Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/208,517

TIRE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 14, 2025
Examiner
FISCHER, JUSTIN R
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Hankook Tire & Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
47%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
724 granted / 1626 resolved
-20.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
106 currently pending
Career history
1732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
69.8%
+29.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1626 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 102 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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lejeune (US 2020/0031174). As best depicted in Figure 1d, Lejeune teaches a tire construction comprising a plurality of display portions or textures and a plurality of non-display portions. See modified Figure 1d below. PNG media_image1.png 538 472 media_image1.png Greyscale It is further evident from Figure 2 that respective display portions are formed with a plurality of protruding elements (claimed projection portions) that extend from a base portion that is recessed with respect to said non-display portion. See modified Figure 2 below. PNG media_image2.png 318 634 media_image2.png Greyscale Lastly, with respect to claim 1, Figures 6 and 7 depict projection portions as being closed loop structures. See modified Figures 6 and 7 below. PNG media_image3.png 452 888 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, as depicted in Figure 2 above, said projections portions extent to a heigh that is below a surface of the non-display portion. As to claim 3, Figure 6 depicts the inclusion of a plurality of projection portions that are identical to one another and such is seen to constitute a “congruent” arrangement as required by the claims. With respect to claim 4, Figure 7 depicts variable spacing between adjacent projection portions and such is seen to constitute the claimed arrangement. 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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lejeune. As detailed above, Lejeune is directed to a tire construction comprising a plurality of display portions and non-display portions, wherein said display portions include a plurality of projection portions. Lejeune further states that respective projection portions can have identical shapes (Figure 6) or varying shapes and distances (Figure 7). While Figure 7 fails to expressly depict an arrangement in which said display portions have a phase difference of 90 degrees, such would have been obvious in view of the general disclosure of Lejeune to include different shapes and different distances (Paragraph 74). Absent a conclusive showing of unexpected results, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use any number of phase differences, including that required by the claimed invention. Claim(s) 6-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lejeune as applied in claims 1 and 4 above and further in view of Parr (WO 2015002981) and/or JP 6672851. As detailed above, Lejeune is directed to a tire construction comprising a plurality of non-display portions and a plurality of display portions, wherein said display portions include a plurality of projection portions. Lejeune further states that a wide variety shapes can be used for respective projection portions. While Lejeune fails to expressly teach the claimed geometries, it is generally well known and conventional in the tire industry to use any number of geometries (shapes, angles, etc.) for tire surface features, as shown for example by Parr (Paragraphs 33-50) and/or JP ‘851 (Figures 3-6). Thus, the prior art as a whole recognizes the known use of various shapes and various angles, including those that are insertable into one another, and such is consistent with the general disclosure of Lejeune. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use shapes and angles in accordance to the claimed invention absent a conclusive showing of unexpected results. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00. 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. Justin Fischer /JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 February 26, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 14, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600178
TUBELESS TIRE INSERT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600842
TYRE AND ELASTOMERIC COMPOUND FOR TYRE, COMPRISING CROSS-LINKED PHENOLIC RESINS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594792
Tire With Pressure Zero Sidewall Hoop Rings and Method of Manufacture
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583259
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576675
TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
47%
With Interview (+2.6%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1626 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month