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 .
This is a non-final Office action responsive to the reply filed on 01/07/2026.
Claims 5, 8, 10 and 15 have been amended.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9 and 12-14 have been canceled.
Claims 5, 8, 10, 11 and 15-17 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/07/2026 has been entered.
Specification
This application does not contain an abstract of the disclosure as required by 37 CFR 1.72(b). An abstract on a separate sheet is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 10, 11, 15 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5, line 3 “multiple ribs” should be - - multiple of the ribs - -.
Claim 10, line 16 “without ribs” should be - - without the ribs - -.
Claim 10, line 18 “without ribs” should be - - without the ribs - -.
Claim 11, line 4 “the connecting elements” should be - - the connecting element - -.
Claim 15, line 14 “without ribs” should be - - without the ribs - -.
Claim 15, line 16 “without ribs” should be - - without the ribs - -.
Claim 17, line 3 “without ribs” should be - - without the ribs - -.
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 15-17 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 15 recites the limitation "the receiving space" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is suggested to ament to - - a receiving space - - or define a receiving space earlier in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the opposite arms" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is suggested to ament to - - opposite arms - - or define opposite arms earlier in the claim.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 5, 8, 10, 11 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sereno (EP 2,108,860 A2), in view of Peterson (US Patent No. 3,562,871).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sereno in view of Peterson discloses, wherein multiple ribs are provided only at end regions of the connection element (see annotated Fig. 7 from Peterson).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sereno in view of Peterson discloses wherein the belt ends each have at least one receiving region (25) for accommodating the connection element, and the receiving region has an elastic surface at least sectionally, with which the rib of the connection element is brought into engagement (see Fig. 2 from Sereno).
Regarding claim 10, Sereno discloses a belt connection for connecting multiple belt ends, the connection comprising:
a plurality of belt ends (see annotated Fig. 3);
a connection element (24) passing through a first belt end of the plurality of belt ends, and thereby connecting, each of the plurality of belt ends to each other (see Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 3);
the first belt end comprising opposite arms having a receiving space therebetween (see annotated Fig. 3); and
the opposite arms comprising elastic receiving channels (25) (see Fig. 2 and paragraph [0002]).
Sereno does not disclose the connection element comprising a plurality of ring shaped ribs on an outer surface thereof, a rib of the plurality of ribs engaging a second belt end of the plurality of belt ends to inhibit separation of the plurality of belt ends from each other; and the rib of the plurality ribs having at least two flanks that converge at an acute angle relative to one another, the ribs located at opposite ends of the connection element, the connection element comprising an area without ribs located axially between the ribs relative to an axial dimension of the connection element, the area without ribs located in the receiving space and the ribs connected to the opposite arms, and the flanks elastically deforming bounding surfaces of the elastic receiving channels such that the bounding surfaces inhibit movement of the connecting element toward the receiving space to inhibit the separation of the plurality of belt ends from each other.
However, Peterson teaches the connection element comprising a plurality of ring shaped ribs on an outer surface thereof; and the rib of the plurality ribs having at least two flanks that converge at an acute angle relative to one another, the ribs located at opposite ends of the connection element, the connection element comprising an area without ribs located axially between the ribs relative to an axial dimension of the connection element (see annotated Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection element from Sereno with the connection element from Peterson that has ribs at opposite ends, in order to facilitate the insertion of the connection element into the receiving channel of the belt, and achieve friction grip and bulging inside the receiving channel to strongly secure the connection element into the receiving channel.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Sereno in view of Peterson discloses wherein the connection element extends orthogonally to longitudinal dimensions of the plurality of belt ends, the plurality of ribs engaging the plurality of belt ends inhibiting a movement of the connecting elements orthogonally to the longitudinal dimensions (see Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 3 from Sereno).
Regarding claim 15, Sereno discloses a belt connection for connecting multiple belt ends, the connection comprising:
a plurality of belt ends (see annotated Fig. 3);
a connection element (24) passing through, and thereby connecting, each of the plurality of belt ends to each other (see Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 3);
the connection element (24) extending orthogonally relative to longitudinal dimensions of the plurality of belt ends (see Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 3); and
the opposite arms comprising elastic receiving channels (25) having elastically deformable boundary surfaces, the surfaces inhibiting movement of the connecting element toward the receiving space by a form-fitting engagement of the connecting element (24) therewith when the receiving channels (25) are deformed under a force to provide a secure connection of the belt ends (see Fig. 2 and paragraph [0002]).
Sereno does not disclose the connection element comprising a plurality of ribs on an outer surface thereof, the plurality of ribs contacting and engaging the plurality of belt ends to inhibit separation of the plurality of belt ends from each other; the plurality of ribs engaging the plurality of belt ends inhibiting a movement of the connection element orthogonally relative to the longitudinal dimensions; and the ribs are located at opposite ends of the connection element, the connection element comprising an area without ribs located axially between the ribs relative to an axial dimension of the connection element, the area without ribs located in the receiving space and the ribs connected to the opposite arms.
However, Peterson teaches the connection element comprising a plurality of ribs on an outer surface thereof; and the ribs are located at opposite ends of the connection element, the connection element comprising an area without ribs located axially between the ribs relative to an axial dimension of the connection element (see annotated Fig. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection element from Sereno with the connection element from Peterson that has ribs at opposite ends, in order to facilitate the insertion of the connection element into the receiving channel of the belt, and achieve friction grip and bulging inside the receiving channel to strongly secure the connection element into the receiving channel.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Sereno in view of Peterson discloses wherein the connection element (24) extends from a first belt end of the plurality of belts ends through a second belt end of the plurality of belt ends to the first belt end (see Fig. 2 and annotated Fig. 3 from Sereno).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Sereno in view of Peterson discloses wherein the ribs are located at opposite ends of the connection element, and further comprising an area without ribs located axially between the ribs relative to an axial dimension of the connection element (see annotated Fig. 7 from Peterson).
PNG
media_image1.png
489
669
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
277
440
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7, filed 01/07/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 10 and 15 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in Sereno, in view of Peterson. Sereno discloses a belt with an elastic receiving channel, and Petersen teaches a connector with ribs at opposite ends and with an area without ribs, capable to inhibit orthogonal motion of the connector toward a space between belt arms of a belt, and to inhibit separation of belt ends.
Examiner’s Comment
In view of applicant’s amendments to the claims submitted in the reply filed on 01/07/2026, the drawing objections indicated in the prior Office action have been withdrawn.
The examiner acknowledges the interview request from the applicant. The examiner encourages the applicant to schedule a telephone interview prior to the Office action reply.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jason W. San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/LOUIS A. MERCADO/
Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/ SPE, Art Unit 3677