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
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) 1-6 and 8-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 3340845 (newly cited) and further in view of (a) Calzetta (WO 2020/202125, of record), (b) Wittmann (WO 2017/085278, of record) and (c) Teckenbrock (US 2009/0047226, newly cited) and/or Stahl (US 11,028,235, newly cited) .
JP ‘845 is directed to an exemplary innerliner rubber composition comprising 100 phr of brominated butyl rubber and 50 phr of N330 carbon black (recognized as having a surface area between 55m2/g and 95 m2/g) (Example 4 in Table 2). This carbon black is seen to correspond with reinforcing flier F2 of the claimed invention. In such an instance, though, the innerliner rubber composition of is devoid of a reinforcing filler F1.
Calzetta is similarly directed to an innerliner rubber composition and teaches the inclusion of treated lignin having a surface area between 30 m2/g and 55 m2/g (corresponds with claimed F1 reinforcing filler) as a partial replacement of carbon black (Page 5, Lines 21+). More particularly, such a composition reduces fossil fuel consumption and improves impermeability without compromising mechanical properties (Page 4, Lines 1-17). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include treated lignin in the innerliner rubber composition of JP ‘845 for the benefits detailed above. It is emphasized that JP ‘845 teaches an innerliner rubber composition comprising 50 phr of carbon black having the claimed surface area- when following the teachings of Calzetta, one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to partially replace said carbon black (that of JP ‘845) with treated lignin at loadings between 15 phr and 45 phr (total filler content of carbon black and lignin would be 50 phr in the exemplary composition of JP ‘845 and such falls within the claimed range between 45 phr and 80 phr of the claimed invention). It is also noted that when describing carbon black, Calzetta states that “preferably, said reinforcing filler comprises 15-45 phr of carbon black having a specific surface area of between 30 m2/g and 50 m2/g” (Page 6, Lines 4-6). It is well taken that a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. As such, there is a reasonable expectation of success when including treated lignin with the carbon black of JP ‘845. Furthermore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close (MPEP 2144.05). For example, a modified rubber composition of JP ‘845 including 40 phr of treated lignin and 10 phr of carbon black (N330) would satisfy the claimed invention. Similarly, a modified rubber composition of JP ‘845 including 35 phr of treated lignin and 15 phr of carbon black (N330) would satisfy the claimed invention.
With further respect to the treated lignin, Calzetta teaches a distribution D50 between 1 micron and 4 microns and a distribution D90 between 5 microns and 8 microns (Page 5, Lines 21+). This disclosure suggests that a distribution D97 in Calzetta would be between 3 microns and 23 microns as required by the claimed invention.
Additionally, regarding claim 1 (and claim 8), lignin is well recognized as including surface-available acidic hydroxy groups, such as phenolic hydroxy groups, as shown for example by Teckenbrock (Paragraph 148) and/or Stahl (Column 2, Lines 45+). It is emphasized that said groups define the makeup of lignin.
Lastly, regarding claim 1, while Calzetta is silent with respect to 14C content and carbon content, the claimed ranges appear to be consistent with those that are conventionally associated with lignin-reinforced tire rubber compositions, as shown for example by Wittman (Abstract).
Regarding 2, as stated above, N330 carbon has a surface area of 78 m2/g and the disclosed lignin of Calzetta has a surface area between 30 m2/g and 55 m2/g.
With respect to claims 3-5, the exemplary innerliner rubber composition of JP ‘845 includes 10 phr of a paraffin oil (softening agent)rubber that differs from halobutyl rubber.
As to claim 6, the lignin of Calzetta is hydrothermally treated.
As to claims 9-11, the innerliner rubber composition of JP ‘845 includes zinc oxide, sulfur, and accelerators (thiazole accelerator in exemplary composition of JP ‘845). With specific respect to claim 11, the components are separated from one another prior to mixing (spatially separated).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, the claimed method is consistent with the known manner in which fillers are added to rubber materials (optimizes filler dispersion).
With respect to claims 14-16, the claimed method steps are consistent with those that are conventionally used in the manufacture of tire components. Additionally, the claimed thickness is consistent with innerliner components, it being noted that the claims are directed to absolute dimensions and it is well taken that dimensions are highly dependent on the tire size and ultimately the intended use of the tire.
Regarding claim 17, a total filler amount (F1 and F2) in the modified rubber composition is 50 phr.
As to claim 19, it reasons that the modified composition of Cai would demonstrate extremely similar properties to that required by the claimed invention since the components, loadings, and methods in the modified tire of JP ‘845 substantially mimic those of the claimed invention.
With respect to claim 21, the general disclosure to partially replace carbon black with lignin is seen to encompass the claimed range of lignin loadings. Example C in Table 1 of Calzetta includes a ratio of approximately 57% but such a composition would be recognized as being exemplary. Absent a conclusive showing of unexpected results, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the composition of JP ‘845 with a ratio in accordance to the claimed invention. For example, a composition including 40 phr of treated lignin and 10 phr of carbon black (N330) is consistent with the teachings of JP ‘845 and Calzetta and is seen to satisfy the claimed invention
4. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP ‘845, Calzetta, Wittmann, Teckenbrock, and Stahl as applied in claim 18 above and further in view of Mechanics of Pneumatic Tires (of record).
As detailed above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to partially replace carbon black in the innerliner composition of JP ‘845 with treated lignin to obtain environmental benefits. In terms of the properties of the innerliner rubber composition, the claimed range of hardness values, at a minimum, are consistent with those that are conventionally associated with innerliners, as shown for example by Mechanics of Pneumatic Tires. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the innerliner rubber of JP ‘845 with a common hardness value (recognized as not being too rigid or hard based on the main function of the innerliner being airflow prevention into the tire).
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-14, filed May 20, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6 and 8-21 under USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of JP ‘845.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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 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.
Justin Fischer/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 June 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights