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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 2 has two labels for “Hcs’” and one appears to be an additional label floating between components that should be removed. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Aoki (US 20030051789).
Regarding claim 1, Aoki discloses a tire comprising: a pair of bead cores (Fig. 1: 5); a carcass layer (Fig. 1: 6) extending between the bead cores; and a belt layer (Fig. 1: 7) disposed on an outer side of the carcass layer in a radial direction.
Aoki further discloses an embodiment wherein the tire size is 215/45R17 (Table 1) ([0047]). Thereby, the tire cross-sectional width/total tire width will be 215 mm, which falls within the claimed range of 100 mm ≤ SW ≤ 400 mm, and the tire cross-sectional height will be 96.8 mm (i.e., 215 mm x 0.45). Additionally, the tire outer diameter will be 625.4 mm (i.e., 96.8 mm + 96.8 mm + (17” x 25.4 mm)), which also falls within the claimed range of 200 mm ≤ OD ≤ 660 mm. Case law holds that where prior art teaches a specific example falling within the claimed range, the claimed range is anticipated. See MPEP 2131.03.
Aoki further discloses a point A1 being defined on a side profile at a same position in a tire radial direction as an end portion on an outer side in the radial direction of the bead cores, a distance H1 being defined from a tire maximum width position Ac to the point A1 in the tire radial direction, a point A1' being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 70% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac, and a point Am being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 35% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac (See combined and annotated Figs. 1-2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
593
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Aoki further discloses an embodiment wherein a radius of curvature RO (mm) of an arc passing through the tire maximum width position Ac, the point A1', and the point Am when the tire is mounted on a specified rim, inflated to a specified internal pressure, and in an unloaded state may be 48 or 45 (Fig. 2, Table 1: Ra). Accordingly, RO/SH will be either 0.495 (i.e., 48/96.8) or 0.465 (i.e., 45/96.8), both of which fall within the claimed range of 0.20 ≤ RO/SH ≤ 1.20. Case law holds that where prior art teaches a specific example falling within the claimed range, the claimed range is anticipated. See MPEP 2131.03.
The examiner notes that the claim limitations “a point A1 being defined on a side profile at a same position in a tire radial direction as an end portion on an outer side in the radial direction of the bead cores, a distance H1 being defined from a tire maximum width position Ac to the point A1 in the tire radial direction, a point A1' being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 70% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac, and a point Am being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 35% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac” are arbitrary points that will necessarily exist on the tire, as illustrated in the annotated Figure of Aoki above.
The examiner further notes that a tire cross-sectional width DW appears to be illustrated and defined by Applicant’s original disclosure as being the same as a total tire width SW.
Regarding claim 2, Aoki further discloses embodiments wherein RO/(SH/DW) will be 106.61 (i.e., when RO is 48) or 99.95 (i.e., wherein RO is 45), both of which fall within the claimed range of 60 ≤ RO/(SH/DW) ≤ 150. Case law holds that where prior art teaches a specific example falling within the claimed range, the claimed range is anticipated. See MPEP 2131.03.
The examiner again notes that a tire cross-sectional width DW appears to be illustrated and defined by Applicant’s original disclosure as being the same as a total tire width SW.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Mizutani discloses a tire, comprising: a pair of bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 5); a carcass layer (Figs. 1-2: 1a) extending between the bead cores; and a belt layer (Figs. 1-2: 3) disposed on an outer side of the carcass layer in a radial direction.
Mizutani further discloses an embodiment wherein the tire size is 195/65R15 ([0016]). Thereby, the tire cross-sectional width/total tire width will be 195 mm, which falls within the claimed range of 100 mm ≤ SW ≤ 400 mm, and the tire cross-sectional height will be 126.75 mm (i.e., 195 mm x 0.65). Additionally, the tire outer diameter will be 634.5 mm (i.e., 126.75mm + 126.75 mm + (15” x 25.4 mm)), which also falls within the claimed range of 200 mm ≤ OD ≤ 660 mm. Case law holds that where prior art teaches a specific example falling within the claimed range, the claimed range is anticipated. See MPEP 2131.03.
Mizutani further discloses a point A1 being defined on a side profile at a same position in a tire radial direction as an end portion on an outer side in the radial direction of the bead cores, a distance H1 being defined from a tire maximum width position Ac to the point A1 in the tire radial direction, a point A1' being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 70% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac, and a point Am being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 35% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac (See annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
625
582
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Mizutani further discloses an embodiment wherein a radius of curvature RO (mm) (Figs. 1-2: R1) of an arc passing through the tire maximum width position Ac, the point A1', and the point Am when the tire is mounted on a specified rim, inflated to a specified internal pressure, and in an unloaded state (Fig. 1) is 25 mm ([0016]). Accordingly, RO/SH will be 0.20 (i.e., 25/126.75),which falls within the claimed range of 0.20 ≤ RO/SH ≤ 1.20. Case law holds that where prior art teaches a specific example falling within the claimed range, the claimed range is anticipated. See MPEP 2131.03.
The examiner notes that the claim limitations “a point A1 being defined on a side profile at a same position in a tire radial direction as an end portion on an outer side in the radial direction of the bead cores, a distance H1 being defined from a tire maximum width position Ac to the point A1 in the tire radial direction, a point A1' being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 70% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac, and a point Am being defined on the side profile at a radial position of 35% of the distance H1 from the tire maximum width position Ac” are arbitrary points that will necessarily exist on the tire, as disclosed by Aoki above.
The examiner further notes that a tire cross-sectional width DW appears to be illustrated and defined by Applicant’s original disclosure as being the same as a total tire width SW.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation).
Regarding claims 3-4, Aoki does not expressly recite the radius of curvature RO (mm) of the arc in the unloaded state is in a range 1.01 ≤ RO/RO’ ≤ 1.60 with respect to a radius of curvature RO' (mm) of the arc when the tire is mounted on a specified rim and inflated to a specified internal pressure and a load of 100% of a specified load is applied, or the radius of curvature RO' (mm) of the arc when the load of 100% is applied is in a range 1.01 ≤ RO'/RO" ≤ 1.50 with respect to a radius of curvature RO" (mm) of the arc when the tire is mounted on a specified rim and inflated to a specified internal pressure and a load of 150% of a specified load is applied.
Mizutani discloses a tire as discussed above in claim 1. Mizutani further recognizes that the curvature of the tire profile changes under load to achieve desired contact characteristics (Figs. 1-2), such as improving vibration characteristics like road noise in a low-frequency and a high-frequency range, without increasing costs or tire weight ([0001], [0004]-[0006]). In particular, the radius of curvature RO (Figs. 1-2: R1) is positioned at the tire’s maximum width position with its center of curvature facing inward is configured as a small radius that reduces the primary stiffness of the tire's cross-section ([0006]). Thus, although Mizutani does not expressly disclose the ratios of RO/RO’ or RO'/RO", the relationship between the unloaded state radius of curvature and the loaded states radii of curvature are considered to be result effective variables that will affect the aforementioned tire characteristics. It is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for the ratios RO/RO’ or RO'/RO". Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the ratios RO/RO’ or RO'/RO" in order to achieve the aforementioned tire characteristics. Accordingly, selecting a radius of curvature relationship within the claimed ranges would have been an obvious design choice yielding predictable results.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sakae (JP 2019119320, see machine translation).
Regarding claims 5-7, Aoki further discloses Aoki further discloses the carcass layer is formed of a pair of layered carcass plies ([0032]). Applicant’s specification discloses “the carcass layer 13 has a single layer structure formed of a single carcass ply … and the carcass ply is configured by arraying carcass cords made of steel covered with a coating rubber at a cord angle of 80 degrees or more and 100 degrees or less with respect to the tire circumferential direction … The carcass cord made of the steel described above has a cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.15 ≤ φcs ≤ 1.10 … and a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80 … and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Page 13). Applicant’s specification also discloses “the carcass ply may be constituted by a carcass cord made of an organic fiber material (for example, aramid, nylon, polyester, rayon, or the like) covered with a coating rubber … the carcass cord made of the organic fiber material has the cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.60 ≤ φcs ≤ 0.90 and the number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 40 ≤ Ecs ≤ 70, and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Pages 13-14).
While Aoki teaches that as the carcass cords, organic fiber cords of nylon, rayon, polyester, and the like can be used ([0032]), this is merely a preferable example and does not explicitly limit the disclosure to such a limitation. Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or non-preferred embodiments. It is also well settled that an applied reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one of the ordinary skill in the art, including not only preferred embodiments, but less preferred and even non-preferred. See MPEP 2123.
Sakae discloses a tire comprising a carcass ply with improved durability and resistance to uneven wear without increasing the mass of the carcass layer ([0006], [0010]), in particular over traditional organic fiber cords ([0002]), wherein the carcass ply comprises steel cords embedded in coating rubber ([0014]), and wherein the diameter of the cord (Fig. 2: 20) is also not particularly limited as long as it is 0.30 mm or less so as to make it easier to minimize the increase in tire mass ([0021]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.15≤ φcs ≤ 1.10. Sakae further discloses the cords comprise filaments (i.e., strands) (Fig. 2: 12) that each have a diameter that is not particularly limited but that may be 0.15 mm or less ([0009], [0020]), and the carcass cord is formed by intertwining a plurality of wire strands (Fig. 2) ([0007]-[0008], [0017], [0022], [0027]). When the diameter of the steel filament is 0.15 or mess, the filament is less susceptible to metal fatigue, the fatigue resistance of the carcass ply can be maintained, and the durability of the tire can be easily maintained ([0020]). Moreover, the twisted (i.e., intertwined) structure of the cords is less likely to collapse, making it easier to maintain symmetry, and as a result, unevenness in cord stiffness along the longitudinal direction is less likely to occur, and excellent durability is easily achieved ([0017]). Accordingly, the carcass cord has a wire strand diameter is 0.15 mm or less and the cord diameter is 0.3 mm or less, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.30 ≤ φcss/φcs ≤ 0.90. Sakae further discloses the carcass cord has a number of insertions in a range of 40 to 130 cords/inch (i.e., 79 to 256 pieces/50 mm) ([0023]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80. Case law holds that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Applicant's original disclosure fails to provide a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the carcass cord diameter φcs, the carcass cord number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm), and the carcass cord wire strand diameter φcss relative to the carcass cord diameter φcs. Sakae further discloses an embodiment wherein the tire size may be 225/40R18 ([0035]), which would have an outer diameter OD of 637 mm, which falls within the claimed range of 200 ≤ OD ≤ 660. Additionally, Sakae discloses the tensile strength of the carcass cord, which inevitably affects the tensile strength per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer, affects the durability ([0018]). In other words, the tensile strength of the carcass cords, and thereby the carcass ply itself, is considered to be a result effective variable that will affect durability. Thus, while Sakae does not explicitly disclose the value for a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said tensile strength. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer in order to obtain sufficient durability. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the carcass structure of Aoki with the carcass structure disclosed by Sakae for the advantages as discussed above.
Furthermore, while Aoki does not expressly recite that the pair of carcass plies are configured by covering, with a coating rubber, it is consistent with the fundamentals of tire construction to form carcass plies having cords covered with a coating rubber in order to keep the cords aligned in place and form the respective plies. Additionally, as discussed above, Sakae discloses embedding carcass cords within a coating rubber.
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sakamaki (JP 2009006768, see machine translation).
Regarding claims 5 and 8, Aoki further discloses Aoki further discloses the carcass layer is formed of a pair of layered carcass plies ([0032]), a carcass cord made of an organic fiber material ([0032]). Applicant’s specification discloses “the carcass layer 13 has a single layer structure formed of a single carcass ply … and the carcass ply is configured by arraying carcass cords made of steel covered with a coating rubber at a cord angle of 80 degrees or more and 100 degrees or less with respect to the tire circumferential direction … The carcass cord made of the steel described above has a cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.15 ≤ φcs ≤ 1.10 … and a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80 … and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Page 13). Applicant’s specification also discloses “the carcass ply may be constituted by a carcass cord made of an organic fiber material (for example, aramid, nylon, polyester, rayon, or the like) covered with a coating rubber … the carcass cord made of the organic fiber material has the cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.60 ≤ φcs ≤ 0.90 and the number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 40 ≤ Ecs ≤ 70, and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Pages 13-14).
While Aoki does not expressly recite that the pair of carcass plies are configured by covering, with a coating rubber, it is consistent with the fundamentals of tire construction to form carcass plies having cords covered with a coating rubber in order to keep the cords aligned in place and form the respective plies.
Sakamaki discloses a tire comprising a carcass ply comprising organic fibers ([0009], [0017]), similar to Aoki, wherein a cord diameter φcs (mm) of the carcass cord is in a range of 0.4 to 1.2 mm ([0009], [0018]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.60 ≤ φcs ≤ 0.90, and the carcass cord has a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in a range of 22 to 62 per 50 mm ([0009]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 40 ≤ Ecs ≤ 70. Sakamaki further discloses it is generally possible to improve the carcass's resistance to road curbs and uneven surfaces by increasing the cord diameter of the organic fiber cords used in the carcass, or by increasing the number of organic fiber cords inserted ([0013]). If the cord diameter is smaller than this range, it becomes difficult to achieve sufficient handling performance, while if it is larger, it becomes difficult to achieve sufficient ride comfort performance; in either case, it is undesirable ([0018]). The specific number of organic fiber cords that make up the carcass can be appropriately determined according to the cord diameter, but for example, when two carcasses are arranged, it is preferable to set the number of cords for the outer carcass to 22 to 62 per 50 mm, and the number of cords for the inner carcass to 18 to 52 per 50 mm. By using organic fiber cords with a cord diameter within the above-mentioned preferred range and a number of threads within the above-mentioned preferred range to construct carcasses, good carcass durability, lightness, and ride comfort can be obtained ([0019]). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the carcass of Aoki in order to provide the cord diameter and number of insertions in the ranges taught by Sakamaki for the advantages as discussed above.
Thereby, modified Aoki in view of Sakamaki discloses the tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) may be satisfied by using the same carcass ply as disclosed by Applicant’s specification. Case law holds that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. MPEP 2112.01. Aoki further discloses a tire outer diameter falling within the claimed range, as discussed above in claim 1. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized, or alternatively found obvious, that a ratio of a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer to the tire outer diameter will fall, or will at least be capable of falling, within the claimed range.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okazaki (US 20160288585).
Regarding claims 9-10, Aoki does not expressly recite a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile is in a range 1.01 ≤ G1'/Gc ≤ 2.00 with respect to a total gauge Gc (mm) at the tire maximum width position Ac, but does illustrate that G1’ is larger than Gc. Aoki also does not expressly recite a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile is in a range 0.4 ≤ G1'/G1 ≤ 0.95 with respect to a total gauge G1 (mm) of the tire side portion at the point A1.
Okazaki discloses a tire comprising a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile (Fig. 1: Gn) with respect to a total gauge G1 of the tire side portion at a point A1 (Fig. 1: G0) ([0037]-[0038]), wherein A1 is located at the bead core and A1’ is located between 0.26h to 0.48h (Fig. 1) ([0037]-[0038]), thereby including a location at 0.35H1. By varying G1’ to G1 it is possible to avoid greatly reducing the gauge and locally deteriorating the rigidity, and thereby it is unlikely to generate portions which serve as being positions in response to a side fore ([0041]-[0044]). In other words, the ratio of the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect rigidity and bending. While Okazaki does not explicitly disclose the value for a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile with respect to a total gauge G1 (mm) of the tire side portion at the point A1, or a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile with respect to a total gauge Gc at a tire maximum width position Ac, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said ratio G1’/G1 and for G1'/Gc. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the ratios G1’/G1 and G1'/Gc in order to provide sufficient and desired levels of rigidity and bending in the tire side portion.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lahure et al. (US 20060157182) and Okazaki (US 20160288585).
Regarding claim 11, Aoki further discloses the carcass layer comprises a body portion (Fig. 1: 6a) extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Fig. 1: 6b) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Fig. 1: 5) and extending in the tire radial direction.
Lahure discloses a tire comprising a carcass layer (Figs. 1-2: 12), wherein the carcass layer comprises a body portion extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 20) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 14) and extending in the tire radial direction, wherein a rubber gauge Gr from a point on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer (Fig. 2: CG) is designed to have a minimized chafer gauge that will lead to a bead area having a reduced weight, as well as increased strength and durability to the bead area ([0051]). In other words, the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect weight, strength, and durability. Similarly, Okazaki discloses a tire comprising a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile (Fig. 1: Gn) with respect to a total gauge G1 of the tire side portion at a point A1 (Fig. 1: G0) ([0037]-[0038]), wherein A1 is located at the bead core and A1’ is located between 0.26h to 0.48h (Fig. 1) ([0037]-[0038]), thereby including a location at 0.35H1. By varying G1’ to G1 it is possible to avoid greatly reducing the gauge and locally deteriorating the rigidity, and thereby it is unlikely to generate portions which serve as being positions in response to a side fore ([0041]-[0044]). In other words, the ratio of the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect rigidity and bending. Accordingly, both a rubber gauge Gr (mm) from the point A1' on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer and a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile are considered to be result effective variables that will affect the weight, strength, durability, rigidity, and bending of the bead side portion of the tire. While Lahura and Okazaki does not explicitly disclose the value for a ratio Gr/G1, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said ratio Gr/G1. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize a rubber gauge Gr (mm) from the point A1' on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile in order to improve bead and side area weight, strength, durability, rigidity, and bending.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (US 20030051789) as applied to claim 1 above, and optionally further in view of Lahure et al. (US 20060157182).
Regarding claim 12, Aoki further discloses the carcass layer comprises a body portion (Fig. 1: 6a) extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Fig. 1: 6b) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Fig. 1: 5) and extending in the tire radial direction.
Aoki further illustrates that a radial height Hcs (mm) from a measurement point of a tire inner diameter to an end portion of the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to the tire cross-sectional height SH is approximately 0.35 (Fig. 1), which falls well within the claimed range of 0.10 ≤ Hcs/SH ≤ 0.49. While Aoki does not state whether the figure is drawn to scale, one of ordinary skill in the art would have nonetheless found it obvious that the ratio of Hcs/SH would be reasonably in the range of approximately 0.35. Case law holds that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Applicant's original disclosure fails to provide a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the ratio.
Optionally, Lahure discloses a tire comprising a carcass layer (Figs. 1-2: 12), wherein the carcass layer comprises a body portion extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 20) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 14) and extending in the tire radial direction, and a radial height Hcs (mm) (Fig. 2: TH) from a measurement point of a tire inner diameter to an end portion of the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to the tire cross-sectional height SH (Fig. 1: SH) is approximately 35% to 45% (i.e., 0.35 to 0.45) ([0048]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.10 ≤ Hcs/SH ≤ 0.49. In this manner, it is possible to obtain a turned-up portion with reduced stress concentrations at the turned-up end ([0048]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Aoki in order to provide the ratio Hcs/SH in the range taught by Lahure for the advantages discussed above.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 3-4, Mizutani further recognizes that the curvature of the tire profile changes under load to achieve desired contact characteristics (Figs. 1-2), such as improving vibration characteristics like road noise in a low-frequency and a high-frequency range, without increasing costs or tire weight ([0001], [0004]-[0006]). In particular, the radius of curvature RO (Figs. 1-2: R1) is positioned at the tire’s maximum width position with its center of curvature facing inward is configured as a small radius that reduces the primary stiffness of the tire's cross-section ([0006]). Thus, although Mizutani does not expressly disclose the ratios of RO/RO’ or RO'/RO", the relationship between the unloaded state radius of curvature and the loaded states radii of curvature are considered to be result effective variables that will affect the aforementioned tire characteristics. It is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for the ratios RO/RO’ or RO'/RO". Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the ratios RO/RO’ or RO'/RO" in order to achieve the aforementioned tire characteristics. Accordingly, selecting a radius of curvature relationship within the claimed ranges would have been an obvious design choice yielding predictable results.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sakae (JP 2019119320, see machine translation).
Regarding claims 5-7, Mizutani does not expressly recite: a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer is in a range 17 ≤ Tcs/OD ≤ 120 with respect to the tire outer diameter OD (mm); the carcass ply of the carcass layer is configured by covering, with a coating rubber, a carcass cord made of steel, the carcass cord has a cord diameter φcs (mm) in a range 0.15≤ φcs ≤ 1.10, and the carcass cord has a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in a range 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80; or the carcass cord is formed by intertwining a plurality of wire strands, and the carcass cord has a wire strand diameter φcss (mm) in a range 0.30 ≤ φcss/φcs ≤ 0.90 with respect to the cord diameter pcs (mm) of the carcass cord.
Sakae discloses a tire comprising a carcass ply with improved durability and resistance to uneven wear without increasing the mass of the carcass layer ([0006], [0010]), in particular over traditional organic fiber cords ([0002]), wherein the carcass ply comprises steel cords embedded in coating rubber ([0014]), and wherein the diameter of the cord (Fig. 2: 20) is also not particularly limited as long as it is 0.30 mm or less so as to make it easier to minimize the increase in tire mass ([0021]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.15≤ φcs ≤ 1.10. Sakae further discloses the cords comprise filaments (i.e., strands) (Fig. 2: 12) that each have a diameter that is not particularly limited but that may be 0.15 mm or less ([0009], [0020]), and the carcass cord is formed by intertwining a plurality of wire strands (Fig. 2) ([0007]-[0008], [0017], [0022], [0027]). When the diameter of the steel filament is 0.15 or mess, the filament is less susceptible to metal fatigue, the fatigue resistance of the carcass ply can be maintained, and the durability of the tire can be easily maintained ([0020]). Moreover, the twisted (i.e., intertwined) structure of the cords is less likely to collapse, making it easier to maintain symmetry, and as a result, unevenness in cord stiffness along the longitudinal direction is less likely to occur, and excellent durability is easily achieved ([0017]). Accordingly, the carcass cord has a wire strand diameter is 0.15 mm or less and the cord diameter is 0.3 mm or less, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.30 ≤ φcss/φcs ≤ 0.90. Sakae further discloses the carcass cord has a number of insertions in a range of 40 to 130 cords/inch (i.e., 79 to 256 pieces/50 mm) ([0023]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80. Case law holds that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Applicant's original disclosure fails to provide a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the carcass cord diameter φcs, the carcass cord number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm), and the carcass cord wire strand diameter φcss relative to the carcass cord diameter φcs. Sakae further discloses an embodiment wherein the tire size may be 225/40R18 ([0035]), which would have an outer diameter OD of 637 mm, which falls within the claimed range of 200 ≤ OD ≤ 660. Additionally, Sakae discloses the tensile strength of the carcass cord, which inevitably affects the tensile strength per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer, affects the durability ([0018]). In other words, the tensile strength of the carcass cords, and thereby the carcass ply itself, is considered to be a result effective variable that will affect durability. Thus, while Sakae does not explicitly disclose the value for a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said tensile strength. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer in order to obtain sufficient durability. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the carcass structure of Mizutani with the carcass structure disclosed by Sakae for the advantages as discussed above.
Furthermore, while Mizutani does not expressly recite that the pair of carcass plies are configured by covering, with a coating rubber, it is consistent with the fundamentals of tire construction to form carcass plies having cords covered with a coating rubber in order to keep the cords aligned in place and form the respective plies. Additionally, as discussed above, Sakae discloses embedding carcass cords within a coating rubber.
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sakamaki (JP 2009006768, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 5, Mizutani is silent as to the materials of the carcass ply. Applicant’s specification discloses “the carcass layer 13 has a single layer structure formed of a single carcass ply … and the carcass ply is configured by arraying carcass cords made of steel covered with a coating rubber at a cord angle of 80 degrees or more and 100 degrees or less with respect to the tire circumferential direction … The carcass cord made of the steel described above has a cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.15 ≤ φcs ≤ 1.10 … and a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 25 ≤ Ecs ≤ 80 … and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Page 13). Applicant’s specification also discloses “the carcass ply may be constituted by a carcass cord made of an organic fiber material (for example, aramid, nylon, polyester, rayon, or the like) covered with a coating rubber … the carcass cord made of the organic fiber material has the cord diameter φcs (mm) in the range 0.60 ≤ φcs ≤ 0.90 and the number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in the range 40 ≤ Ecs ≤ 70, and thus the above-described tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) of the carcass layer 13 is achieved.” (Pages 13-14).
While Mizutani does not expressly recite that the pair of carcass plies are configured by covering, with a coating rubber, it is consistent with the fundamentals of tire construction to form carcass plies having cords covered with a coating rubber in order to keep the cords aligned in place and form the respective plies.
Sakamaki discloses a tire comprising a carcass ply comprising organic fibers ([0009], [0017]), wherein a cord diameter φcs (mm) of the carcass cord is in a range of 0.4 to 1.2 mm ([0009], [0018]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.60 ≤ φcs ≤ 0.90, and the carcass cord has a number of insertions Ecs (pieces/50 mm) in a range of 22 to 62 per 50 mm ([0009]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 40 ≤ Ecs ≤ 70. Sakamaki further discloses it is generally possible to improve the carcass's resistance to road curbs and uneven surfaces by increasing the cord diameter of the organic fiber cords used in the carcass, or by increasing the number of organic fiber cords inserted ([0013]). If the cord diameter is smaller than this range, it becomes difficult to achieve sufficient handling performance, while if it is larger, it becomes difficult to achieve sufficient ride comfort performance; in either case, it is undesirable ([0018]). The specific number of organic fiber cords that make up the carcass can be appropriately determined according to the cord diameter, but for example, when two carcasses are arranged, it is preferable to set the number of cords for the outer carcass to 22 to 62 per 50 mm, and the number of cords for the inner carcass to 18 to 52 per 50 mm. By using organic fiber cords with a cord diameter within the above-mentioned preferred range and a number of threads within the above-mentioned preferred range to construct carcasses, good carcass durability, lightness, and ride comfort can be obtained ([0019]). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the carcass of Mizutani in order to provide the cord diameter and number of insertions in the ranges taught by Sakamaki for the advantages as discussed above.
Thereby, modified Mizutani in view of Sakamaki discloses the tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) may be satisfied by using the same carcass ply as disclosed by Applicant’s specification. Case law holds that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. MPEP 2112.01. Mizutani further discloses a tire outer diameter falling within the claimed range, as discussed above in claim 1. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized, or alternatively found obvious, that a ratio of a tensile strength Tcs (N/50 mm) per a width of 50 mm of a carcass ply constituting the carcass layer to the tire outer diameter will fall, or will at least be capable of falling, within the claimed range.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okazaki (US 20160288585).
Regarding claims 9-10, Mizutani does not expressly recite a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile is in a range 1.01 ≤ G1'/Gc ≤ 2.00 with respect to a total gauge Gc (mm) at the tire maximum width position Ac, but does illustrate that G1’ is larger than Gc. Mizutani also does not expressly recite a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile is in a range 0.4 ≤ G1'/G1 ≤ 0.95 with respect to a total gauge G1 (mm) of the tire side portion at the point A1.
Okazaki discloses a tire comprising a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile (Fig. 1: Gn) with respect to a total gauge G1 of the tire side portion at a point A1 (Fig. 1: G0) ([0037]-[0038]), wherein A1 is located at the bead core and A1’ is located between 0.26h to 0.48h (Fig. 1) ([0037]-[0038]), thereby including a location at 0.35H1. By varying G1’ to G1 it is possible to avoid greatly reducing the gauge and locally deteriorating the rigidity, and thereby it is unlikely to generate portions which serve as being positions in response to a side fore ([0041]-[0044]). In other words, the ratio of the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect rigidity and bending. While Okazaki does not explicitly disclose the value for a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile with respect to a total gauge G1 (mm) of the tire side portion at the point A1, or a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile with respect to a total gauge Gc at a tire maximum width position Ac, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said ratio G1’/G1 and for G1'/Gc. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the ratios G1’/G1 and G1'/Gc in order to provide sufficient and desired levels of rigidity and bending in the tire side portion.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lahure et al. (US 20060157182) and Okazaki (US 20160288585).
Regarding claim 11, Mizutani further discloses the carcass layer comprises a body portion (Figs. 1-2: 1a) extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 1a) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 5) and extending in the tire radial direction.
Lahure discloses a tire comprising a carcass layer (Figs. 1-2: 12), wherein the carcass layer comprises a body portion extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 20) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 14) and extending in the tire radial direction, wherein a rubber gauge Gr from a point on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer (Fig. 2: CG) is designed to have a minimized chafer gauge that will lead to a bead area having a reduced weight, as well as increased strength and durability to the bead area ([0051]). In other words, the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect weight, strength, and durability. Similarly, Okazaki discloses a tire comprising a total gauge G1' of a tire side portion at a point A1' on the side profile (Fig. 1: Gn) with respect to a total gauge G1 of the tire side portion at a point A1 (Fig. 1: G0) ([0037]-[0038]), wherein A1 is located at the bead core and A1’ is located between 0.26h to 0.48h (Fig. 1) ([0037]-[0038]), thereby including a location at 0.35H1. By varying G1’ to G1 it is possible to avoid greatly reducing the gauge and locally deteriorating the rigidity, and thereby it is unlikely to generate portions which serve as being positions in response to a side fore ([0041]-[0044]). In other words, the ratio of the gauges in that portion of the tire side portion affect rigidity and bending. Accordingly, both a rubber gauge Gr (mm) from the point A1' on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer and a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile are considered to be result effective variables that will affect the weight, strength, durability, rigidity, and bending of the bead side portion of the tire. While Lahura and Okazaki does not explicitly disclose the value for a ratio Gr/G1, it is considered within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to rely on routine experimentation to arrive at suitable optimum operating parameters for said ratio Gr/G1. Absent unexpected results, case law holds that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B). In the present invention one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize a rubber gauge Gr (mm) from the point A1' on the side profile to the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to a total gauge G1' (mm) of a tire side portion at the point A1' on the side profile in order to improve bead and side area weight, strength, durability, rigidity, and bending.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani (JP H09300909, see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and optionally further in view of Lahure et al. (US 20060157182).
Regarding claim 12, Mizutani further discloses the carcass layer comprises a body portion (Figs. 1-2: 1a) extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 1a) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 5) and extending in the tire radial direction.
Mizutani further illustrates that a radial height Hcs (mm) from a measurement point of a tire inner diameter to an end portion of the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to the tire cross-sectional height SH is approximately 0.18 (Figs. 1-2), which falls within the claimed range of 0.10 ≤ Hcs/SH ≤ 0.49. While Mizutani does not state whether the figure is drawn to scale, one of ordinary skill in the art would have nonetheless found it obvious that the ratio of Hcs/SH would be reasonably in the range of approximately 0.18. Case law holds that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Applicant's original disclosure fails to provide a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the ratio.
Optionally, Lahure discloses a tire comprising a carcass layer (Figs. 1-2: 12), wherein the carcass layer comprises a body portion extending along a tire inner surface and a turned-up portion (Figs. 1-2: 20) turned up to an outer side in a tire width direction to wrap around the bead cores (Figs. 1-2: 14) and extending in the tire radial direction, and a radial height Hcs (mm) (Fig. 2: TH) from a measurement point of a tire inner diameter to an end portion of the turned-up portion of the carcass layer with respect to the tire cross-sectional height SH (Fig. 1: SH) is approximately 35% to 45% (i.e., 0.35 to 0.45) ([0048]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.10 ≤ Hcs/SH ≤ 0.49. In this manner, it is possible to obtain a turned-up portion with reduced stress concentrations at the turned-up end ([0048]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Mizutani in order to provide the ratio Hcs/SH in the range taught by Lahure for the advantages discussed above.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEDEF PAQUETTE whose telephone number is (571) 272-5031. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST - 4:00 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, KATELYN SMITH can be reached on (571) 270-5545. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. The fax phone number for the examiner is (571) 273-5031.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SEDEF E PAQUETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights