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 Objections
Claim 1, 3, 5, 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 4, "the single land" should be --a single land--
Claim 3, line 3, "at least one of" should be --at least one shoulder main groove of"
Claim 5, line 5, "the first protrusion and the second land end" should be --the first protrusions and the second land ends--
Claim 6, line 5, "the recess and the first land end" should be --the recesses and the first land ends--
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-6 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 2 recites "at least some of the lands include the recesses, first protrusions, and second land ends" (all plural) then refers to "the first protrusion" and "the recess" (singular) in lines 1-4. Claim 2 also recites "having a first land end as the land end" and "the second land end . . . serving as the land end extending in the tire circumferential direction" in lines 4-6. Examiner notes that claim 1 recites plural land ends. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations due to the grammatical number mismatch. Furthermore, referring to both the first land end and the second land end as "the land end" creates confusion as to the structure being recited (are first land end and second land end portions of the land end or are they separate and distinct land ends?).
Claim 3 recites "the plurality of main grooves includes a pair of shoulder main grooves on both ends in the tire axial direction" in lines 1-2. It is unclear as to structure the "ends" are referring to. For the purpose of examination, it is assumed to be the ends of the tread.
Claim 3 recites "the pair of wall surfaces" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 only recites "wall surfaces" of the land ends having recesses.
Claim 3 recites "the first land ends" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
Claim 4 recites "the first block as having a first land end as the land end" in lines 6-7 and then recites "the second block having the recess indented in the tire axial direction from a wall surface of the first land end" in lines 7-8. It is unclear how the recess of the second block is intended to be indented from a wall surface of the first block. For the purpose of examination, Examiner assumes that the recess is indented from a wall surface of a land end of the second block.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 2014/0238567) in view of Tagashira (EP 602989).
Regarding claim 1, Iwasaki discloses a pneumatic tire with a tread including a plurality of main grooves and a plurality of lands ([0006], Fig. 1; see main grooves 3, 4 and lands 6), wherein
at least some of the lands are shaped such that land ends and recesses are arranged in a tire circumferential direction with the single land or a combination of the lands, the recesses being indented in a tire axial direction from wall surfaces of the land ends, the wall surfaces facing the tire axial direction (see annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
471
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Iwasaki does not disclose round chamfers that are arc-shaped in cross section formed on tops of the wall surfaces of at least some of the land ends. It would have been obvious, however, to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the tops of the wall surfaces with arc-shaped round chamfers since Tagashira, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches providing arc-shaped chamfers on the outer edges of all grooves within the tread to reduce tire noise and to prevent drifting by reducing an increase in conicity force with wear(col 5, lines 54-col 6, line 15; col 4, line 17-22).
Regarding claim 2, Iwasaki discloses at least some of the lands include the recesses, first protrusions, and second land ends that are arranged in the tire circumferential direction (see annotated Fig. 1 below), the first protrusion protruding substantially in a V shape from a bottom of the recess in the tire axial direction and having a first land end as the land end, the second land end being connected to one tire-circumferential end of the recess and serving as the land end extending in the tire circumferential direction. Examiner notes that the instant application depicts first protrusion 80 in Fig. 2 as having a trapezoidal outline that protrudes axially. In the same manner, the first protrusion identified in Iwasaki has a trapezoidal outline that protrudes axially and is considered to read on "protruding substantially in a V shape from a bottom of the recess."
PNG
media_image2.png
471
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding round chamfers that are arc-shaped in cross section being formed on a top of a wall surface of the first land end and a top of a wall surface of the second land end, Tagashira discloses providing arc-shaped chamfers on the top of all groove wall surfaces within the tread pattern to reduce noise (col 5, lines 54-57).
Regarding claim 3, Iwasaki discloses the plurality of main grooves includes a pair of shoulder main grooves on both ends in the tire axial direction (see shoulder main grooves 3),
at least one of the pair of shoulder main grooves includes the pair of wall surfaces on both sides in the tire axial direction, the single or the plurality of lands constituting at least one of the wall surfaces are shaped such that the recesses and the first land ends serving as the land ends connected to one tire-circumferential ends of the recesses are alternately arranged in the tire circumferential direction (see annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
471
694
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As to round chamfers that are arc-shaped in cross section being formed on the tops of the wall surfaces of at least some of the land ends, Tagashira discloses providing arc-shaped chamfers on the top of all groove wall surfaces within the tread pattern to reduce noise (col 5, lines 54-57).
Regarding claim 5, Iwasaki discloses a shoulder land disposed at a position including a ground contacting end (see shoulder portion 5), and an inner land provided inside the shoulder land in the tire axial direction (see middle portion 6), the tread further including a shoulder main groove disposed between the shoulder land and the inner land (see shoulder main groove 3), and the first protrusion and the second land end are provided on an opposite side of the inner land from the shoulder main groove (see annotated Fig. 1 under discussion of claim 2, the first protrusion and second land are provided on the center main groove side of middle portion 6).
Regarding claim 6, Iwasaki discloses a shoulder land disposed at a position including a ground contacting end (see shoulder portion 5), and an inner land provided inside the shoulder land in the tire axial direction (see middle portion 6), the tread further including a shoulder main groove disposed between the shoulder land and the inner land (see shoulder main groove 3), and the recess and the first land end are provided on the inner land near the shoulder main groove (see annotated Fig. 1 under discussion of claim 3, the recess and first land end are provided on the shoulder main groove side).
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 2014/0238567) in view of Yamakawa (US 2016/0214438).
Regarding claim 1, Iwasaki discloses a pneumatic tire with a tread including a plurality of main grooves and a plurality of lands ([0006], Fig. 1; see main grooves 3, 4 and lands 6), wherein
at least some of the lands are shaped such that land ends and recesses are arranged in a tire circumferential direction with the single land or a combination of the lands, the recesses being indented in a tire axial direction from wall surfaces of the land ends, the wall surfaces facing the tire axial direction (see annotated Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
477
776
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Iwasaki does not disclose round chamfers that are arc-shaped in cross section formed on tops of the wall surfaces of at least some of the land ends. It would have been obvious, however, to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the tops of the wall surfaces with arc-shaped round chamfers since Yamakawa, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches providing rounded corner portions on the outer edges of the shoulder blocks wherein the rounded corners' radii of curvature vary depending on the block widths to enhance snow performance and rut performance, to reduce a difference in ground reaction force, and to enhance tire uniformity ([0012-0014,0027-0029, 0054,0056]). Examiner notes that Iwasaki's blocks are shown to have different circumferential widths and that it is conventional to vary block widths to reduce tire pattern noise (see Yamakawa, [0070]).
Regarding claim 4, Iwasaski discloses at least some of the lands are a plurality of shoulder blocks that are located at positions including a ground contacting end on at least one side in the tire axial direction and are arranged in the tire circumferential direction, the plurality of shoulder blocks includes first blocks and second blocks that are alternately arranged in the tire circumferential direction (see annotated Fig. 1 above), the first block having a first land end as the land end, the second block having the recess indented in the tire axial direction from a wall surface of the first land end (see notch in land ends of the blocks), the wall surface facing outward in the tire axial direction.
As to round chamfers that are arc-shaped in cross section being formed on tops of the wall surfaces of at least some of the first land ends, Yamakawa discloses providing rounded chamfers on all the wall surfaces of the shoulder land ends.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mori (US 20020053382) discloses providing arc-shaped chamfers on all groove edges.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C DYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT C DYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619