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 .
1) 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.
2) Claims 4, 6, 8, 17-18 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In each of claims 4, 6 and 8, “the first curved portion of each first communicating sipe is convex toward an oblique direction with respect to the axial direction the second curved portion of each second communicating sipe is convex” should be --“the first curved portion of each first communicating sipe is convex toward an oblique direction with respect to the axial direction and the second curved portion of each second communicating sipe is convex-- to correct the grammar. In other words, --and-- should be inserted before “the second curved portion” in each of claims 4, 6 and 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
3) 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.
Kageyama
4) Claims 1-2 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama (US 2018/0290498) in view of Japan 426 (JP 2002-046426).
Kageyama discloses a pneumatic tire (tire size 265/70R17) having a tread comprising circumferential grooves separating a center land portion, middle land portions and shoulder land portions. FIGURE 1 is reproduced below:
PNG
media_image1.png
423
675
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Each middle land portion comprises one end open outer sipes, one end open inner sipes and both end open zigzag sipes; one of ordinary skill in the art readily understanding that sipes are usually drawn as lines in the tire tread art since sipes have a narrow width. Each zigzag sipe comprises linear outer segment, linear inclined middle segment and linear inner segment. Kageyama discloses the claimed invention except for the "first curved portion".
As to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kageyama’s pneumatic tire such that for each zigzag sipe in a middle land portion, the linear inclined middle segment is connected to each of the linear outer segment and the linear inner segment by a curved portion since Japan 426 teaches providing a pneumatic tire having a tread comprising zigzag sipes in middle land portions (each zigzag sipe comprising linear outer segment, linear inclined middle segment and linear inner segment) such that each bent portion between the middle segment and the adjacent segment (inner segment or outer segment) is a curved portion to improve wear resistance of the bent portion [FIGURES 1-2, machine translation]. With respect to Kageyama’s tire tread as modified by Japan 426, the claimed first linear portion reads on the linear inner segment of the zigzag sipe and the claimed first curved portion reads on the curved portion connecting the linear inner segment and the linear inclined middle segment of the zigzag sipe.
As to claim 2, Kageyama’s pneumatic tire defines alternating “first zigzag sipes” and “second zigzag sipes” in a middle land portion. With respect to one of these “second zigzag sipes”, the claimed second linear portion reads on the linear outer segment of the second zigzag sipe and the claimed second curved portion reads on the curved portion (suggested by Japan 426) connecting the linear outer segment of the second zigzag sipe and the linear inclined segment of the second zigzag sipe.
As to claims 11-13: When the bent portions of the both end open zigzag sipe in the middle land portion of Kageyama’s pneumatic tire [FIGURE 1] are configured as curved portions as per Japan 426, then the one end open outer sipes and the one end inner sipes in the middle land portion are disposed within a virtual region as claimed.
As to claims 14 and 15, each middle block of the middle land portion includes two different length one end open outer sipes and two different length one end open inner sipes [FIGURE 1].
5) Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama (US 2018/0290498) in view of Japan 426 (JP 2002-046426) as applied above and further in view of Japan 216 (JP 10-297216).
As to claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kageyama’s pneumatic tire such that the middle land portion has alternating large and small pitches so that the middle land portion has alternating long and short blocks and, with respect to the zigzag sipes, the middle land portion has circumferentially long first zigzag sipes and circumferentially short second zigzag sipes; dimension L5 smaller than dimension L4 thereby being defined since Japan 216 teaches providing a pneumatic tire (tire size 205/50ZR17) having a tread comprising a middle land portion comprising blocks such that the middle land portion has alternating large and small pitches so that the middle land portion has alternating long and short blocks [FIGURE 1] so that wet performance and low noise can be kept and the CF characteristic (grip performance) can be remarkably improved [machine translation].
As to claim 4: Since each of Kageyama’s zigzag sipes (as modified by Japan 426) has two curved portions, the limitation regarding convex toward an oblique direction which is opposite described in claim 4 is satisfied.
As to claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kageyama’s pneumatic tire such that dimension L4 is 50% to 100% of a distance L6 and dimension L5 is 10% to 50% of distance L6 in view of (1) Kageyama’s disclosure to provide one zigzag sipe in each middle block and (2) Japan 216’s above noted teaching to use long and short middle blocks in a tread of a pneumatic tire.
As to claim 6, see comment for claim 4.
6) Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama (US 2018/0290498) in view of Japan 426 (JP 2002-046426) as applied above and further in view of Japan 459 (JP 2006-056459) and Horiguchi et al (US 2019/0329599).
Kageyama discloses a single crown land portion between central circumferential grooves 3C, 3C.
As to claim 16, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kageyama’s pneumatic tire such that the zigzag sipes in the crown portion of the tread of Kageyama’s pneumatic tire extend from first recesses to second recesses since (1) Japan 459 teaches providing a pneumatic tire, which may be a passenger tire [paragraph 48 of machine translation], having a tread comprising a center land portion having zigzag sipes S5 wherein each zigzag sipe S5 connects a first recess 9A and a second recess 9B for forming a cross shaped snow column and increase shear resistance to enhance grip property and to discharge snow in the groove [FIGURES 1-3, paragraph 31 of machine translation] and (2) Horiguchi et al teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger size 215/60R16) having a center land portion having sipes 37 wherein each sipe 37 connects a first recess 31 and a second recess 32 to increase on snow traction [FIGURE 1, paragraph 71].
As to claim 19, Japan 426 renders obvious configuring each bent portion of the zigzag sipes in the center land portion of Kageyama as curved portions as explained above.
7) Claim 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama (US 2018/0290498) in view of Japan 426 (JP 2002-046426) and Japan 216 (JP 10-297216) as applied above and further in view of Japan 459 (JP 2006-056459) and Horiguchi et al (US 2019/0329599).
Kageyama discloses a single crown land portion between central circumferential grooves 3C, 3C.
As to claim 17, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide Kageyama’s pneumatic tire such that the zigzag sipes in the crown portion of the tread of Kageyama’s pneumatic tire extend from first recesses to second recesses since (1) Japan 459 teaches providing a pneumatic tire, which may be a passenger tire [paragraph 48 of machine translation], having a tread comprising a center land portion having zigzag sipes S5 wherein each zigzag sipe S5 connects a first recess 9A and a second recess 9B for forming a cross shaped snow column and increase shear resistance to enhance grip property and to discharge snow in the groove [FIGURES 1-3, paragraph 31 of machine translation] and (2) Horiguchi et al teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger size 215/60R16) having a center land portion having sipes 37 wherein each sipe 37 connects a first recess 31 and a second recess 32 to increase on snow traction [FIGURE 1, paragraph 71].
China 295 (curved portion extends across center)
8) Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over China 295 (CN 116039295) in view of China 375 (CN 108909375) or Ishizaka (US 2009/0114325).
China 295 discloses an automobile tire having a tread comprising a center rib (central rib), middle ribs (central ribs) and shoulder ribs separated by circumferential grooves 1 [FIGURE 1, machine translation]. FIGURES 1 and 2 of China 295 is reproduced below:
PNG
media_image2.png
486
947
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Each middle rib (middle land portion) comprises both end open middle sipes 4 (width less than 2 mm) [FIGURES 1-2, machine translation]. Each middle sipe 4 comprises a first linear portion extending from a crown circumferential groove and a first curved portion extending from the first linear portion across the center of the middle rib (middle land portion) to the shoulder circumferential groove [FIGURES 1-2]. China 295 teaches that the number of central ribs is two to four. FIGURE 1 illustrates a tread pattern having three central ribs. China 295 does not recite the middle rib (middle land portion) comprising one end open outer sipes and one end open inner sipes.
As to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide China 295’s automobile tire such that the middle rib (central / middle land portion) comprises one end open outer sipes (these sipes terminating in the central / middle rib) and one end open inner sipes (these sipes terminating in the central / middle rib) since (1) China 375 teaches providing a pneumatic tire (passenger tire size 225/75R16) having a tread comprising central ribs and shoulder ribs separated by circumferential grooves such that each central rib comprises both end opening sipes 27 and one end open sipes 26 so that the tire has improved wet and snow braking performance [FIGURE 1, machine translation, TABLES 1-2] or (2) Ishizaka teaches providing a pneumatic tire having a tread comprising a center rib, middle ribs and shoulder ribs separated by circumferential grooves such that the middle ribs comprise both end open sipes 52 to improve wet braking performance and one end open sipes 52 to improve uneven wear resistance [FIGURE 1]. With respect to “26” and “27” in China 375 being sipes, “26” and “26” are drawn as lines; sipes usually being drawn as lines in the tire art since sipes have a narrow width. Also, China 375 describes “26” and ”27” as being a “steel sheet groove” and it is known in the tire tread art to form sipes in a tread using narrow thickness steel sheets (steel sipe blades) in a tire mold.
As to claim 10, the curved portion of the both end open sipes 4 in the middle ribs of China 295’s automobile tire extend across the center of the middle rib [FIGURES 1 and 2].
ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER
9) Claims 7-9, 18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 7, the prior art fails to render obvious “the axially inner portion includes a third linear portion extending linearly from an axially inner end of the second curved portion to the crown circumferential groove” in combination with the remaining subject matter of claims 1-3 and 5.
Remarks
10) The remaining references are of interest.
11) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN D MAKI whose telephone number is (571)272-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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 B Smith (Whatley) 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.
/STEVEN D MAKI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
August 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights