction amount less or equal to 15% (e.g. 10.2% or 9.9%) so that the tire has low rolling resistance. Miyazaki discloses a KNOWN BREAKER comprising breaker topping rubber for a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE wherein the breaker topping rubber comprises at most 4.0 parts oil, which one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate from Europe 338 and optional Europe 639 has a low acetone extraction amount. Japan 017 teaches a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE comprising a cap tread and base tread wherein the volume of the base tread should be 10 to 50% volume of the cap tread to improve rolling resistance, suppress heat generation and enhance high speed durability. Europe 129 discloses a rubber composition for a tread (cap tread) of a pneumatic passenger tire comprising: 75.63 parts styrene butadiene rubber, 35 parts natural rubber, 10 parts butadiene rubber, 5 parts carbon black, 105 parts silica, 5 parts ester plasticizer, 10 parts resin, 3 parts liquid polymer, 10 parts oil. See EXAMPLE 2-1, paragraphs 201, 205. In EXAMPLE 2-1, a ratio of [resin + liquid polymer] / [oil + ester plasticizer] = 0.86 [(10+3)/(10+5) = 0.86]. Europe 129 teaches using isoprene based rubber, polybutadiene rubber and/or styrene butadiene rubber (e.g. 5 to 80% isoprene based rubber (e.g. natural rubber), 5 to 80% polybutadiene rubber and 20 to 90% by mass styrene butadiene rubber), [paragraphs 30, 45, 47]. Europe 129 teaches using 0.5 parts or more ester plasticizer, 5 parts or more resin, 1 parts or more liquid polymer, 5 parts or more oil and 0.1 parts or more sulfur in the tread cap rubber [paragraphs 78, 97, 105, 118, 169, EXAMPLE 2-1]. Europe 129 teaches using 70 to 140 parts silica; the tread thereby being a silica rich tread. The tire has improved overall performance in terms of high temperature grip performance and low temperature grip performance. Europe 129 is silent as composition of breaker topping rubber. As to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire with a belt (breaker) such that an average value of acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber having 5 parts or more of oil (e.g. 10 parts oil) is 12.0% by mass or less and a difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of belt coating rubber (breaker topping rubber) is 7.0% by mass or less since: (1) Europe 338, directed to a tread for a pneumatic passenger tire, teaches providing the tread such that acetone extraction amount of the tread is less than or equal to 15% [e.g. 10.2% acetone extraction amount (12 parts oil), 5.5% acetone extraction amount (zero parts oil) or 9.9% acetone extraction amount (12 parts oil)] to improve rolling resistance [EXAMPLE 2, page 2 lines 53-58, page 3 lines 1-4], (2) Miyazaki teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger size 195/65R15) having a tread and breaker (belt) such that the breaker topping for the belt comprises an isoprene-based rubber; a phenol resin and/or an alkylphenol resin; and a partial condensate of HMMM and/or a partial condensate of HMMPME, wherein the breaker topping rubber comprises an amount of the isoprene-based rubber being 60% by mass or higher per 100% by mass of the rubber component, a combined amount of the phenol resin and the alkylphenol resin being 2 to 3.9 parts by mass, a combined amount of the partial condensate of HMMM and the partial condensate of HMMPME being 0.5 to 5 parts by mass, 10 to 70 parts carbon black, at most 15 parts silica, and 2 to 8 parts sulfur each per 100 parts by mass of the rubber component, and a total oil content of at most 4.0 parts by mass to obtain balanced improvement in handling stability, fuel economy, durability, ride quality and adhesion and optionally (3) Europe 639, directed to a pneumatic passenger tire having a silica rich tread teaches providing the tread with an acetone extraction amount of 7% by mass and ash content of 32% by mass [EXAMPLE 1-1]. Hence, Europe 338 provides ample motivation (improved rolling resistance) to provide Europe 129’s tread with an acetone extraction amount 12% by mass or less. Since Europe 129 teaches a pneumatic passenger tire comprising a tread (cap tread and base tread) and a breaker and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber which is suitable for a pneumatic passenger tire (tire size 195/65R15), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Miyazaki's known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber for Europe 129's pneumatic passenger tire. In view of the difference in amount of added oil in the tread rubber and added oil in the breaker topping rubber suggested by the applied prior art (Europe 129 and Miyazaki), there is a reasonable basis to conclude that Europe 129’s tire as modified by the secondary art satisfies the claimed difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of belt coating rubber (breaker topping rubber) being 7.0% by mass or less. The evidence of record (e.g. Europe 338) shows that acetone extraction amount is low when amount oil is low and that acetone extraction amount is high when a large amount of oil is used. FOR EXAMPLE: Example 3 of Europe 338, which comprises 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 3 parts zinc white, 1 part vulcanizing accelerator, 1.75 parts sulfur but no oil, has an acetone extraction amount of 5.5% WHEREAS Example 1 of Europe 338, which comprises 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 3 parts zinc white, 1 part vulcanizing accelerator, 1.75 parts sulfur and 45 parts oil has an acetone extraction amount of 21.5%. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Example 1-1 of optional Europe 639, which comprises 10 parts functionalized resin, 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 2 parts zinc oxide, 4 parts vulcanization accelerator, 1.5 parts sulfur, but no oil has acetone extraction amount of 7% WHEREAS Example 1-3 of optional Europe 639, which comprises 10 parts functionalized resin, 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 2 parts zinc oxide, 4 parts vulcanization accelerator, 1.5 parts sulfur, and 30 parts oil has acetone extraction amount of 15%. Thus, Europe 338 teaches that the acetone extraction amount of Europe 129's cap tread should within the claimed range of at most 12% to obtain the expected and predictable benefit of reduced rolling resistance and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker topping rubber, which one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate has a low acetone extraction amount such that the claimed difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of breaker topping rubber being 7.0% by mass or less is rendered obvious. As to claim 1 (ash content), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s tire such that an average value of ash contents of the tread rubber is 7.5% by mass or more since (1) Europe 129 discloses a silica rich tread comprising 70 to 140 parts silica and (2) Komori et al, directed to a pneumatic tire (passenger size 195/65R15) having a silica rich tread (90 to 200 parts silica) teaches that ash components are derived from silica [paragraphs 8, 24] and discloses a rubber composition for a tread comprising 100 parts silica and having an ash content of 38.34% [EXAMPLE 1]. As to claims 1 and 14 (thickness), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129's pneumatic passenger tire such that the tread comprises a cap rubber layer and at least one other rubber layer wherein a thickness of the cap rubber layer constituting a tread surface relative to a total thickness of the tread is 20% or more [claim 1], the thickness of the cap rubber layer constituting a tread surface relative to the total thickness of the tread is 20% or more and less than 100% [claim 14] since (1) Europe 129 teaches a pneumatic passenger tire having a tread comprising a cap tread and a base tread (other rubber layer) [paragraphs 201-205] and (2) Japan 017 teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger size 225/50R17) having a tread comprising a cap tread and a base tread such that the base tread has tan delta = 0.03 to 0.18 at 60oC, under groove thickness t = 3.0 mm to 8.0 mm and volume of base tread is 10 to 50% volume of entire tire wherein FIGURE 1 illustrate a thickness of the cap tread being 20% or more than a total thickness of the tread to improve rolling resistance, suppress heat generation, enhance high speed durability and improve riding comfort [FIGURE 1, machine translation]. As to claim 4, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129's pneumatic passenger tire such that a rubber component constituting the cap rubber layer comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an isoprene based rubber, a styrene based rubber and a butadiene based rubber, wherein a rubber composition constituting the cap rubber layer contains 5 parts by mass or more and 100 parts by mass or less of a plasticizer based on 100 parts by mass of the rubber component, wherein the rubber composition constituting the cap rubber layer comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of a resin component and a liquid polymer, and a mass content ratio of the resin component and the liquid polymer to oil and an ester-based plasticizer in the rubber composition constituting the cap rubber layer is 0.5 or more and 20 or less since (1) Europe 129 teaches using isoprene based rubber, polybutadiene rubber and/or styrene butadiene rubber as the rubber component of the tread rubber [paragraph 30] and (2) Europe 129 teaches using 0.5 parts or more such as 5 parts ester plasticizer, 5 parts or more resin and 1 parts or more liquid polymer and 5 parts or more oil in the tread cap rubber [paragraphs 78, 97, 105 and 118, EXAMPLE 2-1] wherein, for example, a ratio of [resin + liquid polymer] / [oil + ester plasticizer] = 0.86 [(10+3)/(10+5) = 0.86]. This value of 0.86 falls within the claimed range of 0.5 or more and 20 or less. As to claims 12 and 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire with a belt (breaker) such that an average value of acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber having 5 parts or more of oil (e.g. 10 parts oil) is 3.0% by mass or more and 12.0% by mass or less [claim 12], and a difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of belt coating rubber (breaker topping rubber) is 1.0% by mass or more and 7.0% by mass or less [claim 13] since: (1) Europe 338, directed to a tread for a pneumatic passenger tire, teaches providing the tread such that acetone extraction amount of the tread is less than or equal to 15% [e.g. 10.2% acetone extraction amount (12 parts oil), 5.5% acetone extraction amount (zero parts oil) or 9.9% acetone extraction amount (12 parts oil)] to improve rolling resistance [EXAMPLE 2, page 2 lines 53-58, page 3 lines 1-4], (2) Miyazaki teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger size 195/65R15) having a tread and breaker (belt) such that the breaker topping for the belt comprises an isoprene-based rubber; a phenol resin and/or an alkylphenol resin; and a partial condensate of HMMM and/or a partial condensate of HMMPME, wherein the breaker topping rubber comprises an amount of the isoprene-based rubber being 60% by mass or higher per 100% by mass of the rubber component, a combined amount of the phenol resin and the alkylphenol resin being 2 to 3.9 parts by mass, a combined amount of the partial condensate of HMMM and the partial condensate of HMMPME being 0.5 to 5 parts by mass, 10 to 70 parts carbon black, at most 15 parts silica, and 2 to 8 parts sulfur each per 100 parts by mass of the rubber component, and a total oil content of at most 4.0 parts by mass to obtain balanced improvement in handling stability, fuel economy, durability, ride quality and adhesion and optionally (3) Europe 639, directed to a pneumatic passenger tire having a silica rich tread teaches providing the tread with an acetone extraction amount of 7% by mass and ash content of 32% by mass [EXAMPLE 1-1]. With respect to claims 12 and 13, Europe 338 teaches that the acetone extraction amount of Europe 129's cap tread should within the claimed range of 3.0% by mass or more and at most 12% to obtain the expected and predictable benefit of reduced rolling resistance and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker topping rubber, which one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate has a low acetone extraction amount such that the claimed difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of breaker topping rubber being 1.0% by mass or more and 7.0% by mass or less is rendered obvious. 4) Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Europe 129 (EP 3,872,129) in view of Europe 338 (EP 500,338), Miyazaki (US 2014/0228495), Komori et al (US 2022/0251347 or WO 2020/261874) and Japan 017 (JP 2005-082017) and optionally Europe 639 (EP 4,056,639) as applied above and further in view of Kitago et al (US 2022/0017729 or WO 2020/100492) or Nakamura (US 2021/0332221). As to claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire such that a rate of change in Shore hardness of the cap rubber layer (tread) after being left to stand at 80oC for two months is -10% or more and 10% or less since (1) Kitago et al teaches providing a pneumatic tire for a passenger vehicle having a tread such that the tread comprises a RUBBER COMPOSITION comprising rubber component and 30 to 150 parts (e.g. 60 parts) silica and such that the tread has reduced change in hardness over time and has a heat changing index of 10 or less (preferably 3 or less or 1 or less) to prevent decrease in grip performance and obtain required durability wherein heat changing index is [(hardness of rubber after heat treatment) - (hardness of rubber before heat treatment)] / (hardness of rubber compound before heat treatment) x 100] and wherein heat treatment involves allowing the rubber composition to stand at a temperature of 90oC and an oxygen concentration of 20% for 336 hours [paragraphs 7-11, 27-41, 120-121, 132-133, EXAMPLES 1-9, 12-16] or (2) Nakamura teaches providing a pneumatic tire for a passenger vehicle having a tread such that the tread comprises a RUBBER COMPOSITION comprising a rubber component and 5 to 80 parts (e.g. 40 parts) silica and such that the tread has change in hardness after heat aging being less than or equal to 3 so that the tire has required grip performance and excellent abrasion resistance wherein heat aging is performed under 100oC for 96 hours [paragraph 14-15, 20, 22-23, 30-32, 45-46, 51-52, 61-62, 128, EXAMPLES 4-1 to 4-4]. 5) Claim 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Europe 129 (EP 3,872,129) in view of Europe 338 (EP 500,338), Miyazaki (US 2014/0228495), Komori et al (US 2022/0251347 or WO 2020/261874) and Japan 017 (JP 2005-082017) and optionally Europe 639 (EP 4,056,639); and further in view of Kitago et al (US 2022/0017729 or WO 2020/100492) or Nakamura (US 2021/0332221) as applied above and further in view of Piffard et al (US 2014/0251519). As to claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire such that a shore hardness of the cap rubber layer (tread) is 55 to 70 since Piffard et al teaches providing a pneumatic passenger tire such that the tread has a glass transition temperature of -40oC to -15oC (e.g. Tg = -14oC, hardness = 59 / Tg=-21oC, hardness = 57 / Tg = -31oC, hardness = 57) to break compromise between dry and snow traction; the high Tg tread improving dry traction. 6) Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Europe 129 (EP 3,872,129) in view of Europe 338 (EP 500,338), Miyazaki (US 2014/0228495), Komori et al (US 2022/0251347 or WO 2020/261874) and Japan 017 (JP 2005-082017) and optionally Europe 639 (EP 4,056,639); and further in view of Kitago et al (US 2022/0017729 or WO 2020/100492) or Nakamura (US 2021/0332221); and further in view of Piffard et al (US 2014/0251519) as applied above and further in view of Hashimoto et al (US 2019/0168542). As to claims 8 and 9, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire such that tan delta of the cap rubber layer (tread) at 30oC is 0.30 or less [claim 8], modulus E* at 0oC of the cap rubber layer is 5.0 MPa or more [claim 9] since Hashimoto et al teaches providing a pneumatic passenger tire such that the tread has modulus E’ at 0oC = 3-20 MPa (e.g. 10.03MPa), tan delta at 0oC = 0.15 to 0.50 (e.g. 0.174) and tan delta at 30oC = 0.1 to 0.4 (e.g. 0.129) to suppress worsening or rolling resistance and improve grounding property of the tread to greatly improve steering stability of the tire on dry and wet road surfaces [paragraphs 49-50, 54, EXAMPLE E]. It is noted that E* = E’ + iE’’ and tan delta = E’’/E’. As to claim 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic passenger tire such that a glass transition temperature of the cap rubber layer (tread) is -40oC or higher since Piffard et al teaches providing a pneumatic passenger tire such that the tread has a glass transition temperature of -40oC to -15oC (e.g. Tg = -14oC, hardness = 59 / Tg=-21oC, hardness = 57 / Tg = -31oC, hardness = 57) to break compromise between dry and snow traction; the high Tg tread improving dry traction. As to claim 11, Europe 129 discloses a pneumatic passenger tire. Remarks 7) Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4 and 8-14 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection and the reasons presented therein. Applicant's arguments filed 2-5-26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to applicant's description in the response filed 2-5-26 of the interview on 1-20-26, examiner comments: INTERVIEW RECORD OK. Applicant argues that the 103 rejection appears to be based on the assumption that the only component of the tread rubber and the breaker topping rubber extracted by acetone is oil. FIRST: Applicant is incorrect since none of the rejections are based on a finding that composition having zero parts oil has acetone extraction amount equal to 0%. SECOND: Europe 338 motivates one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129's pneumatic tire such that acetone extraction amount of the rubber composition of the tread is 12.0% by mass or less to obtain the expected and predictable benefit of improving rolling resistance. THIRD: Since Europe 129 teaches a pneumatic passenger tire comprising a tread (cap tread and base tread) and a breaker and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber which is suitable for a pneumatic passenger tire (tire size 195/65R15), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Miyazaki's known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber for Europe 129's pneumatic passenger tire. In view of the difference in amount of added oil in the tread rubber and added oil in the breaker topping rubber suggested by the applied prior art (Europe 129 and Miyazaki), there is a reasonable basis to conclude that Europe 129’s tire as modified by the secondary art satisfies the claimed difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of belt coating rubber (breaker topping rubber) being 7.0% by mass or less. The evidence of record (e.g. Europe 338) shows that acetone extraction amount is low when amount oil is low and that acetone extraction amount is high when a large amount of oil is used. FOR EXAMPLE: Example 3 of Europe 338, which comprises 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 3 parts zinc white, 1 part vulcanizing accelerator, 1.75 parts sulfur but no oil, has an acetone extraction amount of 5.5% WHEREAS Example 1 of Europe 338, which comprises 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 3 parts zinc white, 1 part vulcanizing accelerator, 1.75 parts sulfur and 45 parts oil has an acetone extraction amount of 21.5%. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Example 1-1 of optional Europe 639, which comprises 10 parts functionalized resin, 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 2 parts zinc oxide, 4 parts vulcanization accelerator, 1.5 parts sulfur, but no oil has acetone extraction amount of 7% WHEREAS Example 1-3 of optional Europe 639, which comprises 10 parts functionalized resin, 2 parts wax, 2 parts antioxidant, 2 parts stearic acid, 2 parts zinc oxide, 4 parts vulcanization accelerator, 1.5 parts sulfur, and 30 parts oil has acetone extraction amount of 15%. Thus, Europe 338 teaches that the acetone extraction amount of Europe 129's cap tread should within the claimed range of at most 12% to obtain the expected and predictable benefit of reduced rolling resistance and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker topping rubber, which one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate has a low acetone extraction amount such that the claimed difference between average value of the acetone extraction amounts of the tread rubber and an acetone extraction amount of breaker topping rubber being 7.0% by mass or less is rendered obvious. Applicant argues that during acetone extraction, not only unreacted sulfur but also plasticizers, waxes, oils, resins, and certain additives are typically extracted. This argument is ambiguous and are thereby not persuasive since this argument fails to quantify amount extracted by acetone from components other than oil in rubber composition. Applicant argues that there is no reason to combine Europe 129 with Europe 338, Miyazaki, Komori and Europe 639 in the manner suggested. This argument is not persuasive. Europe 129 discloses a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE comprising a cap tread, base tread and a breaker wherein the cap tread comprising a rubber composition comprising silica which one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate from Komori et al, has an ash content well within the claimed range of 7.5% by mass or more. Europe 338 teaches a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE comprising a tread having an acetone extraction amount less or equal to 15% (e.g. 10.2% or 9.9%) so that the tire has low rolling resistance. Europe 338 provides ample motivation (improved rolling resistance) to provide Europe 129’s tread with an acetone extraction amount 12% by mass or less. Since Europe 129 teaches a pneumatic passenger tire comprising a tread (cap tread and base tread) and a breaker and Miyazaki discloses a known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber which is suitable for a pneumatic passenger tire (tire size 195/65R15), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use Miyazaki's known breaker with a specified breaker topping rubber for Europe 129's pneumatic passenger tire. Miyazaki discloses a KNOWN BREAKER comprising breaker topping rubber for a PNEUMATIC PASSENGER TIRE wherein the breaker topping rubber comprises at most 4.0 parts oil, which one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate from Europe 338 and optional Europe 639 has a low acetone extraction amount. Applicant that Europe 338 (EP 500338) is unsuitable as a secondary reference because it contains no disclosure of silica (reinforcing filler). This argument is not persuasive since Europe 129 (EP 3872129) and Europe 338 (EP 500338) are both directed to pneumatic passenger tires and the same structure of a tread comprising rubber component, reinforcing filler, oil, wax, antioxidant, stearic acid, zinc oxide, sulfur and vulcanization accelerator. Examiner further commented that Europe 338 motivates one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Europe 129’s pneumatic tire such that the tread has an acetone extraction amount less than 12% (e.g. 10.2%) so that the passenger tire has expected and predictable benefit of improved rolling resistance. Applicant’s arguments regarding unexpected results are not persuasive. FIRST: The results in the specification are not commensurate in scope with claims 1-4 and 8-14 since the results in the specification are for specific rubber composition whereas claims 1-4 and 8-14 fail to require such a rubber composition. Examiner noted that there is no evidence showing unexpected results for a tread composition not comprising natural rubber, styrene butadiene rubber, butadiene rubber, carbon black, silica, oil and either liquid polymer of resin. SECOND: The results in the specification are not commensurate in scope with claims 1-4 and 8-14 since the results in the specification are for a tire comprising a base tread having an acetone extraction amount of 7.2 to 16.4% whereas claims 1-4 and 8-14 fail to limit the acetone extraction amount of the at least one other rubber layer. In other words, claims 1-4 and 8-14 read on the claimed at least one other rubber layer (e.g. a base tread layer) having an acetone extraction amount less than 7% or greater than 17% and it would be speculation to conclude that the results described in the specification are obtained when the at least one other rubber layer (e.g. a base tread layer) has an acetone extraction amount less than 7% or greater than 17%. 8) No claim is allowed. 9) 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. 10) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN D MAKI whose telephone number is (571)272-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM. 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 B Smith (Whatley) 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. /STEVEN D MAKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 September 24, 2026