DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is a response to amendments submitted on 08/10/2026.
2. Applicant's arguments filed with respect to claims have been considered but they are not persuasive.
See response to applicants’ arguments at the end of the action.
3. Claims 1-23 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
New added 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling and as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-23 recite “wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature is a structure distinct from the plurality of contact members, and wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature does not establish an electrically conductive connection with the tension members.
However, as best understood, the specifications merely disclose (pars. 45 and 56) that the connector 40 further includes a plurality of contact members 56 (Figure 3C) that establish electrically conductive connections with the tension members 34 in the suspension member 26. The alignment feature 54 aligns the contact members 56 and the tension members 34 to a common reference R to reduce potential misalignment between the suspension member 26 and the contact members 56. If there is mis-alignment, one of the tension members 34 may not have an electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members 56, which would mean that there would be no electrical resistance information for that tension member 34…. Next, electrically conductive connections are established between the contact members 56 and tension members 34 in the suspension member 26 in response to the at least one alignment feature 54 aligning the contact members 56 with the tension members 34 as indicated at step 300.
There is not disclosure that positive enable that at least one suspension member alignment feature does not establish an electrically conductive connection with the tension members, unless there is mis-alignment, one of the tension members 34 may not have an electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members 56, which in any case is explicit or implicit as claimed.
For purposes of office action these claims will be interpreted as an undesired malfunction or electrically conductive connection, hence, will not have patentable weight.
5. 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 21-23 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. Claims 21-23 recite “wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature is a structure distinct from the plurality of contact members, and wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature does not establish an electrically conductive connection with the tension members.
However, as best understood, the specifications merely disclose (pars. 45 and 56) that the connector 40 further includes a plurality of contact members 56 (Figure 3C) that establish electrically conductive connections with the tension members 34 in the suspension member 26. The alignment feature 54 aligns the contact members 56 and the tension members 34 to a common reference R to reduce potential misalignment between the suspension member 26 and the contact members 56. If there is mis-alignment, one of the tension members 34 may not have an electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members 56, which would mean that there would be no electrical resistance information for that tension member 34…. Next, electrically conductive connections are established between the contact members 56 and tension members 34 in the suspension member 26 in response to the at least one alignment feature 54 aligning the contact members 56 with the tension members 34 as indicated at step 300.
There is not disclosure that positive enable that at least one suspension member alignment feature does not establish an electrically conductive connection with the tension members, unless there is mis-alignment, one of the tension members 34 may not have an electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members 56, which in any case is explicit or implicit as claimed.
Hence, it is unclear and vague how to interpret as a common invention feature and to person skilled aunt the art to positive understand the scope of the clain there are unrelated and occasional actions or reactions such as if there is mis-alignment, one of the tension members 34 may not have an electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members. Leaving the question of what happens when there is not mis-alignment, or if the invention provides enough description to purposely avoid electrically conductive connection with one of the contact members.
For purposes of office action these claims will be interpreted as an undesired malfunction or electrically conductive connection, hence, will not have patentable weight.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ZHOU et al. (CN 114988250 A).
In regards to claim 1, ZHOU shows a connector (see Figs. 2-7) comprising:
a body (i.e. full enclosure, 220) defining an internal cavity (i.e. receiving space 620) configured to receive a suspension member (i.e. 140 as general aspect, 210/211, 910/313) of an elevator system (110);
at least one suspension member alignment feature (i.e. interpreted as internal recess 650) formed on an inner wall surface that surrounds the internal cavity (see cavity within 220, Figs. 6-7); and
a plurality of contact members (i.e. conductive member 241) that establish electrically conductive connections with tension members (i.e. 140/211/913 inside 210) in the suspension member (i.e. 140 as general aspect, 210, 910/911/914),
wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) aligns the contact members (241) with the tension members (140/210/211).
PNG
media_image1.png
531
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claims 2-3 and 12, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 2-7) wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature (620/650) comprises at least one contact surface (i.e. 230/610) that extends at an angle relative to the inner wall surface, wherein the at least one contact surface comprises a key (i.e. 241) that is centered within the internal cavity (see cavity within 220, Figs. 6-8), wherein the at least one contact surface comprises at least one resilient finger; wherein the at least one resilient finger (231/9324/9321) comprises at least a pair of resilient fingers with one finger being on one side of the internal cavity and another finger being on an opposite side of the internal cavity. (i.e. 231/9324/9321, Figs. 7 and 9-10).
In regards to claims 4-7, 9-11 and 13, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 2-7) wherein the internal cavity (see cavity within 220, Figs. 6-7) is defined by a width extending from a first end wall of the internal cavity (i.e. internal space within 620/650) to a second end wall of the internal cavity that is opposite of the first end wall, and wherein the at least one contact surface comprises an angled surface that extends at an angle relative to the first end wall to provide a first end wall shape for the first end wall, wherein the second end wall has a second end wall shape that is different than the first end wall shape; wherein the body has a first wall, a second wall opposite the first wall, a first end wall connecting one end of the first wall to one end of the second wall, and a second end wall connecting an opposite end of the first wall to an opposite end of the second wall, and wherein one of the first wall and second wall includes a plurality of openings (i.e. 650) that each receive one contact member; wherein the at least one alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) comprises at least one contact surface that extends at an angle relative to at least one wall surface of the plurality of walls that define the internal cavity (see cavity within 220, Figs. 6-8), (see Figure 6 markup below).
[AltContent: textbox (second end wall)][AltContent: textbox (angle relative to the first wall)][AltContent: textbox (first end wall)][AltContent: textbox (Your text here)][AltContent: textbox (Your text here)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
286
529
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 8, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 1-7) an elevator system (100), comprising:
an elevator car (110);
at least one suspension member (140/210/211, i.e. traction member 140/210 is a belt-shaped structure) that supports the elevator car (110) and facilitates movement of the elevator car (110);
a connector (i.e. 220) defining an internal cavity that is enclosed by a plurality of walls (see cavity within 220 comprising walls all around, Figs. 6-7), wherein a portion of the at least one suspension member (i.e. 620/650) extends into the internal cavity (220);
at least one alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) formed within the internal cavity (220), the at least one alignment feature to directly engage the at least one suspension member (140/210/211); and
a plurality of contact members (i.e. 241) that establish electrically conductive connections (see Description) with tension members (140/210/211) in the at least one suspension member, and wherein the at least one alignment feature aligns the contact members with the tension members (140/210/211).
In regards to claim 14, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 1-7) wherein the at least one suspension member (140/210/211) comprises a first edge extending along a length of the at least one suspension member and a second edge that is opposite of the first edge, and wherein the first edge has a first edge shape that matches the first end wall shape and the second edge has a second edge shape that matches the second end wall shape.
[AltContent: textbox (second edge)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second end wall)][AltContent: textbox (first edge)][AltContent: textbox (Your text here)][AltContent: textbox (Your text here)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
286
529
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 15, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 1-7) and discloses wherein the at least one suspension member (140/210/211) comprises a flat belt including the tension members encased in a jacket (see Description, i.e. the traction member 140 may be a belt structure, the inner part comprises a plurality of bearing members. traction 140 also can be other shape, in the embodiment of the present traction the member 140 is not limited to the shape of the belt.... wherein the steel strip (i.e., the traction member 140) may include a plurality of steel cores (i.e., bearing members) covered by the coating layer. Because the steel core is wrapped, so the state of the steel core cannot be observed from the outside of the steel belt. In the use process of the steel belt elevator system, if the steel core is broken, the strength of the steel belt is reduced, which may bring safety risk) wherein at least one wall of the plurality of walls includes a plurality of openings to receive the contact members that directly engage with the at least one suspension member via the plurality of openings (i.e. see opening on Figs. 2-7).
In regards to claim 16, ZHOU shows (see Figs. 1-7) wherein a center contact member of the plurality of contact members is aligned at a center of the at least one suspension member at a location that is between two adjacent tension members (see Figs. 7-9, i.e. contact members 241/9222/9132 aligned at a center of the at least one suspension member 140/210/211 between two adjacent tension members 140/210/211).
In regards to claim 17, ZHOU shows a connector (see Figs. 2-7) method of aligning a suspension member (220, i.e. traction member 140/210/211 is a belt-shaped structure) within an internal cavity of a connector (see cavity within 220, Figs. 6-7), the method comprising:
forming at least one alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) on an inner wall surface that surrounds the internal cavity (space inside 220);
directly engaging a suspension member surface (220) against the at least one alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) to provide a properly aligned position of the suspension member within the internal cavity (i.e. internal space within 620/650); and
establishing electrically conductive connections between a plurality of contact members (i.e. 241) and tension members (140/210/211) in the suspension member in response to the at least one alignment feature aligning the contact members with the tension members (i.e. traction member 140/210/211 is a belt-shaped structure… gradually narrowed along the first direction relative to the midline of the conductive member).
In regards to claim 18, method claim 18 does not set further limitation other than combination of corresponding apparatus claims 15-16.
In regards to claim 19, method claim 19 does not set further limitation other than combination of corresponding apparatus claims 5-6, 8 and 13-14.
In regards to claim 20, method claim 20 does not set further limitation other than combination of corresponding apparatus claims 3-4 and 10-12.
In regards to claims 21-23 (see rejection under 112 1st and 2nd), ZHOU implicitly shows a connector (see Figs. 2-7) including forming the at least one alignment feature as a structure that is distinct from the plurality of contact members, and wherein the at least one alignment feature does not establish an electrically conductive connection with the tension members (i.e. not electrically conductive connection with the tension members happens when safety risk is detected, see Disclosure, i.e. if the steel core is broken, the strength of the steel belt is reduced, and the safety risk may be brought).
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant's arguments filed 08/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner believes that the prior arts made of record still read on the added limitations.
In response to applicant’s argument regarding claims 1, 8 and 17 that Zhou does not disclose “an independent alignment structure formed on an inner wall surface that surrounds the internal cavity and that positions the traction member independent of the conductive members” or for method claim 17 “directly engaging a suspension member surface against the at least one alignment feature to provide an aligned position of the suspension member within the internal cavity; and establishing electrically conductive connections between a plurality of contact members and tension members in the suspension member in response to the at least one alignment feature properly aligning the contact members with the tension member”, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
First of all, the examiner respectfully reminds the applicant that the claims and only the claims form the metes and bounds of the invention. “Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Moreover, limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. In re Prater, 415 F.2d, 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969)”. (Refer to Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, Eighth Edition Revision 8: July 2010).
Examiner still considers the prior-art of ZHOU shows a connector (see Figs. 2-7) clearly posses all structures and components as broadly claimed. Thus all the limitations of the claims will be considered met so long as the device of the prior art meets all structural limitations. The prior art apparatus as identified in the rejected claims are also capable of performing all the claimed intended use and/or desired functional language. Therefore, all the limitations as claimed are still met or anticipated by ZHOU and by the related prior arts cited (although not as part of the rejection) and as pointed out in the previous office actions and in this final office action. It is well settled that anticipation law requires distinction be made between invention described or taught and invention claimed. It does not require that the reference "teach" what subject patent application teaches, it is only necessary that the claim under attack, as construed by the Court, "read on" something disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim are found in reference, or are "fully met" by it. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 218 USPQ 781,789 (CAFC 1983). Moreover, the Claims8-19 and 37 are drawn to an apparatus must distinguish from prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Danlv, 120 USPQ 528 (CCPA 1959) and MPEP 2114..
The applicant argues that elements 620 and 650 are not an independent structure, and instead these elements are the receiving space and openings in an end 610, however, the claims only requires at least one suspension member alignment feature formed on an inner wall surface that surrounds the internal cavity; a plurality of contact members that establish electrically conductive connections with tension members in the suspension member, wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature aligns the contact members with the tension members.
While, ZHOU in multiple embodiments alike to applicant different embodiments (Figs. 3-5 of specs) fairly shows a connector (full module as shown in Figs. 2-10) comprising a body (i.e. full enclosure, 220) defining an internal cavity (interpreted as a receiving space 620 for receiving the conductive member 500) configured to receive a suspension member (interpreted as for example as traction member 140 as general aspect but further detailed as 210/211, 910/313) of an elevator system (110); at least one suspension member alignment feature (i.e. interpreted as internal recess 650 @ Fig. 6) formed on an inner wall surface that surrounds the internal cavity (i.e. 620 or as presented in Fig. 8-10, 911/911/914); and a plurality of contact members (i.e. conductive member 241) that establish electrically conductive connections with tension members (i.e. 140/211/913 inside 210) in the suspension member (i.e. 140 as general aspect, 210, 910/911/914), wherein the at least one suspension member alignment feature (i.e. internal space within 620/650) aligns the contact members (241) with the tension members (140/210/211).
Hence, it is important to understand that even if an independent element citation might not be labeled as for example an element comprising multiple features such for example, said suspension member is implicit to have inner and exterior surfaces and well of the cavity. Thus, the Examiner has full latitude to interpret each claim in the broadest reasonable sense. The Examiner will reference prior art using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner’s Notes are/if provided with the cited references to prior art to assist the applicant to better understand the nature of the prior art, application of such prior art and, as appropriate, to further indicate other prior art that maybe applied in other office actions. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent and spirit of compact prosecution. However, and unless otherwise stated, the citations are self-explanatory to one skilled in the art and do not need any further explanation. Moreover, the Examiner’s Notes are not prior art but a link to prior art that one of ordinary skill in the art would find inherently or obviously appropriate.
The Examiner has full latitude to interpret each claim in the broadest reasonable sense. The Examiner will reference prior art using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning.
Unless otherwise annotated, as aforementioned, Examiner’s statements are to be interpreted in reference to that of one of ordinary skill in the art. Statements made in reference to the condition of the disclosure constitute, on the face of it, the basis and such would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, establishing thereby an inherent or obviousness prima facie case or statement(s).
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in its entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner and the additional related prior arts made of record that are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure to further show the general state of the art.
Finally, the examiner advises the applicant to also take a look into the related prior arts cited in the previous office action where at least the independent claims can be rear alone or combination by these prior arts.
For example, Robibero shows (Figs. 1-2) at least two suspension members having electrically conductive cords. A monitoring arrangement generates first and second alternating voltages phase shifted by 180° and includes a plurality of input connectors and output connectors electrically connected to the cords and a voltage analyzer arrangement analyzing a neutral point voltage resulting from applying the voltages to the cords. Each suspension member can have the cords connected in parallel between the input connector and the output connector or have two groups of the cords connected in series between the connectors with the groups connected to an interconnecting connector, while Nolting discloses and shows a suspension member for an elevator comprising an elevator belt and a plurality of blade contacts which are operable to pierce the belt and engage the spaced parallel cords arranged within the belt. A plurality of bridge contacts are connected with adjacent pairs of elevator belt cords and signal contacts are connected with cords at the outer edges of the belts. The signal contacts are connected with a monitoring device which sends and receives signals to the contacts to provide an indication of the condition or deterioration of the belt. ) FIG. 9 shows a wire 24 in which an insulation layer has been removed from an inner conductor 24a. The conductor is arranged in the upper portion of the tapered opening 22h of a signal contact 22. FIG. 9 shows a wire 24 without the insulation layer removed but also arranged in the upper portion of the tapered opening 22h of a signal contact 22. During assembly, with the two signal contacts 22 arranged in the two outermost openings 18 in the top of the housing, the wires 24 are inserted into respective housing openings 28 which are in alignment with the signal contact openings so that the end of each wire passes through the respective signal contact opening 22h. As the contacts are driven into the belt, the wires remain stationary since they are supported by the housing adjacent the openings 28. Thus, the signal contacts 22 move downwardly from the position shown in FIG. 11 to the position shown in FIG. 12. The inner edges of the contacts on either side of the contact opening 22h slide along the wire during movement of the contact until they firmly grip or secure the conductor 24a. It will be appreciated that for a wire insulated to the end thereof as shown in FIG. 10, the edges of the contact opening are sufficient sharp to penetrate the insulation layer to bring the signal contact 22 into direct connection with the wire conductor 24a.
Conclusion
9. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE L CARRASQUILLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7879. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday (9am to 5pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on (571) 272-2060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE L CARRASQUILLO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
