Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/278,624

CORNER CONNECTOR STRUCTURE OF SCREEN APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 24, 2023
Examiner
SHEPHERD, MATTHEW RICHARD
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Taroko Door & Window Technologies Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
93 granted / 175 resolved
+1.1% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
217
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§112
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 175 resolved cases

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 . Drawings The drawings dated 10/28/2025 are accepted. Specification The specification dated 10/28/2025 are accepted. 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) 1-4, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White (US 5450701) in view of Zhang (US 20170044825). Regarding claim 1, White teaches a corner connector structure of a screen apparatus (fig. 1), comprising bodies (element 24, it is well understood that a screen apparatus of this type will have multiple bodies, or “corner brackets”), each body being at least provided with a first connecting part (horizontal part of element 24 in fig. 4) and a second connecting part (vertical part of element 24 in fig. 4) which is separated from the first connecting part by an angle, a combining groove (50) being provided at a position of the first connecting part of the body, wherein the combining groove (50) further comprises an opening (at 116) and a lateral notch (area between 106 and 108 in fig. 2), and the combining groove protrudes out relative to the side wall of the lateral notch to form an abutting joint part (76 and 78 are the abutting joint part in fig. 4). White does not teach a wire adjuster being provided in the combining groove. Zhang teaches a screen apparatus with a wire adjuster (3, figs. 6-7) being provided in a combining groove (of element 2 per paragraph 67). 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 White with the teachings of Zhang so that it has a wire adjuster the combing groove, and a wire. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of allowing a user to adjust the tension of the screen via the wire and wire adjuster, keeping the screen apparatus taught. Regarding claim 2, modified White teaches that the first connecting part of each body is separated from the second connecting part of each body by 85-95 degrees (fig. 2). Regarding claims 3-4, modified White teaches that the first connecting part (horizontal part) is at least provided with a first combing piece (end of the horizontal part that extends into the frame), and the second connecting part (vertical part) is at least provided with a second combing piece (end of the vertical part that extends into the frame), wherein both the first combing piece and the second combining piece are an inserting piece (fig. 1). Regarding claim 6, modified White includes teachings of Zhang which teaches that the wire adjuster further comprises a wire adjusting base (31) and a fixing base (32), the wire adjusting base is assembled and combined with the fixing base, and the fixing base is provided in the opening of the combing groove of the body (after the modification above). Regarding claim 7, modified White includes teachings of Zhang which teaches that a peripheral edge of the fixing base (32) is at least provided with a fastener (at the bottom of 32 in fig. 6), the fastener is attached to an upper side and a lower side of the abutting joint part of the body (at least indirectly after the combination above), and the fastener has a compression space (between and behind it). Regarding claim 8, modified White includes teachings of Zhang, which teaches that the fixing base (32) is provided with an accommodating groove (space into which elements 316 fit), and the wire adjusting base (31) is accommodated in the accommodating groove (when snapped together); a first limiting protruding part (323) and a second limiting protruding part (lip at 324 in fig. 6) are provided in the accommodating groove, and the wire adjusting base (31) is provided with a first recessed part and a second recessed part (areas into which the protruding parts can extend, fig. 7) relative to the first limiting protruding part and the second limiting protruding part of the fixing base. Regarding claim 9, modified White includes teachings of Zhang which teaches that the fixing base (32) is provided with at least a through hole (322), the wire adjusting base (31) is provided with an actuating groove (322) relative to the through hole of the fixing base, a rotating shaft (316) is provided in the actuating groove, and the rotating shaft is annularly provided with a plurality of convex tooth parts (fig. 7). Regarding claim 10, modified White teaches that the first connecting part and the second connecting part are each combined with a frame material of a frame body (as shown in fig. 1). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner notes that the above combination teaches all the limitations as claimed. White is found to teach a corner connector structure of a screen apparatus (fig. 1), comprising bodies (element 24, it is well understood that a screen apparatus of this type will have multiple bodies, or “corner brackets”), each body being at least provided with a first connecting part (horizontal part of element 24 in fig. 4) and a second connecting part (vertical part of element 24 in fig. 4) which is separated from the first connecting part by an angle, a combining groove (50) being provided at a position of the first connecting part of the body, wherein the combining groove (50) further comprises an opening (at 116) and a lateral notch (area between 106 and 108 in fig. 2), and the combining groove protrudes out relative to the side wall of the lateral notch to form an abutting joint part (76 and 78 are the abutting joint part in fig. 4). White does not teach a wire adjuster being provided in the combining groove. Zhang teaches a screen apparatus with a wire adjuster (3, figs. 6-7) being provided in a combining groove (of element 2 per paragraph 67). 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 White with the teachings of Zhang so that it has a wire adjuster the combing groove, and a wire. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of allowing a user to adjust the tension of the screen via the wire and wire adjuster, keeping the screen apparatus taught. This alteration is found to have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as one would have been able to come up with this as a means of allowing a user to adjust tension of the screen. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 24, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

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
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+40.3%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 175 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month