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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9, 11-19, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blair (US 20210363822).
Regarding claim 1, Blair teaches a window shade (note that paragraph 175 states that the embodiment from figs. 20a-22b is usable with the shade of fig. 1a and 1b) comprising:
a shade assembly (fig. 1a) having a first end (left end that is able to “slide”, see figs. 20a-22b for this end) and a second end (right end, which is an idler end per paragraph 72, see fig. 1 for this end) opposite to each other, the first end being coupled to a first bracket (1130 from fig. 21a), the second end having a coupler (piece that connects the roll to the bracket, described as an idler end from paragraph 72); and
a connector (1114 and 1141) and a second bracket (130b from fig. 1) respectively attachable to a support surface of a building at two spaced-apart locations;
wherein the first bracket at the first end of the shade assembly is operable to engage with and disengage from the connector (see fig. 22a), and the coupler at the second end of the shade assembly is operable to connect to and detach from the second bracket (functional language),
wherein the first bracket (1130) includes a slot (1122) at least partially defined between two opposite sidewalls (fig. 21a), and the connector includes an insert (1142) slidable into and out of the slot, the two sidewalls of the slot being horizontally opposite to each other (they are considered horizontally opposite to each other as they extend in a horizontal direction and are opposite the slot) when the connector is attached to a fixed structure and the insert is engaged with the slot, at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert for preventing a vertical movement that detaches the first bracket from the connector (functional language).
Regarding claim 2, Blair teaches that the second bracket (130b) and the coupler (piece that connects the roll to the bracket) at the second end of the shade assembly are configured to allow a movement of the shade assembly for engaging and disengaging the first bracket with respect to the connector while the coupler and the second bracket remain connected to each other (see figs. 1a-1b, capable of this).
Regarding claim 3, Blair teaches that while the coupler at the second end of the shade assembly remains connected to the second bracket, the first bracket and the shade assembly are horizontally movable in unison to engage the first bracket with the connector or disengage the first bracket from the connector (see figs. 1a-1b, capable of this).
Regarding claim 4, Blair teaches that the connector and the second bracket are respectively attachable to a support surface of a building at two locations spaced apart from each other along a width axis corresponding to a width dimension of the shade assembly, the assembly being movable along the width axis to connect the coupler at the second end of the shade assembly to the second bracket, and the shade assembly being movable transversally relative to the width axis to engage the first bracket at the first end of the shade assembly with the connector while the coupler remains connected to the second bracket (capable of this).
Regarding claim 6, Blair teaches that the second bracket (130b, it is noted that in the embodiment in figs. 20a-22b the brackets are vertically oriented) has a coupler mount portion (portion extending vertically), and an attaching portion (portion that connects to the ceiling) protruding sideways from the coupler mount portion, the coupler at the second end of the shade assembly being connectible to the coupler mount portion, and the attaching portion being attachable to a support surface of a building via one or more fastener (capable of this).
Regarding claim 9, Blair teaches that the first bracket (1130) has a shade holding portion (1132), and a bracket mount portion (1120) protruding sideways from the shade holding portion, the shade holding portion (1132) being coupled to the first end of the shade assembly, and the bracket mount portion (1120) being operable to engage with and disengage from the connector (1114 and 1141).
Regarding claim 11, Blair teaches that the bracket mount portion includes the slot (1122), and the connector includes the insert (1142).
Regarding claim 12, Blair teaches that the first bracket at the first end of the shade assembly is movable relative to the connector along a first axis to slide the insert into the slot (figs. 21a-21b, an engagement of the insert through the slot being adapted to prevent detachment of the first bracket from the connector along a second axis orthogonal to the first axis (capable of this).
Regarding claim 13, Blair teaches a latch (1165) configured to prevent a movement of the first bracket that slides the insert out of the slot.
Regarding claim 14, Blair teaches that the latch (1165) is coupled to the connector (1114 and 1141), the latch being movable to engage with the first bracket (1130) to prevent a movement of the first bracket that slides the insert out of the slot.
Regarding claim 15, Blair teaches that the insert (1142) is introduced into the slot from a first end of the slot, and is slidable along the slot until the insert contacts a stop (end of 1122 shown in fig. 21a) inside the slot and the latch protrudes outward at a second end of the slot opposite to the first end thereof.
Regarding claim 16, Blair teaches that the latch includes a resilient part (1165 is considered a resilient part) provided at an end of the insert, the resilient part engaging with a sidewall at the second end of the slot to prevent a movement of the first bracket that slides the insert outward at the first end of the slot (figs. 21a-22b).
Regarding claim 17, Blair teaches that the latch (1165) and the insert (1142) are formed integrally as a single body (fig. 21a).
Regarding claim 18, Blair teaches that the insert (1142) has a tapered shape (fig. 22a, the inside of the insert has a tapered element as the dimension changes per this triangular element).
Regarding claim 19, Blair teaches a roller pivotally connected to the first bracket, and a shade structure connected to the roller (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 23, Blair teaches a window shade (note that paragraph 175 states that the embodiment from figs. 20a-22b is usable with the shade of fig. 1a and 1b) comprising:
a shade assembly (fig. 1a) having a first end (left end that is able to “slide”, see figs. 20a-22b for this end) and a second end (right end, which is an idler end per paragraph 72, see fig. 1 for this end) opposite to each other, the first end being coupled to a first bracket (1130 from fig. 21a), the second end having a coupler (piece that connects the roll to the bracket, described as an idler end from paragraph 72); and
a connector (1114 and 1141) and a second bracket (130b from fig. 1) respectively attachable to a support surface of a building at two spaced-apart locations;
wherein the first bracket at the first end of the shade assembly is operable to engage with and disengage from the connector (see fig. 22a), and the coupler at the second end of the shade assembly is operable to connect to and detach from the second bracket (functional language),
wherein the first bracket (1130) includes a slot (1122) at least partially defined between two opposite sidewalls (fig. 21a), and the connector includes an insert (1142) slidable into and out of the slot, the two sidewalls of the slot being opposite to each other (they are considered opposite to each other as they extend opposite the slot) along a width direction of the shade assembly (the width direction is interpreted as the direction of the width of element 1100 as shown in fig. 21a), at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert for preventing a vertical movement that detaches the first bracket from the connector (functional language).
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) 5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blair (US 20210363822).
Regarding claim 5, the embodiment of Blair does not explicitly teach that one of the coupler and the second bracket has a truncated conical shape that is positionable to contact with a second one of the coupler and the second bracket for connecting the coupler to the second bracket.
Another embodiment of Blair (as shown in fig. 9a) teaches an idler an idler end with a coupler that has a truncated conical shape (611) that is positionable to contact with a second bracket (637) for connecting the coupler to the second bracket. 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 Blair so that the idler end is like that of fig. 9a with one of the coupler and the second bracket having a truncated conical shape that is positionable to contact with a second one of the coupler and the second bracket for connecting the coupler to the second bracket. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a strong and removable connection between the components.
Regarding claims 7-8, the embodiment of Blair does not explicitly teach that one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a socket, and a second one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a shaft portion insertable into the socket for connecting the coupler to the second bracket, nor that the shaft portion includes a resilient part movable to engage with and disengage from the socket, an engagement of the resilient part with the socket allowing a movement of the shade assembly for engaging and disengaging the first bracket with respect to the connector.
Another embodiment of Blair (as shown in fig. 27c) teaches an idler with one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a socket (1334), and a second one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a shaft portion (1311) insertable into the socket for connecting the coupler to the second bracket, the shaft portion includes a resilient part (1135) movable to engage with and disengage from the socket (paragraph 217 teaches the part flexing and moving), an engagement of the resilient part with the socket allowing a movement of the shade assembly for engaging and disengaging the first bracket with respect to the connector (functional language).
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 Blair so that one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a socket, and the other one of the coupler and the coupler mount portion includes a shaft portion insertable into the socket for connecting the coupler to the second bracket, nor that the shaft portion includes a resilient part movable to engage with and disengage from the socket, an engagement of the resilient part with the socket allowing a movement of the shade assembly for engaging and disengaging the first bracket with respect to the connector. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a strong and removable connection between the components.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blair (US 20210363822) in view of Geiger (US 20180274293).
Regarding claim 10, Blair teaches that the connector (1114 and 1141) includes one or more hole (1152) through which one or more fastener is engaged to attach the connector to a support surface of a building (paragraph 165). Blair does not teach the one or more hole being covered by the bracket mount portion when the first bracket is engaged with the connector and exposed when the first bracket is disengaged from the connector.
Geiger teaches a window shade assembly with the connector (52) that includes one or more holes (55) through which one or more fastener are engaged to attach the connector to a support surface of a building (paragraph 55), the one or more hole being covered by a bracket mount portion (51) when the first bracket is engaged with the connector and exposed when the first bracket is disengaged from the connector. 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 Blair so that the one or more hole being covered by the bracket mount portion when the first bracket is engaged with the connector and exposed when the first bracket is disengaged from the connector. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of a more aesthetic design that hides fasteners.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blair (US 20210363822) in view of Lin (US 20190010756).
Regarding claim 20, Blair doesn’t explicitly tech that the coupler includes: an anchor element attachable to the second bracket; a spring disposed around the anchor element; and a rotary element rotationally coupled to the roller and disposed around the anchor element and the spring.
Lin teaches (fig. 10) a window shade unit with a coupler that includes: an anchor element (71) attachable to a second bracket (51);
a spring (7c) disposed around the anchor element; and a rotary element (22) rotationally coupled to the roller and disposed around the anchor element and the spring (it is considered disposed around the elements).
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 Blair with teachings of Lin so that the coupler includes: an anchor element attachable to the second bracket; a spring disposed around the anchor element; and a rotary element rotationally coupled to the roller and disposed around the anchor element and the spring. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of providing additional means of rolling up the device.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blair (US 20210363822) in view of Chen (US 20200123853).
Regarding claim 21, Blair does not explicitly teach that the shade assembly further includes a torsion spring assembly disposed inside the roller, the torsion spring assembly including a shaft connected to the first bracket, and a torsion spring that has a first end fixedly connected to the shaft and a second end rotationally coupled to the roller.
Chen teaches a window shade unit with a torsion spring assembly disposed inside the roller (12, paragraph 29), the torsion spring assembly including a shaft (141) connected to the first bracket (13, paragraph 29), and a torsion spring (142) that has a first end fixedly connected to the shaft (paragraph 29) and a second end rotationally coupled to the roller (143). 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 Blair so that the shade assembly further includes a torsion spring assembly disposed inside the roller, the torsion spring assembly including a shaft connected to the first bracket, and a torsion spring that has a first end fixedly connected to the shaft and a second end rotationally coupled to the roller. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of providing additional means of rolling up the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that “The Office Action states that the slot as claimed reads upon the upper channel 1122 in the translating portion 1120 of Blair. However, Blair at best discloses that the upper channel 1122 is formed in a vertical surface of the translating portion 1120 and has no horizontally opposite sidewalls.
Therefore, Blair cannot disclose the feature of claim 1 reciting "the two sidewalls of the slot being horizontally opposite to each other when the connector is attached to a fixed structure and the insert is engaged with the slot, at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert for preventing a vertical movement that detaches the first bracket from the connector.”
The examiner notes that all the limitations as claimed are taught by the above rejection.
Blair is found to teach that the first bracket (1130) includes a slot (1122) at least partially defined between two opposite sidewalls (fig. 21a), and the connector (1114 and 1141) includes an insert (1142) slidable into and out of the slot, the two sidewalls of the slot being horizontally opposite to each other (they are considered horizontally opposite to each other as they extend in a horizontal direction, interpreted as the direction of the depth of the slot, and are opposite the slot) when the connector is attached to a fixed structure and the insert is engaged with the slot, at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert for preventing a vertical movement that detaches the first bracket from the connector (functional language).
The applicant argues that “New claim 23 at least recites "one of the connector and the first bracket includes a slot at least partially defined between two opposite sidewalls, and a second one of the connector and the first bracket includes an insert slidable into and out of the slot, the two sidewalls of the slot being opposite to each other along a width direction of the shade assembly, at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert when the first bracket is engaged with the connector", which is undisclosed by the cited references.”
The examiner notes that Blair is found to teach that the first bracket (1130) includes a slot (1122) at least partially defined between two opposite sidewalls (fig. 21a), and the connector (1114 and 1141) includes an insert (1142) slidable into and out of the slot, the two sidewalls of the slot being opposite to each other (they are considered opposite to each other as they extend opposite the slot) along a width direction of the shade assembly (the width direction is interpreted as the direction of the width of element 1100 as shown in fig. 21a), at least one of the two opposite sidewalls of the slot being adapted to contact with the insert for preventing a vertical movement that detaches the first bracket from the connector (functional language).
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
Prosecution Insights