Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/921,844

TIRE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Oct 21, 2024
Examiner
SCHWARTZ, PHILIP N
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sumitomo Rubber Industries, LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
308 granted / 558 resolved
-9.8% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
69 currently pending
Career history
627
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
59.7%
+19.7% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 558 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 § 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. Claims 14-15 are 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 14 recites the limitation "the grooves" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 is also rejected as depending upon claim 14. Claim 15 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 14 defines a plurality of grooves, but claim 15 which depends upon it refers to “the groove”, and thus there is a singular/plural mismatch. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-15 would be allowable if the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 above are overcome. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Murata is taken to be the closest prior art of record. Regarding claims 14-15, Murata does not teach or suggest, in addition to the other claimed limitations, that a plurality of grooves are formed in the second tread surface, in the context of claim 14, and there is no teaching or suggestion in the prior art of record to modify Murata to arrive at such a configuration. Claims 1-13 and 16 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Murata is taken to be the closest prior art of record. Regarding claims 1-11 and 16, Murata does not teach or suggest, in addition to the other claimed limitations, that an edge is formed at a point at which the first side surface and the second tread surface intersect each other, in the context of claim 1, and there is no teaching or suggestion in the prior art of record to modify Murata to arrive at such a configuration. Regarding claims 12-13, Murata teaches a groove 31b formed on a portion of the first side surface outward of the midpoint in the radial direction (see figure 4), and the claim requires the absence of such a feature, in the context of claim 12, and there is no teaching or suggestion in the prior art of record to modify Murata to arrive at the claimed configuration. 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.” Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments and arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections of the claims have been withdrawn. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP N SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1612. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30. 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, 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. /P.N.S/ Examiner, Art Unit 1749 February 17, 2026 /JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 21, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 06, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583263
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12552119
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR APPLYING A SEALING AGENT TO THE SURFACE OF AN INTERNAL CAVITY OF A PNEUMATIC TYRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12521951
TIRE MOLD AND METHOD FOR TIRE MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12496855
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12472779
TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+35.8%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 558 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month