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.
Watanabe and Georges et al
3) Claims 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Georges et al (US 2010/0154963).
Watanabe discloses a pneumatic tire having a tread comprising a rubber composition comprising 20-90% by mass styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content of 5% by mass or higher or 15% by mass or higher); 10-60% by mass butadiene rubber;
7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin, α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin),
30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica; 5-50 parts carbon black and 5-50 parts oil [paragraphs 1, 10-11, 30-31, 34-47, 54-74, 94-103]. In EXAMPLE #8, Watanabe discloses a rubber composition for a tire tread comprising:
50 parts SBR2 (styrene butadiene rubber) having
styrene content = 25% and a glass transition temperature = -49oC;
50 parts butadiene rubber (BR150B) having cis content = 97% by mass;
10 parts carbon black;
100 parts silica;
10 parts resin A (α-methylstyrene resin having softening point = 85oC) ;
30 parts resin B (α-methylstyrene resin having softening point = 120oC);
20 parts TDAE oil.
See TABLE 1, EXAMPLE 8. The tire may be a truck/bus tire [paragraph 133]. The tire has balanced improvement in wet grip performance and resistance to low temperature brittleness (resistance to crack formation during storage of the tire) [paragraphs 4-5]. Watanabe is silent as to land ratio.
As to claims 14 and 18, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's pneumatic tire for truck/bus (heavy load pneumatic tire) such that:
the tread part is composed of a rubber composition comprising 50 parts by mass or more of silica based on 100 parts by mass of a rubber component, wherein the rubber component comprises greater than 50% by mass of a butadiene rubber, and a styrene-butadiene rubber, wherein a total styrene amount in the rubber component is 25% by mass or less, wherein, when ABR represents a content, in % by mass, of the butadiene rubber in the rubber component and
L represents a land ratio, in %,of a tread surface of the tread part, the following inequality is satisfied: ABR x L > 3000 [claims 14, 18],
when ASTY represents total styrene amount in % by mass, the following inequality is satisfied (ABR/ASTY)xL > 300 [claim 14],
a total styrene amount in the rubber component is less than 10% by mass
[claim 18]
since (1) Watanabe discloses a pneumatic tire for truck / bus (pneumatic heavy load tire) having a tread comprising a rubber composition comprising 20-90% by mass styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content 5% by mass or higher such as 25% by mass); 10-60% by mass butadiene rubber; 7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin,
α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin), 30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica; 5-50 parts carbon black and 5-50 parts oil [paragraphs 1, 10-11, 30-31, 34-47, 54-74, 94-103] wherein the tire has balanced improvement in wet grip performance and resistance to low temperature brittleness (resistance to crack formation during storage of the tire) and (2) Georges et al teaches providing a heavy load pneumatic tire (e.g. truck tire) having a tread and grooves such that the net to gross (land ratio) of the tread is 70 to 90% [FIGURE 2A, paragraphs 2, 46]. Hence, Watanabe discloses a pneumatic heavy load tire (e.g. truck tire) having a tread and Georges et al teaches that a pneumatic heavy load tire (e.g. truck tire) should have a net to gross (land ratio) =
70 to 90. In other words, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a known land ratio (e.g. 70%) as per Georges et al for the tread of Watanabe's pneumatic heavy load tire. Furthermore, Watanabe teaches that the rubber composition for the tire tread may comprise:
40% by styrene butadiene rubber,
60% by mass butadiene rubber
wherein the SBR has a styrene content of 5% or 25%
[paragraphs 34, 40, 47, 49, 137]. With respect to this composition, it is emphasized that Watanabe teaches that the rubber component may comprise styrene butadiene rubber and butadiene rubber wherein the amount of butadiene rubber may be 60% [paragraph 47] and the styrene amount may be 5% or 25% [paragraphs 34, 137].
When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe and L (%) = 70 as per Georges et al, then ABRxL = 4200. This value of 4200 falls within the claimed range of greater than 3000 [claims 14, 18].
When the rubber component comprises 40% styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content = 5% or 25%), and 60% butadiene rubber as per Watanabe, then a total styrene content in the rubber component is 2% or 10% [(5x40)/100 + 60x0)/100) = 2 or (25x40)/100 + 60x0)/100) = 10]. The value of 2% falls within the claimed range of 25% by mass or less [claim 14] and falls within the claimed range of less than 10% by mass [claim 18]. The value of 10% falls within the claimed range of 25% by mass or less [claim 14].
When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe, total styrene content (% by mass) = 2 as per Watanabe determined above and L (%) = 70 as per Georges et al, then (ABR/ASTY)xL = 2100. This value of 2100 falls within the claimed range of greater than 300 [claim 14]. When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe, total styrene content (% by mass) = 10 as per Watanabe determined above and L (%) = 70 as per Georges et al, then (ABR/ASTY)xL = 420. This value of 420 falls within the claimed range of greater than 300 [claim 14].
As to claims 15 and 19, Watanabe's teaching to use 7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin, α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin) renders obvious using 5% by mass or more of hydrocarbon resin in the rubber composition.
As to claims 16 and 20, Watanabe's teaching to use 30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica renders obvious using 100 parts by mass or more of silica.
As to claims 17 and 21, Watanabe's rubber composition comprising 40% by mass of styrene butadiene rubber (e.g. Tg = -49oC) and 60% by mass of butadiene rubber (cis content 97% by mass) inherently has a glass transition temperature within the claimed range of lower than -30oC.
4) Claims 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Georges et al (US 2010/0154963) as applied above and further in view of Miyazaki (US 2014/0144566).
As to claims 17 and 21, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's rubber composition for a tire tread such that a glass transition temperature of the rubber composition is lower than -30oC since (1) Watanabe teaches or at least renders obvious a rubber composition comprising 40% by mass of styrene butadiene rubber (e.g. Tg = -49oC) and 60% by mass of butadiene rubber BR150B [paragraphs 40, 47, 137, 139] and (2) Miyazaki, directed to the tire tread art, discloses that BR150B is high cis butadiene rubber having a glass transition temperature of
-108oC.
Watanabe and Japan 407
5) Claims 1-9 and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Japan 407
(JP 60-082407).
Watanabe discloses a pneumatic tire having a tread comprising a rubber composition comprising 20-90% by mass styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content of 5% by mass or higher or 15% by mass or higher); 10-60% by mass butadiene rubber;
7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin, α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin),
30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica; 5-50 parts carbon black and 5-50 parts oil [paragraphs 1, 10-11, 30-31, 34-47, 54-74, 94-103]. In EXAMPLE #8, Watanabe discloses a rubber composition for a tire tread comprising:
50 parts SBR2 (styrene butadiene rubber) having
styrene content = 25% and a glass transition temperature = -49oC;
50 parts butadiene rubber (BR150B) having cis content = 97% by mass;
10 parts carbon black;
100 parts silica;
10 parts resin A (α-methylstyrene resin having softening point = 85oC) ;
30 parts resin B (α-methylstyrene resin having softening point = 120oC);
20 parts TDAE oil.
See TABLE 1, EXAMPLE 8. The tire may be a truck/bus tire [paragraph 133]. The tire has balanced improvement in wet grip performance and resistance to low temperature brittleness (resistance to crack formation during storage of the tire) [paragraphs 4-5]. Watanabe is silent as to land ratio.
As to claims 1, 14 and 18, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's pneumatic tire for truck/bus (heavy load pneumatic tire) such that:
the tread part is composed of a rubber composition comprising 50 parts by mass or more of silica based on 100 parts by mass of a rubber component, wherein the rubber component comprises greater than 50% by mass of a butadiene rubber, and a styrene-butadiene rubber, wherein a total styrene amount in the rubber component is 25% by mass or less, wherein, when ABR represents a content, in % by mass, of the butadiene rubber in the rubber component and
L represents a land ratio, in %,of a tread surface of the tread part, the following inequality is satisfied: ABR x L > 3000 [claims 1, 14, 18],
the land ratio L of the tread surface is less than 70% [claim 1],
when ASTY represents total styrene amount in % by mass, the following inequality is satisfied (ABR/ASTY)xL > 300 [claim 14],
a total styrene amount in the rubber component is less than 10% by mass
[claim 18]
since (1) Watanabe discloses a pneumatic tire for truck / bus (pneumatic heavy load tire) having a tread comprising a rubber composition comprising 20-90% by mass styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content 5% by mass or higher such as 25% by mass); 10-60% by mass butadiene rubber; 7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin,
α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin), 30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica; 5-50 parts carbon black and 5-50 parts oil [paragraphs 1, 10-11, 30-31, 34-47, 54-74, 94-103] wherein the tire has balanced improvement in wet grip performance and resistance to low temperature brittleness (resistance to crack formation during storage of the tire) and (2) Japan 407 teaches providing a pneumatic tire for trucks/buses (heavy load tire size 1000R20) having a tread and grooves such that negative ratio = 10% to 35% which is equivalent to land ratio = 65% to 90% since negative ratio + land ratio = 100% [FIGURES 1-3, machine translation, Derwent Abstract].
Hence, Watanabe discloses a pneumatic heavy load tire (e.g. truck tire) having a tread and Japan 407 teaches that a pneumatic heavy load tire (e.g. truck tire) should have a land ratio) = 65% to 90% (e.g. 65%). In other words, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use a known land ratio (e.g. 65%) as per Japan 407 for the tread of Watanabe's pneumatic heavy load tire. Furthermore, Watanabe teaches that the rubber composition for the tire tread may comprise:
40% by styrene butadiene rubber,
60% by mass butadiene rubber
wherein the SBR has a styrene content of 5% or 25%
[paragraphs 34, 40, 47, 49, 137]. With respect to this composition, it is emphasized that Watanabe teaches that the rubber component may comprise styrene butadiene rubber and butadiene rubber wherein the amount of butadiene rubber may be 60% [paragraph 47] and the styrene amount may be 5% or 25% [paragraphs 34, 137].
As noted above, Japan 407 teaches land ratio = 65%. This value of 65% falls within the claimed range of less than 70% [claim 1].
When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe and L (%) = 65 as per Japan 407, then ABRxL = 3900. This value of 3900 falls within the claimed range of greater than 3000 [claims 1, 14, 18].
When the rubber component comprises 40% styrene butadiene rubber (styrene content = 5% or 25%), and 60% butadiene rubber as per Watanabe, then a total styrene content in the rubber component is 2% or 10% [(5x40)/100 + 60x0)/100) = 2 or (25x40)/100 + 60x0)/100) = 10]. The value of 2% falls within the claimed range of 25% by mass or less [claims 1, 14] and falls within the claimed range of less than 10% by mass [claim 18]. The value of 10% falls within the claimed range of 25% by mass or less [claims 1, 14].
When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe, total styrene content (% by mass) = 2 as per Watanabe determined above and L (%) = 65 as per Japan 407, then (ABR/ASTY)xL = 1950. This value of 1950 falls within the claimed range of greater than 300 [claim 14]. When ABR (% by mass butadiene) = 60 as per Watanabe, total styrene content (% by mass) = 10 as per Watanabe determined above and L (%) = 65 as per Japan 407, then (ABR/ASTY)xL = 390. This value of 390 falls within the claimed range of greater than 300 [claim 14].
As to claims 3, 15 and 19, Watanabe's teaching to use 7-50 parts resin (C5/C9 petroleum resin, α-methylstyrene resin, or terpene resin) renders obvious using 5% by mass or more of hydrocarbon resin in the rubber composition.
As to claims 4, 16 and 20, Watanabe's teaching to use 30-200 parts (50-150 parts) silica renders obvious using 100 parts by mass or more of silica.
As to claims 5, 17 and 21, Watanabe's rubber composition comprising 40% by mass of styrene butadiene rubber (e.g. Tg = -49oC) and 60% by mass of butadiene rubber (cis content 97% by mass) inherently has a glass transition temperature within the claimed range of lower than -30oC.
As to claims 6 and 7, the applied prior art renders obvious ABRxL = 3900. See comments for claims 1, 14 and 18.
As to claim 8, Watanabe teaches that the rubber component may comprise 60% by mass butadiene rubber [paragraph 47].
As to claim 9, Watanabe discloses using styrene butadiene rubber having glass transition temperature of -49oC [paragraph 137].
6) Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Japan 407 (JP 60-082407) as applied above and further in view of Korea 994 (KR 2004-0038994).
Watanabe does not recite small holes.
As to claim 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's pneumatic tire such that the tread surface has two or more circumferential main grooves extending in the tire circumferential direction and land parts partitioned off by the circumferential main grooves wherein when a pair of land parts located on an outermost side in a tire width direction of the land parts are defined as shoulder land parts, the shoulder land parts have one or more small holes each having an opening area of greater than 0.1 mm² and less than 15 mm² since Korea 994 teaches providing a heavy load pneumatic tire having a tread comprising land portions separated by circumferential main grooves such that holes (diameter D = 3-10 mm) are formed in a shoulder land portion to facilitate radiation of heat accumulated in the shoulder land portion and thereby improve durability of the tire [FIGURES 2-3, machine translation]. When diameter D = 3 mm [end point of Korea 994’s range for D], then area of a hole is 7.1 mm2 [D=3 mm → R=1.5mm → A = πR2 → A = πx(1.5mm)2 → A = 7.1 mm2]. This value of 7.1 mm2 falls within the claimed range of greater than 0.1 mm2 and less than 15 mm2.
7) Claims 11-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Japan 407 (JP 60-082407) as applied above and further in view of Japan 117 (JP 06-001117).
As to Watanabe does not recite circumferential narrow grooves whose groove width widens toward an inner side in the tire radial direction.
Japan 117 discloses a pneumatic tire (heavy load size 11R24.5) having a tread comprising four main circumferential grooves (3) separating five ribs (4,5) wherein a circumferential narrow groove (6,7) is disposed in each rib (4.5) [FIGURE 1]. Each circumferential main groove (3) has a width “r” (e.g. 12 mm) [machine translation]. Each circumferential narrow groove widens from width “a” (e.g. 1 mm) at the tread surface to a width “b” (e.g. 6 mm) at the bottom thereof [machine translation]. The tire has improved partial wear prevention [machine translation].
As to claims 11-13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's pneumatic heavy load tire such that
the tread surface has two or more circumferential main grooves extending in a tire circumferential direction and land parts partitioned off by the circumferential main grooves, and wherein, when a pair of land parts located on an outermost side in a tire width direction of the land parts are defined as shoulder land parts, the shoulder land parts have at least one or more circumferential narrow grooves [claim 11],
the tread surface has widened circumferential grooves whose groove width widens towards an inner side in a tire radial direction [claim 12],
the widened circumferential groove is present on a land part located on a tire center line, or on a land part closest to the tire center line when a circumferential main groove is present on the tire center line [claim 13]
since Japan 117 discloses a pneumatic tire (heavy load size 11R24.5) having a tread comprising four main circumferential grooves (3) separating five ribs (4,5) wherein a circumferential narrow groove (6,7) is disposed in each rib (4.5) [FIGURE 1] wherein each circumferential main groove (3) has a width “r” (e.g. 12 mm), each circumferential narrow groove widens from width “a” (e.g. 1 mm) at the tread surface to a width “b” (e.g. 6 mm) at the bottom thereof and the tire has improved partial wear prevention [machine translation].
8) Claims 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2020/0040168) in view of Japan 407 (JP 60-082407) as applied above and further in view of Miyazaki (US 2014/0144566).
As to claims 17 and 21, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Watanabe's rubber composition for a tire tread such that a glass transition temperature of the rubber composition is lower than -30oC since (1) Watanabe teaches or at least renders obvious a rubber composition comprising 40% by mass of styrene butadiene rubber (e.g. Tg = -49oC) and 60% by mass of butadiene rubber BR150B [paragraphs 40, 47, 137, 139] and (2) Miyazaki, directed to the tire tread art, discloses that BR150B is high cis butadiene rubber having a glass transition temperature of
-108oC.
Remarks
9) Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-21 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection and the reasons presented therein.
With respect to applicant's description in the response filed 6-24-26 of the interview on 5-27-26, examiner comments: INTERVIEW RECORD OK.
Applicant's arguments regarding unexpected results are not persuasive since the claimed invention has not been compared with Watanabe's EXAMPLE 8. Alternatively, Applicant's arguments regarding unexpected results are not commensurate in scope with the claims and are thereby not persuasive since the results are for a specific tread pattern and a specific rubber composition and the claims fail to require this specific tread pattern and rubber composition. EXAMPLES: The claims fail to require three circumferential grooves (one of which is on the tire center line) and lateral grooves and a rubber composition comprising hydrocarbon resin.
10) No claim is allowed.
11) 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.
12) 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 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights