DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the RCE filed 4/29/2024.
Status of the claims: Claims 1-15 and 18 are examined as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 9 both recite “wherein the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade”. It is unclear where there is support for this in the specification as filed. While the specification states that the transforming members modify the overall height of the shade, it is silent as to the transforming members also modifying the overall width of the shade. This is further not shown in the drawings as filed. Thus it is considered new matter.
Claim 1 states that the “shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration”. It is unclear where there is support for this in the specification as filed for the embodiment of claim 1. Claim 1 requires the plurality of attachment rods attached at particular vertical positions on the back side of the cloth. As best understood, the attachment rods help to change the shade from a flat shade (first type) to a Roman or hobbled shade (second type) when the shade is retracted. It is unclear where there is support for this embodiment being only a second type when raised or lowered.
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 1-15 and 18 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.
Claims 1 and 9 both recite “wherein the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade”. It is unclear how exactly the transforming members would do this as they appear to be configured to couple to each other vertically, but not necessarily horizontally based on the specification and drawings provided.
Claim 1 states that the “shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration”. It is unclear how this is accomplished based on the specification and the drawings showing the embodiment having attachment rods as recited in claim 1. In what way do the attachment rods transform the shade from a first type to a second type? This is unclear and confusing.
Dependent claims are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
Claims are being examined as best understood.
Specification
The amendments filed 4/29/2026 are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
Claims 1 and 9 both recite “wherein the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade”. It is unclear where there is support for this in the specification as filed. While the specification states that the transforming members modify the overall height of the shade, it is silent as to the transforming members also modifying the overall width of the shade. This is further not shown in the drawings as filed. Thus it is considered new matter.
Claim 1 states that the “shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration”. It is unclear where there is support for this in the specification as filed for the embodiment of claim 1. Claim 1 requires the plurality of attachment rods attached at particular vertical positions on the back side of the cloth. As best understood, the attachment rods help to change the shade from a flat shade (first type) to a Roman or hobbled shade (second type) when the shade is retracted. It is unclear where there is support for this embodiment being only a second type when raised or lowered.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade” and “the shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
As best understood, claims 1-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nien EP1647665, Teuscher US 10,731,410 and Kirby et al US 2010/0294438.
In regard to claim 1, with reference to Figures 5-6, Nien ‘665 discloses a shade having a shade front side and a shade back side, the shade comprising:
A cloth (30, Fig. 5) configured to cover a window opening, wherein the cloth includes a front cloth side and a back cloth side;
a plurality of transforming members (22, Fig. 6) each (1) having a first dimension that is less than or equal to a width of the cloth (30), and (2) having a first transforming side and a second transforming side, wherein the first transforming side of each the plurality of transforming member is coupled to the back cloth side of the cloth (as shown in Fig. 6);
the second transforming side of each of at least two selected adjacent transforming members (22), of the plurality of transforming members, are configured to be coupled to each other to modify an overall height of the shade.
Nien ‘665 fails to disclose wherein when excess cloth material of the cloth extends past the first dimension of the plurality of transforming members, the excess material is configured to be coupled on the shade back side at a plurality of different locations on the shade back side to modify an overall width of the shade. Nien ‘665 further fails to disclose the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade, a plurality of attachment rods attached at particular vertical positions on the backside of the cloth, wherein each of the plurality of attachment rods extends across a majority of a back cloth side width of the cloth of the shade, each of the plurality of attachment rods configured to attached to different vertical locations on the shade back side to transform the shade from a first type of shade to a second type of shade when the shade is covering an entirety of the window opening, wherein the shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is both in a lowered configuration and a raised configuration.
Teuscher ‘410 discloses wherein when excess cloth material of the cloth extends past the first dimension of the plurality of strips, the excess material is configured to be coupled on the shade back side at a plurality of different locations on the shade back side to modify an overall width of the shade. (claim 1 of Teuscher ‘410)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Nien ‘665 to fold excess material extending past the transforming members as taught by Teuscher ‘410 for the purpose of allowing a user to alter the overall width of the device to meet a user’s needs. (column 4, lines 26-36)
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Nien ‘665 and Teuscher ‘410 to use the transforming members that are coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the cloth be configured to be coupled to each other modify the overall width of the shade as such would allow for a simple construction by using like parts for like purposes.
Kirby ‘438 discloses a plurality of attachment rods (124, Fig. 7) attached at particular vertical positions on the backside of the cloth (119, Fig. 7), wherein each of the plurality of attachment rods (124) extends across a majority of a back cloth side width of the cloth of the cloth of the shade, each of the plurality of attachment rods configured to attached to different vertical locations on the shade back side to transform the shade from a first type (Fig. 7) of shade to a second type (shown in Fig. 17) of shade when the shade is covering an entirety of the window opening.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Nien ‘665 to include the plurality of attachment rods wherein the shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is both in a lowered configuration and a raised configuration as taught by Kirby ‘438 to provide a means to interact with a lift bad to move the shade up and down.
In regard to claim 2, Nien ‘665 as modified by Kirby ‘438 disclose wherein the first type of shade is a flat front Roman shade (when fully extended and no 22 are connected) and the second type of shade is a hobbled shade (as taught by Kirby ‘438, Fig. 17).
In regard to claims 3-4, Nien ‘665 discloses a securing mechanism (hook and loop structure) on the back side of the second transforming side of the at least two adjacent transforming members (22), wherein the securing mechanism of the at least two adjacent transforming members mate to couple together the at least two adjacent transforming members.
In regard to claim 5, Nien ‘665 discloses a head rail unit (shown below) configured to be coupled to a top end of the cloth.
PNG
media_image1.png
574
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As best understood, in regard to claims 6-8, Nien ‘665 as modified by Kirby ‘438 disclose wherein the head rail unit houses a raising mechanism that includes a retractable liner (120, Kirby Fig. 5) positioned between the cloth (30, Nien) and each of the plurality of attachment rods (124, Kirby Fig. 5) ; wherein when the shade is raised, the liner (120) retracts and engages with the plurality of attachment rods (124).
In regard to claim 17, Nien ‘665 as modified by Kirby ‘438 disclose that the shade remains as a second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration (as taught to be lowered and raised by Kirby ‘665).
In regard to claim 18, Nien ‘665 as modified by Kirby ‘438 disclose that the plurality of transforming members (22, Nien ‘665) are different than the plurality of attachment rods (124, Kirby)
As best understood, claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perkowitz US 8381792 in view of Nien EP1647665 and Teuscher US 10,731,410.
In regard to claim 9, with reference to Figures 10-11, Perkowitz ‘792 disclose a shade having a shade front side and a shade back side, the shade comprising:
A cloth (18, column 4, lines 40-53) configured to cover a window opening, wherein the cloth includes a front cloth side and a back cloth side; one or more ribbons (32A-C) traveling a length of the shade; a plurality of clipping components (84A-I) each configured to couple to the back cloth side and the one or more ribbons, wherein each of the plurality of clipping components is coupled to the back cloth side at one or more ribbons at a same vertical position (Figure 10); wherein each of the plurality of clipping components (84A-I) is configured to stay at the same vertical position on the cloth (18) and move to a plurality of different positions different from the same vertical position on the one or more ribbons to transform the shade from a first shade type to a second shade type (Clipping components 84A-I are tied to ribbons 32A-C with strand 92, thus they are configured to be untied and retied elsewhere) .
Perkowitz ‘792 fails to disclose a plurality of transforming members each (1) having a first dimension that is less than or equal to a width of the cloth and extending across a majority of an overall width of the shade, and (2) having a first transforming side and a second transforming side, wherein the first transforming side of each the plurality of transforming member is coupled to the front cloth side of the cloth or the back cloth side of the cloth; the second transforming side of at least two adjacent transforming members, of the plurality of transforming members, configured to be coupled together to modify an overall height of the shade; wherein when excess cloth material of the cloth that extends past the first dimension of the plurality of transforming members is coupled at a plurality of different locations on the back of the shade to modify an overall width of the shade, the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade.
Teuscher ‘410 discloses wherein when excess cloth material of the cloth extends past the first dimension of the plurality of strips, the excess material is configured to be coupled on the shade back side at a plurality of different locations on the shade back side to modify an overall width of the shade. (claim 1 of Teuscher ‘410)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Nien ‘665 to fold excess material extending past the transforming members as taught by Teuscher ‘410 for the purpose of allowing a user to alter the overall width of the device to meet a user’s needs. (column 4, lines 26-36)
Nien ‘665 discloses a plurality of transforming members (22, Fig. 6) each (1) having a first dimension that is less than or equal to a width of the cloth (30), and (2) having a first transforming side and a second transforming side, wherein the first transforming side of each the plurality of transforming member is coupled to the back cloth side of the cloth (as shown in Fig. 6); the second transforming side of each of at least two selected adjacent transforming members (22), of the plurality of transforming members, are configured to be coupled to each other to modify an overall height of the shade.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Perkowitz ‘792 to include the transforming members as taught by Nien ‘665 in order to provide a Roman blind type effect. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the transforming members (22) to extend across a majority of an overall width of the shade, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Further, changes in size or shape without special functional significance are not patentable. Research Corp.v. Nasco Industries, Inc., 501 F2d 358; 182 USPQ 449 (CA 7) cert. Denied 184 USPQ 193; 43 USLW 3359 (1974). Making the transforming members be longer would provide a greater holding force and resist coming apart easily.
It further would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the device of Nien ‘665 and Teuscher ‘410 to use the transforming members that are coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the cloth be configured to be coupled to each other modify the overall width of the shade as such would allow for a simple construction by using like parts for like purposes.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perkowitz US 8381792 in view of Nien EP1647665 and Teuscher US 10,731,410 as applied to claim 9 and further in view of Linder et al FR2582495.
In regard to claim 10, Perkowitz ‘792 as modified by Nien ‘665 discloses wherein the first type of shade is a flat front Roman shade. (Fig 10, Perkowitz).Perkowitz ‘792 fails to explicitly disclose that he second type of shade is a hobbled shade. Linder et al ‘495 disclose wherein the first type of shade is a flat front Roman shade (Figure 1) and the second type of shade is a hobbled shade (Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Perkowitz ‘792 to make the second type of shade be a hobbled shade since such is a known configuration and style in the art. Such would be obvious based on a user’s desired look.
In regard to claims 11-12, Nien ‘665 discloses a securing mechanism (hook and loop structure) on the second transforming side of the at least two adjacent transforming members (22), wherein the securing mechanism of the at least two adjacent transforming members mate to couple together the at least two adjacent transforming members.
As best understood, claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perkowitz US 8381792, Nien EP1647665 and Teuscher US 10,731,410 as applied to claim 9 and further in view of Wang US 2010/0212839.
In regard to claim 13, Perkowitz ‘792 fails to disclose a head rail unit configured to be coupled to a top end of the cloth. With reference to Figure 3, Wang ‘839 discloses a head rail unit (12) configured to be coupled to a top end of the cloth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Linder et al ‘495 to include a headrail as taught by Wang ‘839 in order to affix the shade to and house lift cords and associated structure.
In regard to claims 14-15, Perkowitz ‘792/Nien ‘665/ Teuscher ‘410 as modified by Wang ‘829 disclose wherein the head rail unit (12, Wang ‘829) houses a raising mechanism that includes one or more pull strings (6, Wang ‘829), the shade travels an overall length of the shade and each of the one or more pull strings (6, Wang ‘829) is configured to engage with at least one corresponding clipping component ((84A-I) Perkowitz ) of the plurality of clipping components when the pull string retracts during a raising of the shade.
As best understood, claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perkowitz US 8381792, Nien EP1647665 and Teuscher US 10,731,410 as applied to claim 9 and further in view of Kirby et al US 2010/0294438.
In regard to claim 16, Perkowitz ‘792/Nien ‘665/ Teuscher ‘410 fail to disclose a plurality of attachment rods attached at second different vertical positions on the back side of the cloth; a sheath positioned between the cloth and each of the plurality of attachment rods, wherein when the shade is raised, the sheath retracts and engages with the plurality of attachment rods.
With reference to Figure 5, Kirby et al ‘438 disclose a plurality of attachment rods (124) attached at second different vertical positions on the back side of the cloth, a sheath (128) positioned between the cloth and each of the plurality of attachment rods (124), wherein when the shade is raised, the sheath retracts and engages with the plurality of attachment rods.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the device of Perkowitz ‘792/Nien ‘665/ Teuscher ‘410 to include a plurality of attachment rods and sheath as taught by Kirby et al ‘438 in order to provide an alternate mechanism to raise and lower the shade to different heights.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that Nien, Teuscher and Kirby do not disclose “the plurality of transforming members that are configured to modify the overall width of the shade are the same plurality of transforming members whose second transforming sides are configured to be coupled to each other to modify the overall height of the shade” and “wherein the shade remains as the second type of shade when the shade is in both a lowered configuration and a raised configuration”, as stated in the 112 rejection above, it is unclear where there is support for these limitations in the claims as filed as well as how these are both accomplished and the claims are being examined as best understood in light of this.
As stated above, one having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use the transforming members of Nien to adjust width and height for the purpose of simplifying construction, and as taught by Kirby ‘438 the attachment rods are configured to attach at different vertical locations to transform the shade from a first type (Fig. 7) to a second type (Fig. 17) as is claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C RAMSEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3133. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Wed 7:00-3:30.
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.
/JEREMY C RAMSEY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights