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 with traverse of group I in the reply filed on 8/10/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “In the enclosed set of amended claims, a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprises a first bead wire and a second bead wire, with such items being understood in the art to embody stiff elements that provide shaping and sealing effects around the rim of a tyre. Weight must be given to the presence of these features in each independent claim.”. This is found partially persuasive with respect to group III for the reasons set forth in applicants response. This is not found persuasive with respect to group II because the features applicant is pointing to are features of the material worked upon in the apparatus. See MPEP 2114 and 2115.
The requirement between method and product groups (I, III) and apparatus group II is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5, 14, 15, 21, 23, 32, 33, 42 and 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the longitudinal length of the fibres" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This appears to be the first recitation of any longitudinal length and the examiner suggests amending the claim to recite “a longitudinal length of the fibres”.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the first and second stiffening elements" in line 10 and again recites "the first and second stiffening elements" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The recitation in line 10 appears to be the first recitation of any first and second stiffening elements. Additionally, it is unclear how the first and second stiffening elements relate to a first bead wire and a second bead wire as used earlier in line, and it is noted by the examiner that applicant has deleted most of the other references to the first and second stiffening elements in claim 14 and replaced them with a reference to a first bead wire and a second bead wire. It is suggested that applicant amend lines 10 and 11 to use the terms “the first bead wire and the second bead wire” for consistency.
Claims 15, 21, 23, 32, and 44 are rejected based on their dependency from claim 14.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the overlapping portion of tubular material" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This appears to be the first recitation of any overlap or overlapping step and the examiner suggests amending the claim to provide support for an overlap step or recite “an overlapping portion of tubular material”.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "a tyre base layer comprising a first and second bead wire" in line 1, "providing a continuous belt of tyre base layer according to the method of claim 1" in line 3, "the tyre base layer according to the method of claim 1" in line 4, and "a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, and the claim is unclear and appears to be a direct translation of foreign language claims from a foreign application. The claims require performing the steps of the method of claim 1, and thus are dependent from claim 1, however, many of the elements that are recited in claim 1, such as “a continuous belt of tyre base layer”, are recited as if antecedent basis to claim 1 is non-existent. The examiner suggests amending line 3 to recite “manufacturing and providing the continuous belt of tyre base layer according to the method of claim 1”, and additionally, suggests clarifying the relationship between continuous belt of tyre base layer and a tyre base layer in lines 1 and 4, and additionally suggests amending lines 9-10 to “wherein the first and second bead wires comprise the metal, the thermoplastic polymer, the thermoset polymer, or the aramid material.
Claim 42 recites the limitation "a tyre base layer comprising a first and second bead wire" in line 1-2, "providing a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first and second bead wire according to the method of claim 1" in line 3-4, "the tyre base layer according to the method of claim 1" in line 4, and "cutting the belt of tyre base layer to a length suitable for use within a single tyre" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, and the claim is unclear and appears to be a direct translation of foreign language claims from a foreign application. The claims require performing the steps of the method of claim 1, and thus are dependent from claim 1, however, many of the elements that are recited in claim 1, such as “a continuous belt of tyre base layer”, are recited as if antecedent basis to claim 1 is non-existent. The examiner suggests amending line 3 to recite “manufacturing and providing the continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising the first and second bead wire according to the method of claim 1”, and additionally, suggests clarifying the relationship between continuous belt of tyre base layer and a tyre base layer in lines 1 and 3, and additionally suggests amending lines 1-2 to recite “the first and second bead wire” and line 5 to recite “cutting the continuous belt of tyre base layer to a length suitable for use within a single tyre”.
Claim 44 recites the limitation "a first and second bead wire" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This element is introduced in claim 14, and applicant should amend this to recite “the first and second bead wire”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 32 and 43 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Auxerre (US 6463975 B1).
As to claim 32, Auxerre discloses a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first and second bead wire structurally identically to one manufactured according to the method of claim 14, wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material. See column, lines, disclosing “Generally, a tire of the type in question comprises a carcass reinforcement formed of at least one ply of metal cables, which is anchored in each bead to a bead wire,”
As to claim 43, Auxerre discloses continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first and second bead wire structurally identically to one manufactured according to the method of claim 1, wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material.
See column 4, lines 28 to column 5, line 22, disclosing
The carcass reinforcement, in order to reduce the volume of the beads as far as possible, is advantageously formed of reinforcement elements of textile material, which makes it possible to produce the reinforcement windings around the bead wires easily. However, sometimes, for various reasons, the presence of a metal carcass reinforcement is required, in particular in the regions of the crown and sidewalls of the tire. One preferred solution of the invention then consists in providing said tire with a carcass reinforcement made of three parts: a first part consisting of metal reinforcement elements passing at least beneath the crown reinforcement and into the sidewalls, and two other parts, formed of textile reinforcement elements, which are turned up and wound around the two anchoring bead wires of each bead. The edges of the metal part, which part may or may not be turned up about the anchoring bead wires, have with the axially inner edges of the textile parts a common overlap length, at least located in the region in which the additional armature of circumferential reinforcement elements is located.
The endurance of the beads according to the invention may also be improved by thinning said beads, imparting to the carcass reinforcement anchored to two bead wires within a bead a meridian profile which does not have any change in curvature in the region of the beads. Said meridian profile is then characterized in that, viewed in meridian section, its trace, between the point A of greatest axial width and the point of tangency T with the virtually circular coating layer of the first anchoring bead wire, is convex and circular over its entire length, the center of curvature being located on the straight line D" , of greatest axial width, such that the thickness s of the bead B, measured on a line perpendicular to said meridian profile at a point C of height h.sub.c of between 30 and 40 mm and measured relative to the base of the bead YY', is between 2 and 2.5 times the thickness e of the sidewall measured on the straight line D" of greatest axial width.
Not only does the combination of the presence of two anchoring bead wires per bead with the presence of a bead reinforcement armature, having circumferential elements, and arranged, according to the invention, within the main part of the carcass reinforcement, permit improvement of the endurance of the beads, but furthermore, in combination with the entirely convex meridian profile of the carcass reinforcement described above, it makes it possible to obtain a very significant reduction in the weight of the tire, while not adversely affecting its properties. Said reduction in weight may be advantageously accentuated by the replacement of the bead wires having rectangular metal wires, which are generally used in the type of tire in question, by more economical bead wires of "braided" type, that is to say, formed of a helicoidal braiding of a plurality of metal wires, or bead wires of the "stack" type of polygonal section, that is to say bead wires obtained by winding a metal wire on a form, which results in a plurality of layers of different widths. The types of bead wire above furthermore mean that less space is taken up, owing to the shape of their cross-sections and to the possible reduction of said sections, of the order of 30% and 50% for each, respectively, which, relative to the application of the invention to the case of bead wires with rectangular wires, which take up more space, results in a thinner bead thickness.
Figure 4 shows one example the arrangement:
PNG
media_image1.png
1018
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 28 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Applicant’s amendments filed 8/10/2026 in response to the restriction requirement (which included a reasoned statement indicating a lack of unity and prior art to support the statement) has overcome the prior art of record
With respect to claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 28, the prior art of record does not disclose “A method of manufacturing a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first bead wire and a second bead wire” and “wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material” in combination with the limitations of claim 1, including especially the steps of “laying a first bead wire on the sheet of material where the first lateral edge portion and central portion meet, and laying a second bead wire on the sheet of material where the central portion and second lateral edge portion meet, folding the first lateral edge portion over the first bead wire, folding the second lateral edge portion over the second bead wire”.
As noted in the prior restriction requirement, EP 2864112 A1 (Document D1) is regarded as being the prior art closest to the subject-matter of claim 1, and discloses a method of building a tyre, wherein an annular carcass is provided with bead cores, left and right, and the respective lateral flaps are then turned up and over said bead cores and joined to the carcass portion between the bead cores.
The subject-matter of claim 1 differs from this known method in that at the method is not concerned with the construction of a tyre per se, but rather for a continuous carcass base layer, intended for subsequent use in tyre production, and is therefore considered novel (Article 33(2) PCT).
The problem to be solved by the present invention may therefore be regarded as that of manufacturing tyres more efficiently and at reduced cost.
The solution to this problem, proposed in claim 1 of the present application, is considered as involving an inventive step (Article 33(3) PCT) because none of the available prior art suggests this distinguishing feature in the context of the effects achieved. This solution is also considered non-standard for the skilled person.
However, Kim (US 20150122096 A1) does discloses a continuous carcass base layer, intended for subsequent use in tyre production. See the abstract, disclosing:
Disclosed is a carcass cutting and winding apparatus which cuts carcass cord paper rubber-topped in a rolling process during manufacture of a tire according to a predetermined angle and width, and winds the carcass cord paper around a winder with liner paper being interposed therebetween, to prevent folding and crumpling of the cut carcass cord paper while enabling process automation, thereby improving winding uniformity of the carcass material.
However, as noted above, the prior art of record does not disclose “A method of manufacturing a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first bead wire and a second bead wire” and “wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material” in combination with the limitations of claim 1, including especially the steps of “laying a first bead wire on the sheet of material where the first lateral edge portion and central portion meet, and laying a second bead wire on the sheet of material where the central portion and second lateral edge portion meet, folding the first lateral edge portion over the first bead wire, folding the second lateral edge portion over the second bead wire”.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 5, 33 and 42, which are all dependent from claim 1, would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 14, 15, 21, 23, and 44 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claims 14, 15, 21, 23 and 4, the prior art of record does not disclose “A method of manufacturing a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first bead wire and a second bead wire” and “wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material” in combination with the limitations of claim 1, including especially the steps of “inserting a first bead wire and a second bead wire into the tubular material such that a longitudinal length of each bead wire is parallel with the longitudinal length of the tubular material”.
As noted in the prior restriction requirement, EP 2864112 A1 (Document D1) is regarded as being the prior art closest to the subject-matter of claim 14, and discloses a method of building a tyre, wherein an annular carcass is provided with bead cores, left and right, and the respective lateral flaps are then turned up and over said bead cores and joined to the carcass portion between the bead cores.
The subject-matter of claim 14 differs from this known method in that at the method is not concerned with the construction of a tyre per se, but rather for a continuous carcass base layer, intended for subsequent use in tyre production, and is therefore considered novel (Article 33(2) PCT).
The problem to be solved by the present invention may therefore be regarded as that of manufacturing tyres more efficiently and at reduced cost.
The solution to this problem, proposed in claim 1 of the present application, is considered as involving an inventive step (Article 33(3) PCT) because none of the available prior art suggests this distinguishing feature in the context of the effects achieved. This solution is also considered non-standard for the skilled person.
However, Kim (US 20150122096 A1) does discloses a continuous carcass base layer, intended for subsequent use in tyre production. See the abstract, disclosing:
Disclosed is a carcass cutting and winding apparatus which cuts carcass cord paper rubber-topped in a rolling process during manufacture of a tire according to a predetermined angle and width, and winds the carcass cord paper around a winder with liner paper being interposed therebetween, to prevent folding and crumpling of the cut carcass cord paper while enabling process automation, thereby improving winding uniformity of the carcass material.
However, as noted above, the prior art of record does not disclose “A method of manufacturing a continuous belt of tyre base layer comprising a first bead wire and a second bead wire” and “wherein the first and second bead wires comprise a metal, a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoset polymer, or an aramid material” in combination with the limitations of claim 1, including especially the steps of “inserting a first bead wire and a second bead wire into the tubular material such that a longitudinal length of each bead wire is parallel with the longitudinal length of the tubular material”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE R KOCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5807. The examiner can also be reached by E-mail at george.koch@uspto.gov if the applicant grants written authorization for e-mails. Authorization can be granted by filling out the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form.
The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6:30.
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, PHILIP C TUCKER can be reached at (571)272-1095. 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.
/GEORGE R KOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
GRK
Prosecution Insights