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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/833106. Claims 1-15, 22-26 are currently pending in this application.
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) 1-4, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARADA ((2018/0223953).
Regarding Claim 1, HARADA teaches A continuous belt comprising: an upper portion including a top surface and a plurality of cords (2); and a lower portion comprising a plurality of ribs (4), the ribs having a width and defining a plurality of grooves below the upper portion; wherein each rib includes a first wall and a second wall defining a peak for each groove; wherein each rib includes a bottom cover (5) defining a bottom surface of the rib (4);
HARADA does not teach wherein the width of the ribs is between 0.15 inches (e.g., about 3.8 mm) and 0.50 inches (e.g., about 12.7 mm); and wherein the belt has a dynamic compressive modulus E* in the with-grain direction at 121°C greater than 48 MPa.
HARADA discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
HARADA discloses the result effective variable of a belt compressive modulus at a given temperature since the belt has some compressive modulus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the belt compressive modulus parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt is rigid enough to be sufficiently durable at operating temperatures and belt loads for a given application.
Regarding Claim 2, HARADA as modified teaches wherein the bottom cover (5) comprises fabric [0018].
Regarding Claim 3, HARADA as modified teaches further comprising a top cover (1) defining the top surface.
Regarding Claim 4, HARADA as modified teaches wherein the top cover (1) comprises fabric.
Regarding Claim 6, HARADA as modified teaches wherein the bottom cover (5) does not cover the first and second walls.
Regarding Claim 7, HARADA does not teach wherein the belt has an RPA G* modulus at 175°C greater than 5,000 kPa.
HARADA discloses the result effective variable of a belt RPA G* modulus since the belt has some RPA G* modulus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the RPA G* modulus.parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt is stiff enough to sufficiently withstand belt oscillating shear for a given application.
Regarding Claim 8, HARADA as modified teaches wherein the upper portion (3) includes a cushion portion comprising a material different than a material of the lower portion (4).
Claim(s) 9-14, 22-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAKAHASHI (2014/0364260)
Regarding Claim 9, TAKAHASHI teaches A continuous belt comprising: an upper portion including a top surface and a plurality of cords (14); and a lower portion comprising a plurality of ribs (15), the ribs having a width and a height and defining a plurality of grooves below the upper portion;
TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the width of the ribs is between 0.15 inches (e.g., about 3.8 mm) and 0.50 inches (e.g., about 12.7 mm);wherein the belt has a groove cord pitch ratio between a height of a bottom of the cords above the peaks of the grooves and the width of the ribs; and wherein the groove cord pitch ratio is less than 8%.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt groove cord pitch ratio since the belt has some groove cord pitch ratio.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the groove cord pitch ratio parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has less height for flexibility while having adequately wide ribs for durability.
Regarding Claims 10, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein each rib includes a first wall and a second wall defining a peak for each groove; and wherein the belt has an aspect ratio between the width of the ribs and the height of the ribs, the aspect ratio being greater than 1.40.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a rib aspect ratio since the belt rib has some aspect ratio (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib aspect ratio parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt rib is sufficiently durable while allowing adequate grip with its belt pulleys for a given application.
Regarding Claims 11, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein each rib includes a first wall and a second wall defining a peak for each groove; and wherein the belt has an aspect ratio between the width of the ribs and the height of the ribs, the aspect ratio between 1.60 and 1.75.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a rib aspect ratio since the belt rib has some aspect ratio (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib aspect ratio parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt rib is sufficiently durable while allowing adequate grip with its belt pulleys for a given application.
Regarding Claims 12, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the width of each rib is greater than 4 mm.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 13, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the width of the ribs is between 0 0.36-0.38 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 14, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the height of the ribs is between 0.15 inches and 0.40 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 22, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the width of the ribs is about 0.37 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 23, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the height of the ribs is between 0.22 inches and 0.23 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 24, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the height of the ribs is about 0.227 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 25, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the height of the ribs is between 0.15 inches and 0.40 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Regarding Claims 26, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein the height of the ribs is between 0.22 - 0.23 inches.
TAKAHASHI discloses the result effective variable of a belt rib width since the ribs have some width (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to recognize the rib width parameter as a result effective variable and optimize it so the belt has adequate surface area to grip pulleys while creating a sufficiently durable belt for a given application.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARADA ((2018/0223953) in view of NONAKA (2016/0208890).
Regarding Claim 5, HARADA does not teach wherein the peak of each groove is rounded.
NONAKA teaches wherein the peak of each groove is rounded (Figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to change the belt in HARADA to have rounded groove peaks as in NONAKA so the belt better meshes a given set of pulleys.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAKAHASHI (2014/0364260) in view of HARADA ((2018/0223953).
Regarding Claims 15, TAKAHASHI does not teach wherein each rib includes a bottom cover defining the bottom surface.
HARADA teaches wherein each rib includes a bottom cover (5) defining the bottom surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to change the belt in HARADA to have the bottom cover in HARADA to increase belt durability, bending resistance, heat resistance, and crack resistance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY Y LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-7018. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 ET.
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, ROBERT W HODGE can be reached at 5712722097. 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.
HENRY Y. LIU
Examiner
Art Unit 3654
/HENRY Y LIU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights