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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following nonlimiting informalities:
The specification calls reference character 12 “horizontally spaced members”, “ribs”, “spaced members”, “horizontally spaced ribs” and “the bottom rib” throughout the specification. Please be consistent with the terminology used.
The specification refers to element 20A as a “D-shaped loop”, “first spaced loop”, and just a “loop” at different times. Please be consistent with the terminology used.
The specification refers to element 20B as a “second spaced loop”, and just a “loop” at different times. Please be consistent with the terminology used.
The specification refers to element 55 as a “tie clip”, as well an “attachment”. Please be consistent with the terminology used.
Applicant is advised to carefully review the disclosure for grammatical issues. Appropriate correction is required. It is up to the applicant to find and correct all issues similar to those described above.
Drawings
The drawings dated 8/21/2025 are accepted.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following non-limiting informalities:
Claim 1 recites “said plurality said spaced members” but should recite “said plurality of horizontally spaced members”
Claim 5 recites “direction” on line 3, but should recite “directions”
Claim 6 recites “direction and to raising and lowering” on line 4. This should recite “directions and for raising and lowering”
Claim 6 recites “position” on line 5, but should recite “positions”
Claim 10 recites “said tie slip”, but should recite “a tie clip”
Claim 12 recites “each said first and second loops comprise” on line 10, but should recite “each of said first and second loops comprise”
Claim 13 recites “each said loops include” but should recite “each said loop includes”
Claim 14 recites “wherein said” but should recite “wherein each”
It is up to the applicant to find and correct all issues similar to those described above. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Perkowitz (US 8857493).
Regarding claim 1, Perkowitz teaches a window covering (fig. 14, which is similar to fig. 10 according to column 10 lines 24-30) comprising: a) a fabric (82) having a top and bottom for covering a window (intended use) ;
b) a plurality of horizontally spaced members (86) attached to said fabric, between said top and bottom;
c) at least one attachment (114) secured to each of said plurality said spaced member;
d) a flexible sleeve (134) attached to said at least one attachment (114) of said plurality of horizontally spaced members between said top and bottom of said fabric;
e) and a cord (26) extending inside said flexible sleeve from said bottom to said top to lift said fabric from a closed position covering said window to an open position to reveal said window (capable of), and
said at least one attachment (114) comprising a loop having an opening therein (fig. 14 shows the attachment composing a loop with an opening) to receive said flexible sleeve (fig. 14), said loop attached to said flexible sleeve (fig. 14).
Regarding claim 2, Perkowitz teaches that said flexible sleeve (134) includes a grommet (38A) adjacent said top attached to said fabric and including an opening in said flexible sleeve for said cord to extend through and into said grommet.
Regarding claim 3, Perkowitz teaches that said top of said fabric depends from a head rail (fig. 10).
Regarding claim 11, Perkowitz teaches that said covering is a Roman blind (fig. 10).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg (US 20160258210) in view of Perkowitz (US 20130292065).
Regarding claim 1, Goldberg teaches (figs. 2-6) a window covering comprising:
a fabric (206) having a top and bottom for covering a window;
a plurality of horizontally spaced members (214s) attached to said fabric, between said top and bottom;
at least one attachment (224, at least one per each 214) secured to each of said plurality of spaced members;
and a cord (216) extending from said bottom to said top to lift said fabric from a closed position covering said window to an open position to reveal said window,
said at least one attachment comprising a loop (fig. 6 shows the loop 293) having an opening (294) therein to receive said cord.
Goldberg does not teach a flexible sleeve attached to said at least one attachment of said plurality of horizontally spaced members between said top and bottom of said fabric, nor that the cord extends inside said flexible sleeve, with the opening to receive the flexible sleeve, the loop attached to said flexible sleeve.
Perkowitz teaches (fig. 33) a window covering comprising a flexible sleeve (32a) between a top and bottom of a fabric, with a cord (26a) extending inside said flexible sleeve. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Goldberg with the teachings of Perkowitz so that there is a flexible sleeve between said top and bottom of said fabric, with the cord extending inside said flexible sleeve. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of protecting the cord from fraying as it runs through the attachments.
After the alteration, the flexible sleeve is considered attached to each attachment of said plurality of horizontally spaced members, as the sleeve runs inside the attachment as the cord runs inside the attachment, and the opening receives the flexible sleeve, and the loop is considered attached to the flexible sleeve as all components are attached in the assembly at least indirectly.
Regarding claim 2, modified Goldberg teaches that said flexible sleeve includes a grommet (38A) adjacent said top attached to said fabric and including an opening in said flexible sleeve for said cord to extend through and into said grommet (fig. 33 of Goldberg).
Regarding claim 3, modified Goldberg teaches said top of said fabric depends from a head rail (202, paragraph 32).
Regarding claim 8, modified Goldberg teaches that said horizontally spaced members (214s) comprise ribs (250s and 258s) that include a first channel (244) extending along a length of said ribs (fig. 3) to receive a horizontal portion of said fabric (fig. 2a).
Regarding claim 9, modified Goldberg teaches that the first channel is "C"- shaped in cross section (fig. 3) and including a rod (212) that extends through said first channel to trap said horizontal portion of said fabric between said rod and said first channel (fig. 2a).
Claim(s) 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg (US 20160258210) in view of Perkowitz (US 20130292065), as applied above, and further in view of Jacobson (US 5476132).
Regarding claim 4, modified Goldberg does not explicitly teach that said head rail includes a rotating member attached to said cord that extends through said grommet so as to lift said fabric to said open position when said rotating member is rotated in a first direction and to close said window in said closed position when said rotating bar is rotated in a second direction.
Jacobson teaches a window covering with a head rail includes a rotating member (55) attached to a cord (56’) so as to lift fabric (12) to an open position when said rotating member is rotated in a first direction and to close said window in said closed position when said rotating bar (see 112b above, this is interpreted as the rotating member) is rotated in a second direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Goldberg by replacing the lift mechanism with that of Jacobson so that the head rail includes a rotating member attached to said cord that extends through said grommet so as to lift said fabric to said open position when said rotating member is rotated in a first direction and to close said window in said closed position when said rotating bar is rotated in a second direction. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a lift mechanism that is durable and easy to operate.
Regarding claim 5, modified Goldberg includes the teachings of Jacobson which teaches a wand (13) attached to said head rail to rotate said rotating member in said first and said second direction (as described in column 2 line 61 through column 3 line 7).
Regarding claim 6, modified Goldberg includes the teachings of Jacobson which teaches that said wand has two intersecting recesses or projections (fig. 4) coaxially disposed (fig. 2) within a hand pumping sleeve (14) for rotating said rotatable member between said first and second directions and for raising and lowering (see claim objection above) said fabric between said open and closed positions when said hand pumping sleeve is moved between a first hand pumping position and a second hand pumping position (as described in column 2 line 61 through column 3 line 7).
Regarding claim 7, modified Goldberg includes the teachings of Jacobson which teaches an extension (11) that comprises a shaft (63) having one end attached to said wand (see fig. 6) and another end of said shaft includes a shaft connection (the threads) to said head rail.
Claim(s) 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg (US 20160258210) in view of Perkowitz (US 20130292065), as applied above, and further in view of Cleaver (US 20120175068).
Regarding claim 10, modified Goldberg teaches that said loop comprises a curved portion having two spaced ends connected by a linear portion (as shown in annotated figure below, the ends are the corners where they meet the linear portion), and said ribs include a second channel (252) extending along the length of said ribs for slidingly receiving said linear portion (fig. 2a), and where said flexible sleeve is attached to each said curved portion (see claim 1 rejection above).
Modified Goldberg does not explicitly teach that the flexible sleeve is attached to each said curved portion by tie clips.
Cleaver teaches (fig. 10) a window covering with a flexible sleeve (114) that is attached to a loop (110) by a tie clip (see 112b rejection above, as described in paragraph 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Goldberg so that the flexible sleeve is attached to each said curved portion by tie clips. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a cheap way of securing the components.
PNG
media_image1.png
442
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, modified Goldberg teaches that said covering is a Roman blind (fig. 2).
Claim(s) 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg (US 20160258210) in view of Perkowitz (US 20130292065), Cleaver (US 20120175068), and Jacobson (US 5476132).
Regarding claim 12, Goldberg teaches a Roman blind for a window (figs. 1-6) comprising:
a head rail (202, paragraph 32);
a fabric (206) having a top and bottom for covering a window; said fabric depending from said head rail for covering said window;
a plurality of horizontally spaced ribs (214s) extending across said fabric, said plurality of horizontally spaced ribs each including a first recess (244) for receiving and attaching a horizontal portion of said fabric to said plurality of said horizontally spaced ribs, between said top and bottom of said fabric (fig. 2a);
a plurality of first and second spaced loops (224) secured to each said plurality of horizontally spaced ribs respectively (figs. 2-3 show at least two 224s per 214, and there are multiple 214s); wherein each said first and second loop comprises a curved portion having two opposite spaced ends connected by a linear portion (as shown in annotated figure above, the ends are the corners where they meet the linear portion) top define an opening (294) therein;
first and second cords (the 216s, fig. 2 shows at least two corresponding to the 224s from above) extending respectively from said bottom to said bottom (fig. 2a), wherein a top of each said cord is attached to the headrail (paragraph 34).
Goldberg does not teach the head rail having a rotatable member therein, first and second spaced flexible sleeves disposed vertically through said openings of said plurality of first and second spaced loops respectively; a plurality of attachments extending through each said first and second flexible sleeves for attaching said sleeves to said plurality of first and second spaced loops respectively; the first and second cords extending inside said first and second flexible sleeves respectively, with a top of each cord attached to the rotatable member, nor a wand depending from said head rail for rotating said rotatable member in a first direction for winding said spaced first and second cords around said rotatable member and moving said first and second spaced cords within said first and second flexible sleeves respectively so as to move said fabric from a closed position to an open position, and for rotating said rotatable member in a second direction for unwinding said first and second cords from said rotatable member and moving said spaced first and second cords within said first and second flexible sleeves respectively so as to move said fabric from an open position to an closed position.
Perkowitz teaches (fig. 33) a window covering comprising first and second spaced flexible sleeves (32a, 32b) disposed vertically with first and second cords (26a and 26b) extending inside said first and second flexible sleeves respectively. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Goldberg with the teachings of Perkowitz so that there are first and second spaced flexible sleeves disposed vertically with first and second cords extending inside said first and second flexible sleeves respectively. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of protecting the cords from fraying as they run through the attachments.
After this modification the first and second spaced flexible sleeves are disposed vertically through said plurality of first and second spaced loops respectively, as they surround the cords which are disposed through the first and second spaced loops respectively.
Cleaver teaches (fig. 10) a window covering with an attachment (116) extending through a flexible sleeve (114) for attachment said sleeve to a loop (110, as described in paragraph 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Goldberg so that there are a plurality of attachments extending through each said first and second flexible sleeves for attaching said sleeves to said plurality of first and second spaced loops respectively. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a cheap way of securing the components.
Jacobson teaches a window covering with a head rail includes a rotating member (55) therein with a top of a cord (56’) attached to the rotatable member, and a wand (13) depending from said head rail for rotating said rotatable member in a first direction for winding said cord around said rotatable member and moving said cord within a flexible sleeve (capable of this) so as to move said fabric from a closed position to an open position (as described in column 2 line 61 through column 3 line 7), and for rotating said rotatable member in a second direction for unwinding said cord from said rotatable member and moving said cord within a flexible sleeve (capable of this) so as to move said fabric from an open position to an closed position (as described in column 2 line 61 through column 3 line 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Goldberg by replacing the lift mechanism with that of Jacobson so that the head rail includes a rotating member therein with a top of each cord attached to the rotatable member, and a wand depending from said head rail for rotating said rotatable member in a first direction for winding said spaced first and second cords around said rotatable member and moving said first and second spaced cords within said first and second flexible sleeves respectively so as to move said fabric from a closed position to an open position, and for rotating said rotatable member in a second direction for unwinding said first and second cords from said rotatable member and moving said spaced first and second cords within said first and second flexible sleeves respectively so as to move said fabric from an open position to an closed position. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a lift mechanism that is durable and easy to operate.
Regarding claim 13, modified Goldberg teaches that said plurality of ribs each include a second channel (252, each 214 has one), and each said loop (224s) includes an attachment portion (297) slidingly receivable within said second channel for placement along said rib (fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 14, modified Goldberg teaches that said curved portion is perpendicular to said linear portion (at the exact point that they meet they are perpendicular).
Regarding claim 15, modified Goldberg includes the teachings of Cleaver, which teaches that each said plurality of attachments comprises a tie clip (fig. 10 of Cleaver) extending through said first and second flexible sleeves at each said loop (after the modification above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the limitations added to claim 1 overcome the Perkowitz rejection. The examiner notes that the limitations as claimed are still taught by the rejection as explained above.
The applicant argues that the added limitations to claim 1 overcome the 103 rejection that was applied in the Non-Final Rejection. The examiner notes that the limitations as claimed are still taught by the rejection as explained above.
Goldberg much of the structure, including at least one attachment (224, at least one per each 214) secured to each of said plurality of spaced members; …said at least one attachment comprising a loop (fig. 6 shows the loop 293) having an opening (294) therein to receive said cord. It also teaches that said loop comprises a curved portion having two spaced ends connected by a linear portion (as shown in annotated figure above, the ends are the corners where they meet the linear portion).
Perkowitz teaches (fig. 33) a window covering comprising a flexible sleeve (32a) between a top and bottom of a fabric, with a cord (26a) extending inside said flexible sleeve. And, after the alteration, the flexible sleeve is considered attached to each attachment of said plurality of horizontally spaced members, as the sleeve runs inside the attachment as the cord runs inside the attachment, and the opening receives the flexible sleeve, and the loop is considered attached to the flexible sleeve as all components are attached in the assembly at least indirectly.
It is noted that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R SHEPHERD whose telephone number is (571)272-5657. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/M.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634