Invalidity dossier
US 9031739
Method for determining inner failure of tire
Current assignee: Bridgestone Corp
Added 9/23/2026, 11:14:55 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US 9,031,739 B2
Title: Method for determining inner failure of tire
Patent number: US9031739B2. Application number: US13/805,430. Inventor: Takeshi Masago. Original/current assignee: Bridgestone Corp. Priority date: 2010-06-24. Filing date: 2010-12-03. Publication date: 2015-05-12 (grant). Prior-art date listed: 2010-06-24. Anticipated expiration (per listing): 2030-12-03. Earlier publication US20130131915A1. Classifications include B60C19/00, B60C11/24, B60C11/246, G01M17/02, G01M17/007, and B60C2019/004.
Purpose: To provide a method for accurately determining internal failures, such as separations, of a tire during vehicular travel, without affecting tire behavior. The inventor observed that faulty tires (with a separation) tend to have a shorter ground contact length in the tread center area, and that the radial acceleration waveform's peak levels at the bulge points are lower for faulty tires.
Plain-language scope: Radial acceleration of a tire during travel is detected by an acceleration sensor installed on the tire's inner surface in the tread center area. A "band value" — the magnitude of vibrational components in a specific frequency band — is calculated from that acceleration. The band value is compared against a predetermined band value of a normal tire, and an internal failure is determined when the calculated band value is smaller than the normal tire's. The specific frequency band includes the frequency of the second lowest peak in the frequency spectrum from frequency analysis of the radial acceleration (the lowest peak being attributable to road surface unevenness or characteristic tire vibration near 40 Hz). Additional aspects: the specific frequency band is within 100 Hz to 400 Hz, and the specific frequency band is changed relative to vehicular speed. Further aspects concern a leading-edge side band value calculated from the leading-edge region waveform, and a trailing-edge side band value (per the excerpt's opening of that passage).
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9031739/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide complete claim text, the full description, the exact number of claims, the complete leading-edge/trailing-edge determination logic, or any other embodiments. It also does not establish litigation, ownership transfers, validity, or prior-art conclusions, and no independent verification of the listed dates or legal status is made here.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:32:48 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9031739. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.