DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed 12/22/2023.
Status of the claims: Claims 21-24 and 32-40 are hereby examined below. Claims 24-31 are withdrawn.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
Species I, Figures 11-17
Species II, Figures 18-23
The species are independent or distinct because they require different structures to activate the leveling assembly. Species I requires a cam within a slot, while Species II is a rack and pinion arrangement. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, claim 1 is generic.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
The species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries such as “rack and pinion” vs. “cam”).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with Jason Jennings on 12/15/2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Species II, claims 21-23 and 32-40. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 24-31 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the reference characters used in Figures 18-23 are not consistent with the reference characters as recited in the specification. For example, Figure 18 shows reference character 160, while the specification recites 160*. There are multiple reference numbers in these figures that should be corrected for consistency. 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 § 112
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.
Claim 32 is 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.
Claim 32 recites “the rail insert is configured as a rack and pinion type actuator”. The phrase "-type" renders the claim indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "-type"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It is unclear what is required to be of a rack and pinion type.
Claims are being examined as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 21-38 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oskam US 6,059,004.
In regard to claim 21, with reference to Figures 1-3, Oskam ‘004 disclose a covering for an architectural structure, the covering comprising: a headrail (10, Fig. 1); a bottom rail (12, Fig. 1) in a lateral direction between a first lateral end of the bottom rail and a second lateral end of the bottom rail, the bottom rail being suspended relative to the headrail via first (14, middle, Fig. 1) and second (14, right, Fig. 1) lift cords, the first lift cord (14, middle) defining a first effective cord length between the headrail (10) and the bottom rail (12), and the second lift (14, right) cord defining a second effective cord length between the headrail (10) and the bottom rail (12); a lift system component (14, left, Fig. 1) positioned within the bottom rail; and a leveling assembly (27,30 Fig. 2) positioned at least partially within the bottom rail (12), the leveling assembly including a slide (27) coupled to the lift system component (14, left) and a rail insert (30) supported relative to the one of the bottom rail (12), the rail insert (12) being configured to engage the slide (27) such that rotation of at least a portion of the rail insert (30) relative to the slide (27) results in a lateral position of the lift system component (14, left) being adjusted within the bottom rail (12); wherein the lift system component (14, left) is coupled (via 27) to the first and second lift cords (14, middle and right) such that, as the lateral position of the lift system component (14, left) is adjusted within the one of the bottom rail (12), at least one of the first effective cord length or the second effective cord length is varied to adjust an orientation of the bottom rail.
In regard to claim 22, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein a portion of the rail insert (30) is accessible along an exterior of the one of the bottom rail (12) or the headrail to allow for rotation of the at least a portion of the rail insert (30) about the rotational axis. (shown in Fig. 3)
In regard to claim 23, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the portion of the rail insert (30) defines an engagement slot (shown in Fig. 3) configured to allow a tool to be inserted therein for rotating the at least a portion of the rail insert about the rotational axis.
In regard to claim 32, Oskam ’004 discloses wherein the rail insert (30) is configured as a rack- and-pinion-type actuator. (rotation of 30 creates a linear movement of 27)
In regard to claim 33, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein a portion of the slide (27) forms a rack gear (female threads, column 3, lines 19-21) configured to engage a corresponding drive gear (male threads) of the rail insert (30).
In regard to claim 34, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the portion of the slide (27) comprises an actuation plate (26, Fig. 3) defining an actuation slot (38) , the actuation plate including gear teeth (female threads as stated above) projecting into the actuation slot (38) for engaging the drive gear (threads) of the rail insert (30).
In regard to claim 35, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the rail insert further comprises an annular lip (formed by the rightmost thread in Fig 3) provided along one side of the drive gear (male threads), the annular lip being configured to engage a portion of the actuation plate (26) to vertically retain the rail insert (30) relative to the slide (27).
In regard to claim 36, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the rail insert (30) further comprises an adjustment post (32, Fig. 3) extending outwardly from the drive gear (threads), the adjustment post (32) being accessible along an exterior of the one of the bottom rail (12) or the headrail to allow the drive gear to be rotated about the rotational axis.
In regard to claim 37, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the adjustment post (32) is configured to be engaged with a tool (flathead screwdriver) for rotating the drive gear about the rotational axis.
In regard to claim 38, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the first and second effective cord lengths are varied to adjust a skew angle of the bottom rail relative to a horizontal reference plane. (abstract)
In regard to claim 40, Oskam ‘004 discloses wherein the lift system component (14, left) is positioned within the bottom rail (12).
As an alternative rejection for claim 21 (with the differences in bold), with reference to Figures 1-3, Oskam ‘004 disclose a covering for an architectural structure, the covering comprising: a headrail (10, Fig. 1); a bottom rail (12, Fig. 1) in a lateral direction between a first lateral end of the bottom rail and a second lateral end of the bottom rail, the bottom rail being suspended relative to the headrail via first (14, middle, Fig. 1) and second (14, right, Fig. 1) lift cords, the first lift cord (14, middle) defining a first effective cord length between the headrail (10) and the bottom rail (12), and the second lift (14, right) cord defining a second effective cord length between the headrail (10) and the bottom rail (12); a lift system component (16 and 14, left, Fig. 1) positioned within the top rail; and a leveling assembly (27,30 Fig. 2) positioned at least partially within the bottom rail (12), the leveling assembly including a slide (27) coupled to the lift system component (14, left) and a rail insert (30) supported relative to the one of the bottom rail (12), the rail insert (12) being configured to engage the slide (27) such that rotation of at least a portion of the rail insert (30) relative to the slide (27) results in a lateral position of the lift system component (14, left) being adjusted within the bottom rail; wherein the lift system component (14, left) is coupled (via 27) to the first and second lift cords (14, middle and right) such that, as the lateral position of the lift system component (14, left) is adjusted within the one of the bottom rail (12), at least one of the first effective cord length or the second effective cord length is varied to adjust an orientation of the bottom rail.
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.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oskam US 6,059,004 in view of Filko US 20140262079.
In regard to claim 39, Oskam ‘004 fails to disclose that the lift system component comprises a motor. However, with reference to Figure 2A, Filko ‘079 discloses that the lift system component (18) comprises a motor. (paragraph [0030])
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 Oskam ‘004 to have a motor as part of the lift system component as taught by Filko ‘079 for the purpose of providing a means to easily operate the device instead of using manual manipulation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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