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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 11/25/2025 is acknowledged. Claim 16 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Himuro (EP0890456) in view of Shibata (US 5178698).
Regarding claim 1, Himuro discloses a tire having a tread portion wherein the tread portion (see Fig. 1; [0023]) comprises:
a plurality of circumferential grooves extending continuously in a tire circumferential direction (see circumferential main grooves 1); and
a plurality of land regions demarcated by the circumferential grooves (see lands defined by block rows 4, 5 in central region TC and shoulder regions TS), wherein
the land regions include a first land region (blocks 4 in central region TC) and a second land region (blocks 5 in shoulder region TS) adjacent to each other,
the first land region is provided with a plurality of first axial grooves extending in a tire axial direction so as to completely cross a ground contacting surface of the first land region (see steep slant groove segment 2),
the second land region is provided with a plurality of second axial grooves extending in the tire axial direction so as to completely cross a ground contacting surface of the second land region (see gentle groove segment 3),
each of the first axial grooves includes a first end on one side in the tire axial direction and a second end on the other side in the tire axial direction (grooves 2 are open on each side),
the first axial grooves are arranged in a first arrangement over the entire circumference of the tire (pattern repeats as illustrated in Fig. 1),
in the first arrangement,
the first axial grooves are arranged at intervals so that the number (a) of types of a first pitch, which is a distance in the tire circumferential direction between the first axial grooves adjacent to each other in the tire circumferential direction, is one or more over the entire circumference of the tire (grooves 2 are arranged in a repeating pattern such that there is at least one pitch type, see Fig. 1),
in a pair of the first axial grooves adjacent to each other in the tire circumferential direction, a circumferential distance between the first end of one of the first axial grooves and the second end of the other first axial groove is 5% or less of the first pitch of the pair of the first axial grooves or a region obtained by extending parallel to the tire axial direction an opening at the first end of one of the first axial grooves that is open to one of the circumferential grooves adjacent to the first land region on the one side overlaps with an opening at the second end of the other first axial groove that is open to one of the circumferential grooves adjacent to the first land region on the other side (Fig. 1 clearly illustrates the open end on left side of axial groove 2 overlaps with open end of right side of adjacent axial groove 2),
the second axial grooves are arranged in a second arrangement over the entire circumference of the tire (see Fig. 1).
Himuro does not disclose the second axial groove as arranged with at least two pitch types and that the number of second pitch types is greater than the number of first pitch types. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Shibata discloses configuring shoulder blocks with at least two different circumferential lengths, i.e.., at least two pitch types, to reduce noise (working embodiments disclose 3 pitch types; col 1, lines 35-60; col 2, lines 47-60). In this embodiment, Shibata discloses the outer lateral grooves are provided with variable pitches while the inner lateral grooves are arranged at regular intervals or pitches in the circumferential direction (col 2, lines 47-60; col 4, lines 46-48). In other words, the shoulder blocks have at least two pitch types and the inner blocks have one pitch type. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the tread of Himuro with first and second axial grooves having pitch types satisfying the claimed relationships since Shibata discloses configuring the outer axial grooves with at least two pitch types and the inner axial grooves with a single pitch type to reduce noise (col 2, lines 47-60; col 4, lines 46-48).
Regarding claim 2, the second pitch of the shoulder blocks is smaller than the first pitch of the center blocks in Himuro (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, as discussed above, Shibata disclose 1 first pitch type (col 4, line 46-48).
Regarding claim 5, Shibata discloses at least two pitch types and discloses 3 pitch types in the working embodiment (col 1, lines 35-60; col 2, lines 47-60).
Regarding claim 6, the total number of second axial grooves is greater than the total number of first axial grooves in Himuro (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, the maximum angle of the second axial grooves with respect to the axial direction is smaller than the maximum angle of the first axial grooves with respect to the tire axial direction (grooves 2 are steeper than grooves 3 in Himuro).
Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the first axial grooves with angle theta1 of 30 to 50 degrees to the axial direction since Himuro disclose steep grooves 2 as inclined at 10° to 45° with respect to the circumferential direction (45-80° degrees to the axial direction), said range overlapping the claimed range ([0014-0015]).
Regarding claim 15, as discussed above, Shibata disclose 1 first pitch type (col 4, line 46-48).
Regarding claim 17, Shibata discloses at five pitch types can be used (col 5, lines 24-25).
Regarding claim 20, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the second axial grooves with maximum angle of 10 degrees or less since Himuro disclose the gentle grooves 3 as inclined at 0 to 90 degrees with respect to the circumferential direction (0-60° degrees to the axial direction), said range overlapping the claimed range ([0019]).
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20160152087) in view of Shibata (US 5178698).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses a tire having a tread portion wherein the tread portion (see Fig. 1; [0047]) comprises:
a plurality of circumferential grooves extending continuously in a tire circumferential direction (see shoulder main groove 3); and
a plurality of land regions demarcated by the circumferential grooves (see lands defined by crown blocks 21 in central region and shoulder blocks 9 in shoulder regions), wherein
the land regions include a first land region (crown blocks 21 in central region) and a second land region (shoulder blocks 9 in shoulder regions) adjacent to each other,
the first land region is provided with a plurality of first axial grooves extending in a tire axial direction so as to completely cross a ground contacting surface of the first land region (see crown lateral grooves 20 extending from one shoulder groove to other shoulder groove),
the second land region is provided with a plurality of second axial grooves extending in the tire axial direction so as to completely cross a ground contacting surface of the second land region (see shoulder lateral grooves 8),
each of the first axial grooves includes a first end on one side in the tire axial direction and a second end on the other side in the tire axial direction (first and second ends are ends of crown lateral grooves 20 where they open to the first and second shoulder main grooves 3; examiner notes that the specification allows for longitudinal grooves to cross the axial grooves, see claim 9, Fig. 4 of instant application),
the first axial grooves are arranged in a first arrangement over the entire circumference of the tire (pattern repeats as illustrated in Fig. 1),
in the first arrangement,
the first axial grooves are arranged at intervals so that the number (a) of types of a first pitch, which is a distance in the tire circumferential direction between the first axial grooves adjacent to each other in the tire circumferential direction, is one or more over the entire circumference of the tire (crown lateral grooves 20 are arranged in a repeating pattern such that there is at least one pitch type, see Fig. 1),
in a pair of the first axial grooves adjacent to each other in the tire circumferential direction, a circumferential distance between the first end of one of the first axial grooves and the second end of the other first axial groove is 5% or less of the first pitch of the pair of the first axial grooves or a region obtained by extending parallel to the tire axial direction an opening at the first end of one of the first axial grooves that is open to one of the circumferential grooves adjacent to the first land region on the one side overlaps with an opening at the second end of the other first axial groove that is open to one of the circumferential grooves adjacent to the first land region on the other side (Fig. 1 clearly illustrates the open end on left side of crown lateral groove 20 overlaps with open end of right side of adjacent crown lateral groove 20; see annotated Fig. 1 below), and
the second axial grooves are arranged in a second arrangement over the entire circumference of the tire (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
308
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hayashi does not disclose the second axial groove as arranged with at least two pitch types and that the number of second pitch types is greater than the number of first pitch types. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Shibata discloses configuring shoulder blocks with at least two different circumferential lengths, i.e.., at least two pitch types, to reduce noise (working embodiments disclose 3 pitch types; col 1, lines 35-60; col 2, lines 47-60). In this embodiment, Shibata discloses the outer lateral grooves are provided with variable pitches while the inner lateral grooves are arranged at regular intervals or pitches in the circumferential direction (col 2, lines 47-60; col 4, lines 46-48). In other words, the shoulder blocks have at least two pitch types and the inner blocks have one pitch type. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the tread of Hayashi with first and second axial grooves having pitch types satisfying the claimed relationships since Shibata discloses configuring the outer axial grooves with at least two pitch types and the inner axial grooves with a single pitch type to reduce noise (col 2, lines 47-60; col 4, lines 46-48).
Regarding claims 2, 3, 12, 14, and 18, Hayashi depicts the first and second pitch lengths as coinciding while Shibata is cited for providing variability in the second pitch lengths to improve noise performance. While Shibata does not expressly detail a numerical relationship between the lengths of the second pitches and the lengths of the first pitches, Shibata does disclose the importance of controlling shoulder block length to achieve a noise reducing effect, provide steering stability, and prevent uneven wear wherein at least one shoulder block has a minimum size and one shoulder block has a maximum size (col 2, lines 47-60). Given that Hayashi's tread depicts the shoulder block and central blocks as having substantially similar pitch sizes, in modifying the shoulder block pitch lengths as taught by Shibata, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured some shoulder blocks with slightly reduced size and some shoulder blocks with slightly increased size in order to achieve the varied pitch lengths desired by Shibata while also substantially maintaining the general tread pattern of Hayashi (i.e., not making blocks excessively long or short).Furthermore, those skilled in the art would have experimentally determined through routine experimentation the optimum length of the shoulder block pitches for (1) reducing noise, and; (2) maintaining steering stability and wear resistance. Examiner notes that there has been no showing of unexpected results relating to the sizes of the second pitch lengths.
Regarding claim 4, as discussed above, Shibata disclose 1 first pitch type (col 4, line 46-48).
Regarding claim 5, Shibata discloses at least two pitch types and discloses 3 pitch types in the working embodiment (col 1, lines 35-60; col 2, lines 47-60).
Regarding claim 7, adjacent second axial grooves do not overlap each other (shoulder grooves do not overlap in Hayashi (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, the maximum angle of the second axial grooves with respect to the axial direction is smaller than the maximum angle of the first axial grooves with respect to the tire axial direction (grooves 20 are steeper than grooves 8 in Hayashi).
Regarding claim 9, the first land region (defined between shoulder grooves 3) is provided with a longitudinal groove cross the first axial grooves (see center main groove 4).
Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the first axial grooves with angle theta1 of 30 to 50 degrees to the axial direction since Hayashi discloses crown lateral grooves have angles of 20 to 40 degrees to the axial direction ([0092]), said range overlapping the claimed range.
Regarding claim 15, as discussed above, Shibata disclose 1 first pitch type (col 4, line 46-48).
Regarding claim 17, Shibata discloses at five pitch types can be used (col 5, lines 24-25).
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20160152087) in view of Shibata (US 5178698) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koda (JP2023044037, with English machine translation).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Hayashi does not disclose the number of second axial grooves is greater than the number of first axial grooves or that the second axial groove number is 105-120% of the first axial groove number; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the second axial groove number as claimed since Koda, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches configuring the center pitch number Pce and the shoulder pitch number Psh such that the relationship Pce/Psh is 0.4 to 1.2, preferably 0.5 to 1.0 to improve noise performance and rolling resistance (pg 27, 3rd paragraph; ratio of 0.4 to 1.2, preferably 0.5 to 1.0, means shoulder pitch number is 83% to 250%, preferably 100% to 200%, greater than the center pitch number), said ranges overlapping the claimed range.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 20160152087) in view of Shibata (US 5178698) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamada (US 2012/0145295).
Regarding claim 20, Hayashi does not disclose the angle of the second axial grooves as 10 degrees or less; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the second axial grooves (shoulder grooves) of Hayashi as claimed since Yamada, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches configuring shoulder axial grooves as 75 degrees or more and 88 degrees or less to balance lateral stiffness and cornering performance ([0049-0050]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is represented by Himuro (EP0890456), Hayashi (US 20160152087), Shibata (US 5178698), and Kakumu (US 5178699). Himuro and Hayashi disclose tire tread pattern wherein the center lateral grooves (determine first pitch) are inclined such that the ends of adjacent grooves overlap with each other. Himuro and Hayashi fails to further teach or suggest the first pitch is in the range from 80% to 120% (claim 11) or 105 to 120% (claim 13) of an axial width of the ground contacting surface of the first land region. Himuro and Hayashi depict pitch length / width relationships that are outside the claimed range. Shibata discloses variations in pitch lengths between the center and shoulder portions of the tread and fails to further teach a pitch length to width ratio as claimed. Kakumu discloses a tire tread having inclined axial grooves wherein the block length to block width (Lm/Wm) ratio is 0.38 to 0.55, which is well outside the claimed range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C DYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT C DYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619