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 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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King-Darr (U.S. Patent No. 6,098,698) in view of Tremaine (U.S. Patent No. 8,887,789).
Regarding claim 1, King-Darr discloses a garage screen system [FIG. 1] comprising:
a garage (10) having an interior space (11) positioned within the garage and an opening (13) extending through a front side of the garage to the interior space [FIGS. 1, 3], the garage comprising a frame (the frame is defined by the perimeter structure of the opening 13, shown in at least Figures 1-3) which extends around the opening [FIG. 1];
a mounting structure (housing 14 and corresponding structure attaching the housing 14 to the garage) being coupled to the garage, the mounting structure comprising a housing (14) being positioned at a top of the opening [FIG. 3];
a spool (16) being mounted in the housing and being rotatable with respect to the housing around a horizontal axis extending between a pair of lateral sides of the opening (column 4, lines 45-49);
a covering (17, 21) being wound onto the spool in a stored position, the covering being extendable from a bottom of the housing with the covering between a front and a back of the housing such that the covering is extended vertically downward under the spool and inset relative to both the front and the back of the housing [FIG. 3] (see annotated drawing below), the covering being extendable to an extended position with respect to the spool wherein the covering extends away from the spool out of the housing and covers the opening (column 5, lines 16-21), the covering having a plurality of apertures extending through the covering, each aperture of the plurality of apertures having a size such that the covering is configured to inhibit insects from moving through the covering (column 4, lines 50-61), the covering comprising a flexible sheet (17) and a rigid member (21), the flexible sheet being coupled to the spool (column 4, lines 61-63), the rigid member being coupled to and extending along a distal edge of the flexible sheet with respect to the spool [FIG. 1], the rigid member maintaining a width of the flexible sheet between a pair of lateral edges of the sheet [FIG. 1], the rigid member being weighted such that the rigid member facilitates extending the covering to the extended position (the rigid member inherently has a weight that pulls downwardly on the covering to facilitate movement to the extended position).
PNG
media_image1.png
858
839
media_image1.png
Greyscale
King-Darr does not disclose that the mounting structure is positioned in the opening entirely between a front and a back of the opening.
Nonetheless, Tremaine discloses a screen system comprising a mounting structure (130) positioned in an opening of a door (column 3, lines 8-19 discloses that the screen system is installed in a door opening; this positioning is also shown in Figures 1a and 1b), the mounting structure being positioned entirely between a front and a back of the opening (Figure 1b illustrates the housing 130 of the mounting structure being positioned entirely between a front and a back of the opening defined by the width of frame member of the opening 135 shown at the top of the figure), the front of the opening being defined by a front edge of an interior surface of the frame, the back of the opening being defined by a back edge of the interior surface of the frame [FIGS. 1a, 1b] (see annotated drawing below).
PNG
media_image2.png
834
559
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the garage screen system of King-Darr to provide the mounting structure in the opening, as taught by Tremaine, in order to provide a compact arrangement for the mounting structure that does not protrude as far past the exterior of the garage structure. This configuration provides a more aesthetic or “hidden” appearance for the screen system by reducing the visual impact of the installation.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, King-Darr discloses a pair of rails (18, 19) being coupled to and extending downwardly from the housing [FIG. 1], each rail of the pair of rails being positioned on a respective lateral side of the pair of lateral sides of the opening [FIG. 1]; each rail of the pair of rails engaging the covering (column 5, lines 12-15) such that the covering is extendable from the spool only along the pair of rails [FIG. 3]; wherein each rail of the pair of rails has a groove (20) extending into an inner side of an associated one of the pair of rails with respect to the opening, the groove of each rail of the pair of rails receiving the covering [FIG. 4].
Regarding claim 4, King-Darr discloses the pair of rails, but does not disclose a plurality of mounting holes in an associated one of the rails.
Nonetheless, Tremaine discloses a screen system comprising a pair of rails (107, 110) each having a plurality of mounting holes (holes through which fasteners 140 extend, shown in Figure 1a) extending through an associated one of the pair of rails [FIG. 1a] to facilitate mounting the mounting structure to the garage via fasteners (140; column 15, lines 41-46).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the garage screen system of King-Darr to include mounting holes on the rails, as taught by Tremaine, in order to ensure a secure connection of the rails and the mounting structure to the building structure.
Regarding claim 5, King-Darr discloses a drive assembly (25) being operatively coupled to the spool to rotate the spool alternately in a first direction and a second direction to cause the covering to move toward the stored position and the extended position respectively (column 5, lines 58-63).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, King-Darr discloses an electrical cord (the electrical cord is shown schematically in Figure 5; column 6, lines 2-4 further discloses an electrical connection between the motor and the power supply 27) being electrically coupled to the drive assembly, the electrical cord being electrically couplable to an electrical system (27) in the garage to power the drive assembly (column 5, line 58-column 6, line 4); and a controller (26) being in communication with the drive assembly, the controller having an input for selectively operating the drive assembly (column 5, line 63-column 6, line 2).
Claims 6, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King-Darr (U.S. Patent No. 6,098,698) in view of Tremaine (U.S. Patent No. 8,887,789), as applied to claims 1 and 5 above, and further in view of Winters (U.S. Patent No. 5,988,256).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, King-Darr, as modified above, discloses that the drive assembly comprises a motor (25, but does not disclose a drivetrain comprising a belt-and-pulley transmission.
Nonetheless, Winters discloses a drive assembly comprising a motor (24) and a drivetrain (25), the drivetrain operatively coupling the motor to a spool (23) [FIG. 4], the drivetrain comprising a belt-and-pulley transmission (column 4, lines 59-62).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the screen system of King-Darr, as modified above, to include the belt-and-pulley drive train taught by Winters, in order to provide easier access to the motor for maintenance or replacement.
Regarding claim 11, King-Darr, as modified above, discloses a door being mounted in the garage, the door being operable to alternately open and close the opening (column 7, lines 57-59 discloses a garage door mounted in the garage interior that retractably closes the opening), but does not explicitly disclose a pair of tracks in which the door is slidable.
Nonetheless, Winters discloses a screen system including a pair of tracks being mounted in the garage, a door (door shown in Figure 2) being slidable along the pair of tracks (one track is shown in Figure 2, an opposite track is understood to be on the other side of the assembly; the garage door configuration shown in Figure 2 is a well-known configuration that is understood to include a pair of tracks in which the door is slidable to open and close the opening), each track of the pair of tracks having a vertical portion positioned adjacent to and extending along the opening and a horizontal portion coupled to and extending rearwardly from the vertical portion, the vertical portion of each track of the pair of tracks being positioned rearwardly of the mounting structure [FIG. 2] (see annotated drawing below).
PNG
media_image3.png
387
402
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the screen system of King-Darr, as modified above, to include garage door configuration taught by Winters, in order to allow for use of the screen system with a standard residential up-and-over garage door configuration.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King-Darr (U.S. Patent No. 6,098,698) in view of Tremaine (U.S. Patent No. 8,887,789), as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Graham (U.S. Patent No. 6,901,987).
Regarding claim 10, King-Darr, as modified above, discloses the controller and wireless operation of the controller (column 5, line 66-column 6, line 4), but does not explicitly disclose a receiver.
Nonetheless, Graham discloses a screen system including a receiver (66) being electrically coupled to a drive assembly (74) and being in wireless communication with a controller (column 9, lines 13-43).
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the controller and remote operation of King-Darr to include the receiver taught by Graham, in order to allow for reliable operation of the screen system, including multiple control signal operations, via the remote.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King-Darr (U.S. Patent No. 6,098,698) in view of Tremaine (U.S. Patent No. 8,887,789), Winters (U.S. Patent No. 5,988,256), and Graham (U.S. Patent No. 6,901,987).
Regarding claim 12, King-Darr discloses a garage screen system [FIG. 1] comprising:
a garage (10) having an interior space (11) positioned within the garage and an opening (13) extending through a front side of the garage to the interior space [FIGS. 1, 3], the garage comprising a frame (the frame is defined by the perimeter structure of the opening 13, shown in at least Figures 1-3) which extends around the opening [FIG. 1];
a mounting structure (housing 14 and corresponding structure attaching the housing 14 to the garage) being coupled to the garage, the mounting structure comprising:
a housing (14) being positioned at a top of the opening [FIG. 3]; and
a pair of rails (18, 19) being coupled to and extending downwardly from the housing [FIG. 1], each rail of the pair of rails being positioned on a respective lateral side of the pair of lateral sides of the opening [FIG. 1];
a spool (16) being mounted in the housing and being rotatable with respect to the housing around a horizontal axis extending between a pair of lateral sides of the opening (column 4, lines 45-49);
a covering (17, 21) being wound onto the spool in a stored position, the covering being extendable from a bottom of the housing with the covering between a front and a back of the housing such that the covering is extended vertically downward under the spool and inset relative to both the front and the back of the housing [FIG. 3] (see annotated drawing above), the covering being extendable to an extended position with respect to the spool wherein the covering extends away from the spool out of the housing and covers the opening (column 5, lines 16-21), the covering having a plurality of apertures extending through the covering, each aperture of the plurality of apertures having a size such that the covering is configured to inhibit insects from moving through the covering (column 4, lines 50-61), the covering comprising a flexible sheet (17) and a rigid member (21), the flexible sheet being coupled to the spool (column 4, lines 61-63), the rigid member being coupled to and extending along a distal edge of the flexible sheet with respect to the spool [FIG. 1], the rigid member maintaining a width of the flexible sheet between a pair of lateral edges of the sheet [FIG. 1], the rigid member being weighted such that the rigid member facilitates extending the covering to the extended position (the rigid member inherently has a weight that pulls downwardly on the covering to facilitate movement to the extended position), each rail of the pair of rails engaging the covering (column 5, lines 12-15) such that the covering is extendable from the spool only along the pair of rails [FIG. 3], each rail of the pair of rails having a groove (20) extending into an inner side of an associated one of the pair of rails with respect to the opening, the groove of each rail of the pair of rails receiving the covering [FIG. 4];
a drive assembly (25) being operatively coupled to the spool to rotate the spool alternately in a first direction and a second direction to cause the covering to move toward the stored position and the extended position respectively (column 5, lines 58-63), the drive assembly comprising a motor (25);
an electrical cord (the electrical cord is shown schematically in Figure 5; column 6, lines 2-4 further discloses an electrical connection between the motor and the power supply 27) being electrically coupled to the drive assembly, the electrical cord being electrically couplable to an electrical system (27) in the garage to power the drive assembly (column 5, line 58-column 6, line 4);
a controller (26) being in communication with the drive assembly, the controller having an input for selectively operating the drive assembly (column 5, line 63-column 6, line 2);
a door being mounted in the garage, the door being operable to alternately open and close the opening (column 7, lines 57-59 discloses a garage door mounted in the garage interior that retractably closes the opening).
King-Darr does not disclose that the mounting structure is positioned in the opening entirely between a front and a back of the opening, a plurality of mounting holes in each of the rails, a drivetrain comprising a belt-and-pulley transmission, a receiver electrically coupled to the drive assembly, or a pair of tracks along which the door is slidably movable.
Nonetheless, Tremaine discloses a screen system comprising a mounting structure (130) positioned in an opening of a door (column 3, lines 8-19 discloses that the screen system is installed in a door opening; this positioning is also shown in Figures 1a and 1b), the mounting structure being positioned entirely between a front and a back of the opening (Figure 1b illustrates the housing 130 of the mounting structure being positioned entirely between a front and a back of the opening defined by the width of frame member of the opening 135 shown at the top of the figure), the front of the opening being defined by a front edge of an interior surface of the frame, the back of the opening being defined by a back edge of the interior surface of the frame [FIG. 1b] (see annotated drawing above); and a pair of rails (107, 110) each having a plurality of mounting holes (holes through which fasteners 140 extend, shown in Figure 1a) extending through an associated one of the pair of rails [FIG. 1a] to facilitate mounting the mounting structure to the garage via fasteners (140; column 15, lines 41-46).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the garage screen system of King-Darr to provide the mounting structure in the opening with the covering extending from a middle of the bottom of the housing, and to include mounting holes on the rails, as taught by Tremaine, in order to ensure a secure connection of the rails and the mounting structure to the building structure; and in order to provide a compact arrangement for the mounting structure that does not protrude as far past the exterior of the garage structure. This configuration provides a more aesthetic or “hidden” appearance for the screen system by reducing the visual impact of the installation.
Furthermore, Winters discloses a garage screen system (10) comprising a drive assembly comprising a motor (24) and a drivetrain (25), the drivetrain operatively coupling the motor to a spool (23) [FIG. 4], the drivetrain comprising a belt-and-pulley transmission (column 4, lines 59-62); and a pair of tracks being mounted in the garage, a door (door shown in Figure 2) being slidable along the pair of tracks (one track is shown in Figure 2, an opposite track is understood to be on the other side of the assembly; the garage door configuration shown in Figure 2 is a well-known configuration that is understood to include a pair of tracks in which the door is slidable to open and close the opening), each track of the pair of tracks having a vertical portion positioned adjacent to and extending along the opening and a horizontal portion coupled to and extending rearwardly from the vertical portion, the vertical portion of each track of the pair of tracks being positioned rearwardly of the mounting structure [FIG. 2] (see annotated drawing above).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the garage screen system of King-Darr to include the belt-and-pulley drive train and garage door configuration taught by Winters, in order to provide easier access to the motor for maintenance or replacement, and to allow for use of the screen system with a standard residential up-and-over garage door configuration.
Furthermore, Graham discloses a screen system including a receiver (66) being electrically coupled to a drive assembly (74) and being in wireless communication with a controller (column 9, lines 13-43).
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the controller and remote operation of King-Darr to include the receiver taught by Graham, in order to allow for reliable operation of the screen system, including multiple control signal operations, via the remote.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/30/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 1-5, 8, and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King-Darr in view of Tremaine are directed to the new limitations presented in the amended claims, particularly the limitation ”the covering being extendable from a bottom of the housing with the covering between a front and a back of the housing such that the covering is extended vertically downward under the spool and inset relative to both the front and the back of the housing” as recited in claims 1 and 12. Applicant states that the rejection set forth in the Office action dated 7/1/25 acknowledges that King-Darr does not disclose the position of the extension of the cover from the housing, but it is noted that this acknowledgement was made with respect to the limitation prior to the amendment set forth in the response dated 9/30/25 (specifically, with respect to the limitation requiring extension from a middle of the bottom of the housing). As shown in the annotated drawing above, King-Darr depicts an extension of the covering from the bottom of the housing that is inset from both the front and rear faces of the housing. The claims require only that the covering itself be inset from the front and back of the housing, and they do not specify an amount of inset required. The gap provided by the thickness of the portion of the rail 18 shown in the annotated drawing reads on the claimed “inset”, given a broadest reasonable interpretation.
Applicant did not set forth any further arguments directed to particular teachings or disclosures of the prior art. The arguments directed to the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 are therefore not found persuasive. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) is withdrawn in view of the amendments to the 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 ABE L MASSAD whose telephone number is (571)272-6292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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.
/ABE MASSAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634