Office Action Predictor
Application No. 18/010,655

Ladder Tape Assemblies with Cord Shrouds Arrangements for Slatted Blinds

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Examiner
SHEPHERD, MATTHEW RICHARD
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Hunter Douglas, INC.
OA Round
4 (Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

53%
Career Allow Rate
92 granted / 174 resolved
Without
With
+39.9%
Interview Lift
avg trend
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
43 pending
217
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.5%
+8.5% vs TC avg
§102
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§112
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Objections Claim 38 objected to because of the following informalities: Line 16 recites “of a respective pair”, but should recite “of the respective pair”. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 38, 42, and 68-72 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 20130048233) in view of Tsai (US 20060289124). Regarding claim 38, Lin teaches a slatted blind (fig. 1), comprising: a headrail (2); a bottom rail (3) movable relative to the headrail; a first (11) lift cord extending between the headrail and the bottom rail; a plurality of slats disposed between the headrail and the bottom rail (fig. 1); and a ladder tape assembly configured to support the plurality of slats between the headrail and the bottom rail (shown in detail in fig. 6), the ladder tape assembly comprising: a first vertically extending ladder rail (7); a second vertically extending ladder rail (7) spaced apart from the first ladder rail; and a plurality of pairs of shroud loops (Each element 10 is considered a shroud loop. Any slack in each element 10 causes each element 10 to form a loop, thus they are considered loops, even in a state without slack. It is noted that the two adjacent element 10s as shown in fig. 6 are considered a single pair of shroud loops. As is shown in fig. 2, there are multiple pairs of these shroud loops in the ladder tape assembly) extending between the first and second ladder rails (fig. 6 shows one of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops), each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops including a first shroud loop (one of the 10s of a single pair) and a second shroud loop (a second of the 10s of a single pair) disposed between the first and second ladder rails (fig. 6), each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops supporting thereon a respective slat of the plurality of slats such that the respective slat is disposed on top of both the first shroud loop and the second shroud loop of a respective pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops (as shown in fig. 6); wherein the first lift cord (11) extends vertically through the first shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops (in fig. 6, element 11 is considered to extend vertically through the first shroud loop, as it is contained by and runs on the inside side of the loop itself). Lin does not teach a second lift cord that extends vertically through the second shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops. Tsai teaches first and second lift cords (21s, fig. 1) that extend vertically through respective shroud loops (the 13s). 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 Lin with teachings of Tsai so that there is second lift cord that extends vertically through the second shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of making the slats raise more evenly with a lift cord on each side of the slat. Regarding claim 42, Lin teaches a ladder tape assembly for supporting slats of a slatted blind, the ladder tape assembly comprising (shown in figs. 2 and 6): a first vertically extending ladder rail (7); a second vertically extending ladder rail (7) spaced apart from the first ladder rail; and a plurality of pairs of shroud loops (Each element 10 is considered a shroud loop. Any slack in each element 10 causes each element 10 to form a loop, thus they are considered loops, even in a state without slack. It is noted that the two adjacent element 10s as shown in fig. 6 are considered a single pair of shroud loops. As is shown in fig. 2, there are multiple pairs of these shroud loops in the ladder tape assembly) extending between the first and second ladder rails (fig. 6 shows one of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops), each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops including a first shroud loop (one of the 10s of a single pair) and a second shroud loop (a second of the 10s of a single pair) disposed between the first and second ladder rails (fig. 6), each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops supporting thereon a respective slat of a plurality of slats such that the respective slat is disposed on top of both the first shroud loop and the second shroud loop of a respective pair of shroud loops of the plurality of pairs of shroud loops (as shown in fig. 6); a first lift (11) cord extending vertically through the first shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops (in fig. 6, element 11 is considered to extend vertically through the first shroud loop, as it is contained by and runs on the inside side of the loop itself). Lin does not teach a second lift cord that extends vertically through the second shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops. Tsai teaches first and second lift cords (21s, fig. 1) that extend vertically through respective shroud loops (the 13s). 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 Lin with teachings of Tsai so that there is second lift cord that extends vertically through the second shroud loop of each pair of shroud loops. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of making the slats raise more evenly with a lift cord on each side of the slat. Regarding claim 68, modified Lin teaches that the first and second shroud loops extend transversely across a space defined directly between the first and second ladder rails (fig. 6). Regarding claim 69, modified Lin teaches that the first and second lift cords extend vertically across the space defined directly between the first and second ladder rails (after the modification above). Regarding claim 70, modified Lin teaches that each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of shroud loops forms a ladder step, wherein each ladder step extends transversely between the first and second ladder rails from a first end of each ladder step positioned at the first ladder rail to a second end of each ladder step positioned at the second ladder rail (see fig. 6). Regarding claim 71, modified Lin teaches that the first and second shroud loops extend transversely across a space defined directly between the first and second ladder rails (see fig. 6). Regarding claim 72, modified Lin teaches that each pair of shroud loops of the plurality of shroud loops forms a ladder step, wherein each ladder step extends transversely between the first and second ladder rails from a first end of each ladder step positioned at the first ladder rail to a second end of each ladder step positioned at the second ladder rail (see fig. 6). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 39- 41, 43-45, and 62-67 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 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 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 15, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 19, 2025
Response Filed
May 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 05, 2026
Response Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595698
SASH CARRIER FOR A WINDOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12565809
DAY-AND-NIGHT CURTAIN DUAL-RAIL DUAL-CONTROL CORRELATION TYPE STOPPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12540506
COVERING WITH MULTIPLE SHADE CONFIGURATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12529261
One-Piece Screening System
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12473778
MOTORIZED WINDOW TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+39.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 174 resolved cases by this examiner