Ex Parte Stuckey et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jun 20, 2018

13947695 (P.T.A.B. Jun. 20, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/947,695 07/22/2013
48985 7590 06/22/2018
BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS, INC.
10 East Firestone Blvd.
AKRON, OH 44317
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Jon I. Stuckey
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
Pl l 129US1A 6824
EXAMINER
DYE, ROBERT C
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1747
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
06/22/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
iplawpat@bfusa.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JON I. STUCKEY, KATHLEEN CLEMMER, and
KENTD. WEATHERWAX
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
Technology Center 1700
Before CATHERINE Q. TIMM, BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, and
MERRELL C. CASHION, JR., Administrative Patent Judges.
TIMM, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant2 appeals from the
Examiner's decision to reject claims 1-3, 5-8, 3 12, 13, 15-20, and 22 under
1 In explaining our Decision, we cite to the Specification of July 22, 2013
(Spec.), Final Office Action of August 30, 2016 (Final Act.), Appeal Brief of
January 30, 2017 (Br.), and Examiner's Answer of March 24, 2017 (Ans.).
2 Appellant is the Applicant, Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC,
which, according to the Brief, is the real party in interest. Br. 1.
3 Although the Final Office Action omits claims 5-7 from the statement of
rejection, the discussion of these claims in the body of the rejection indicate
claims 5-7 are rejected. Final Act. 5. The error is harmless given Appellant
recognizes the claims as rejected. Br. 11.
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Sugitani4 in view ofYamashita5 and,
optionally, further in view of Genta 6 and Imhoff7 and adding further prior art
references to reject claims 9-11 and 21. We have jurisdiction under
35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
The invention is directed to a tire made without large amounts of steel
or other metal. Spec. ,r 1. According to the Specification, "[i]t had been
understood in the art that a steel belt was required in radial tires to prevent
undesired expansion of the tire that would result in poor cornering
performance." Spec. ,r 2. The Specification also states that prior non-steel
constructions were not viable alternatives to steel-belted tires because they
tend to deform easily, wear faster, and are unable to travel at high speeds.
Id. Appellant's claims are directed to a tire made with reduced amounts of
steel or other metal in the belts, reinforcements, cap plies, shoulders, and
sidewalls and that has a 1 degree cornering coefficient of between 0.23 and
0.30. See, e.g., claims 1, 12, 16; Spec. ,r 1. Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A tire comprising:
a first annular bead and a second annular bead;
a body ply extending between the first annular bead and
the second annular bead;
4Sugitani et al., US 2009/0165916 Al, published July 2, 2009.
5 Yamashita, US 2008/0006359 Al, published Jan. 10, 2008.
6 Giancarlo Genta, Motor Vehicle Dynamics Modeling and Simulation, 43
Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences 69-71 (1997).
7 Imhoff et al., US 2007/0209751 Al, published Sept. 13, 2007.
2
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
a circumferential belt disposed radially outward of the
body ply and extending axially across a portion of the body ply;
a first reinforcement ply disposed radially outward of the
circumferential belt and extending axially across a portion of
the body ply;
a circumferential tread disposed radially outward of the
first reinforcement ply and extending axially across a portion of
the body ply;
a first sidewall extending between the first annular bead
and a first shoulder, the first shoulder being associated with the
circumferential tread; and
a second sidewall extending between the second annular
bead and a second shoulder, the second shoulder being
associated with the circumferential tread,
wherein the tire is inflated to an inflation pressure of
between 15 and 45 psi,
wherein the tire has a 1 degree cornering coefficient of
between 0.23 and 0.30, and
wherein only the first and second annular beads contain
metal.
Br. 17 ( claims appendix) ( emphasis added).
OPINION
Appellant argues the claims and rejections as a group and concentrates
on the Examiner's findings with regard to the limitations in claims 1, 12, and
16 and, particularly, the limitations excluding metal in regions of the tire
other than the annular beads and the requirement that the 1 degree cornering
coefficient be between 0.23 and 0.30. Br. 11-16.
3
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
With regard to the presence of metal, Appellant notes that
independent claim 1 recites that "only the first and second annular beads
contain metal," independent claim 12 recites "a metal-free circumferential
belt region" and a "metal-free circumferential tread," and independent claim
16 recites "a non-metallic annular belt." Br. 11. The question is whether
Appellant has identified a reversible error in the Examiner's finding that the
prior art teaches or suggests a tire that is metal-free in regions other than the
annular beads such as in the annular circumferential belt and tread regions.
Of particular interest are the findings and arguments directed to
Sugitani. The Examiner finds that Sugitani suggests a tire with organic fiber
cords in each of its annular belt reinforcements 8, 9, 10. Final Act. 3 ( citing
Sugitani ,r,r 26, 33). Appellant contends the Examiner has misinterpreted
Sugitani. Br. 11. According to Appellant, Sugitani requires at least one belt
formed of steel. Br. 11-12. Appellant has not identified a reversible error
in the Examiner's interpretation of Sugitani.
Sugitani is directed to a run flat tire with enhanced maneuverability,
particularly starting ability, on icy roads when flat and with enhanced ride
comfort and driving stability on snowy roads when inflated. Sugitani ,r 1.
Sugitani recognized that prior run flat tires would buckle when
running flat and this would reduce the tire's contact with the road as shown
in Figure 5. Sugitani ,r 3. This lower contact reduced the maneuverability of
the tire on low friction surfaces such as icy roads. Id. It was known in the
art to add a belt layer that increases the compression stiffness of the tire in
the width direction to suppress buckling, but this increases stiffness and
decreases the comfort of the ride. Sugitani ,r,r 4--8. Sugitani solves this ride
4
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
comfort problem while suppressing buckling by disposing the cords of the
belt layers (belt layers 8, 9, 10) at particular angles. Sugitani ,r,r 10, 13, 17-
18. Sugitani is particularly concerned with increasing the compression
stiffness in the width direction of the tread portion of the tire while
suppressing an increase in out-of-plane stiffness in the circumferential
direction of the belt layers. Sugitani ,r 17.
Sugitani discloses that each of the cords of the belt layers "is
preferably formed of steel cords or organic fiber cords having high strength
and high modulus of elasticity." Sugitani ,r 33. Sugitani then lists a number
of organic fiber cord materials having the desired strength and elasticity
properties. Id. In the next paragraph, Sugitani states preferences for using
steel cord in either: (1) at least one of belt layer 9 and 10 or (2) both belt
layers 9 and 10. Sugitani ,r 34. Specifically, Sugitani states that:
In the present embodiment, it is preferable that at least
one of the intermediate belt layer 9 and the outermost belt layer
10 be formed of a steel cord. It is more preferable that both of
these belt layers 9 and 10 be formed of a steel cord. This makes
it possible to securely increase the compression stiffness of the
tread portion 4 in the width direction. Accordingly, the buckling
phenomenon in run-flat running can be securely suppressed. As
a result, since the area of the contact patch of the tire is secured,
the maneuverability (particularly, the starting performance) on
icy road surfaces can be further enhanced.
Sugitani ,r 34 (reference numeral bolding omitted, emphasis added).
The use of "preferable," "securely," and "further" in the above
paragraph indicate that steel cords were merely preferred and that organic
fiber cords were viewed as a viable, although less preferred, alternative in
belt layers 9 and 10. Sugitani is not stating that steel cord must be used.
5
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
Rather, Sugitani is teaching that using steel cord in belt layers 9 and 10 will
provide the flat tire with an increased suppression of buckling and, thus,
further enhance its maneuverability on icy roads. Sugitani ,r 34. The
Examiner's interpretation of Sugitani as broadly disclosing that the belt
layers 8, 9, 10 can be formed of organic fiber cords and that the use of steel
cord is merely a preferred embodiment is reasonable and supported by a
preponderance of the evidence.
A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably
suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred
embodiments. Merck & Co v. Biocraft Labs., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir.
1989). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a
teaching away from a broader disclosure or non-preferred embodiments. In
re Susi, 440 F.2d 442,446 n.3 (CCPA 1971). Thus, Appellant has not
identified a reversible error in the Examiner's finding that Sugitani teaches
or suggests a tire with non-metal belts.
Turning to the limitation on the 1 degree cornering coefficient,
independent claim 1 requires the coefficient between 0.23 and 0.30.
Appellant contends that "[ n ]othing in the cited references teaches or
suggests that a tire having non-metal belts could achieve such a cornering
coefficient." Br. 14. We disagree. Appellant's own Specification indicates
that, although using organic fiber cords such as nylon cords will reduce the
cornering coefficient, the coefficient may still be within the claimed range.
See Spec. ,r,r 55, 65 (Tires 2 and 3 having two low angle, 45 degree nylon
belts and two nylon cap plies have a cornering coefficient that is reduced
23% to 31 %, respectively, from that of Tire 1, which has two steel belts and
6
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
two cap plies, but the cornering coefficient of those tires is 0.30 and 0.28,
respectively, which is still well within the operational ranges of
commercially available passenger car tires).
Moreover, the evidence supports the Examiner's finding that one
following the teachings of Sugitani would have arrived at tires with
cornering coefficients with the range of claim 1 when such was desired.
Sugitani suggests using high strength and high modulus of elasticity organic
fiber cords that may be, for example, bicomponent fiber including any of, an
aramid fiber, a polyketone fiber, a polyethylene naphthalate fiber, and a
poly(p-phenylene-benzobisoxazole) fiber, each having a tensile modulus of
elasticity from 10,000 N/mm2 to 150,000 N/mm2, and preferably from
20,000 N/mm2 to 100,000 N/mm2. Sugitani ,r 33. As pointed out by the
Examiner, Sugitani' s belts have cords oriented at similar angles as those of
Appellant. Final Act. 4. Also, Genta and Imhoff provide evidence that the
cornering coefficient was a known result effective variable for which values
of between 0.23 and 0.30 were conventional for passenger car tires such as
low aspect-ratio, high performance tires (see, e.g., Genta 70, Fig. 2.3 l(a))
and that tires with organic fiber cords could, in fact, achieve cornering
coefficients even higher than those of claim 1, if desired (Imhoff,I,I 72, 73).
As stated by the Examiner, the ordinary artisan "would have been motivated
to configure the tire's cornering coefficient based on the desired cornering
and handling properties (higher cornering coefficient for higher cornering
forces/performance needs)." Final Act. 5. Appellant has not identified a
reversible error in the Examiner's determinations with respect to the
7
Appeal2017-009097
Application 13/947,695
obviousness of forming tires with a cornering coefficient within the
cornering coefficient range of claim 1.
CONCLUSION
We sustain the Examiner's rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
DECISION
The Examiner's decision is affirmed.
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l).
AFFIRMED
8