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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 11 remains withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/16/2026.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s submission dated 08/12/2026 has been entered.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese Document CN 114885232 A – Zhu.
Regarding claim 1.
Zhu discloses a device (1, fig 5) for opening and closing a curtain on a rod or rail, comprising:
a driven wheel (1351, fig 6) coupled to a motor within a housing (10, fig 5) and protruding from the housing (10, fig 5) in frictional engagement with the rod or rail (See attached machine translation; As shown in FIG. 5 to FIG. 7, the embodiment of the intelligent curtain controller 1 of the invention 1. The intelligent curtain controller 1 comprises a main body 10 and a connecting device 20 assembled on the main body 10. The connecting device 20 can be connected with the curtain rod in a sliding manner.); and
a suspension assembly (20, fig 5) comprising a support member (21, fig 5) in sliding or rolling contact with the rod or rail (at 213, fig 6) and a linkage (22, fig 7) extending along a suspension axis (See fig 6) and connecting the support member to the housing to suspend the housing from the support member (See fig 5), wherein the driven wheel is rotated by the motor to advance the device along the rod or rail for opening and closing the curtain with the housing suspended from the support member (See claim 1).
Regarding claim 2.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Zhu further discloses the support member (21, fig 5) is at least one of a slide member in sliding contact with the rod or rail, a roller member (213, fig 6) in rolling contact with the rod or rail, or a V-shaped member with two frustrum portions (See attached machine translation; The connecting device 20 can be connected with the curtain rod in a sliding manner.).
Regarding claim 3.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Zhu further discloses the support member (21, fig 5) comprises at least one or more of a support arm (211, fig 6) with terminal members (213, fig 6) configured to roll or slide along outer channels of an I- rail (See fig 6) or a support arm with terminal members configured to roll or slide along an inner channel of a U-rail.
Regarding claim 4.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Zhu further discloses the linkage (22, fig 7) includes one or more springs (144, fig 7) that biases the housing to press the driven wheel against the rod or rail (See fig 6).
Regarding claim 5.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 4.
Zhu further discloses the linkage (22, fig 7) comprises a spring holder (141, fig 7) containing the one or more springs (144, fig 7) and connected to the housing (See figs 7 and 6), and an arm (222, fig 7) connected to the support member and detachably joined to the spring holder (See fig 7).
Regarding claim 6.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 4.
Zhu further discloses the linkage (22, fig 7) includes a locking mechanism (221, fig 7) with one or more detent positions (see spring attachment holes, fig 6) to arrest movement of the linkage relative to the housing along the suspension axis (See fig 6).
Regarding claim 7.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 6.
Zhu further discloses the suspension assembly (20, fig 5) is moveable (See ratcheting mechanism at 2211, fig 7) between a first assembly position (at which the topmost ratchet position is engaged) defined by the support member (21, fig 5) extended a first distance from the housing, and a second live position (as in figs 5 and 6) defined by the support member (21, fig 5) extend a second distance from the housing (See figs 5 and 6), the second distance less than the first distance (See figs 5 and 6), and wherein in the first assembly position the locking mechanism (221, fig 7) extends from the suspension assembly (20, fig 5) and engages (See fig 5) with the housing (10, fig 5) to resist a force (geometry of 221 is such that it cannot be pulled further into the housing when the driven wheel is not engaged with the rod or rail.) of the one or more springs (See fig 6), and in the live position the locking mechanism is positioned within the suspension assembly to allow the one or more springs to bias the housing to press the driven wheel against the rod or rail (See fig 6).
Regarding claim 8.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Zhu further discloses the suspension assembly (20, fig 5) is moveable (See ratcheting mechanism at 2211, fig 7) between a first assembly position (at which the topmost ratchet position is engaged) defined by the support member extended a first distance from the housing (at which the topmost ratchet position is engaged), and a second live position (as in figs 5 and 6) defined by the support member extended a second distance from the housing (see figs 5 and 6), the second distance less than the first distance (see figs 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 9.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Zhu further discloses the linkage (22, fig 7) comprises a first member (22, fig 7) extending from the support member to the housing along a first suspension axis at a first side of the driven wheel (1351, fig 7) and a second member (see opposite of 22, fig 7) extending from the support member to the housing along a second suspension axis at a second side of the driven wheel (See fig 7).
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PG Pub. US 2005/0172563 A1 – Komoda.
Regarding claim 12.
Komoda discloses a system (Examiner notes that the embodiment of fig 8 is relied upon. However, other figures may be referred to for illustration purposes.) for opening and closing (Compare figs 5 and 6) a curtain on a rod or rail (101, fig 10), comprising:
a driven wheel (109, fig 10) coupled to a motor (Paragraph [0059]; Accordingly, the output of the supersonic motor 107 is gradually increased, thus preventing the output transmitting members 129 from being rotated idly before the running member 102 is started.) within a housing (105, fig 8) and in frictional engagement with the rod or rail (as in fig 2), wherein the driven wheel is rotated by the motor to advance the system along the rod or rail for opening and closing the curtain (Paragraph [0059]; Accordingly, the output of the supersonic motor 107 is gradually increased, thus preventing the output transmitting members 129 from being rotated idly before the running member 102 is started. Also, noise production is suppressed when the running member 102 is started. FIG. 9 shows the speed of the running member 102 when moving toward the right end 101g, or the curtain spreading speed, and the speed of the running member 102 when moving toward the left end 101h, or curtain folding speed.);
a controller for the motor (Paragraph [0059]; When the running member 102 is moved from the stopped state toward the right end 101g or the left end 101h, the control means gradually changes the frequency of the high frequency voltage supplied to the supersonic motor 107);
an encoder operatively connected to the controller, wherein the encoder tracks rotational movement of the driven wheel (Paragraph [0058]; While the running member 102 moves from the right end 101g to the left end 101h, or from when the first end reaching signal is generated to when the second end reaching signal is generated, the sensor magnet 111 rotates with the rotor 122 of the rotary member 109. This produces pulse data in the Hall element 113 in correspondence with the rotation of the sensor magnet 111);
one or more sensor targets (101g and 101H, fig 8) disposed on the rod or rail (See fig 8); and
a sensor (115, fig 8) operatively connected to the controller and configured to generate a signal indicating presence of each of the one or more sensor targets disposed on the rod or rail when the sensor is located in proximity to or in contact with the respective sensor target during the advance of the system along the rod or rail (Paragraph [0064]; If the running member 102 reaches the right end 101g or the left end 101h of the curtain rail 101, the end reaching signal is generated by the contact between the end 101g, 101h and the corresponding switch 115.).
Regarding claim 13.
Komoda discloses all limitations of claim 12.
Komoda further discloses the encoder is a rotary encoder that generates output pulses based upon rotational movement of the driven wheel (Paragraph [0058]; While the running member 102 moves from the right end 101g to the left end 101h, or from when the first end reaching signal is generated to when the second end reaching signal is generated, the sensor magnet 111 rotates with the rotor 122 of the rotary member 109. This produces pulse data in the Hall element 113 in correspondence with the rotation of the sensor magnet 111).
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(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Chinese Document CN 111743373 A – Ren et al., hereinafter Ren.
Regarding claim 10.
Zhu discloses all limitations of claim 9.
Zhu Does not disclose the first member includes a first plurality of springs and the second member includes a second plurality of springs, wherein the first plurality of springs and the second plurality of springs bias the housing to press the driven wheel against the rod or rail.
However, Ren teaches the first member includes a first plurality of springs (Such as 31 in fig 6 and 26 in fig 10) and the second member includes a second plurality of springs (Such as 31 in fig 6 and 26 in fig 10), wherein the first plurality of springs and the second plurality of springs bias the housing (3, fig 5) to press the driven wheel (5, fig 5) against the rod or rail (8, fig 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhu with the plurality of springs of Ren. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of allowing for tuning of the force of pressure between the driven wheel and the rod or rail.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komoda.
Regarding claim 16.
Komoda discloses all limitations of claim 12.
Komoda further discloses the sensor is a contact sensor connected to an electrical circuit (Paragraph [0064] If the running member 102 reaches the right end 101g or the left end 101h of the curtain rail 101, the end reaching signal is generated by the contact between the end 101g, 101h and the corresponding switch 115.).
The applied embodiment of Komoda does not disclose each of the one or more sensor targets comprises a piece of electrically conductive material configured to cause a short circuit in the electrical circuit when the piece of electrically conductive material is in contact with the contact sensor.
However, another embodiment of Komoda teaches each of the one or more sensor targets (41, fig 5) comprises a piece of electrically conductive material (41a, fig 5) configured to cause a short circuit in the electrical circuit (complete the circuit) when the piece of electrically conductive material is in contact with the contact sensor (to charge the batteries).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Komoda with the electrically conductive material of the alternate embodiment of Komoda. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of reducing the likelihood of false sensor activations.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komoda in view of Chinese document CN 104720531 A – Wei et al., hereinafter Wei.
Regarding claim 17.
Modified Komoda teaches all limitations of claim 16.
Modified Komoda does not teach the contact sensor comprises an electrically conductive material at a surface of the driven wheel.
However, Wei teaches the contact sensor (23, fig 4) comprises an electrically conductive material (electrode) at (a function word to indicate presence or occurrence in, on, or near. In this case, near – see fig 4) a surface of the driven wheel (21, fig 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Komoda with the positioning of the electrically conductive material at a surface of the driven wheel as suggested by Wei. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of reducing the overall envelope of the trolley.
Regarding claim 18.
Modified Komoda teaches all limitations of claim 16.
Modified Komoda does not teach the contact sensor comprises electrically conductive probes that travel with the system (See fig and touch the rod or rail at all times during the advance of the system along the rod or rail.
However, Wei teaches the contact sensor (23, fig 4) comprises electrically conductive probes (at 23, fig 4) that travel with the system (as in fig 1) and touch the rod or rail at all times during the advance of the system along the rod or rail (Paragraph [0048] of machine translation; that the sliding electrode 23 always contacts the rail electrodes 31 are electrically connected.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, with a reasonable expectation of success, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Komoda with the probes and contact taught by Wei. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to yield the predictable result of improving sensor uptime.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 15, and 19-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with regard to claim 7 are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Zhu does not disclose “wherein in the first assembly position the locking mechanism extends from the suspension assembly and engages with the housing to resist a force of the one or more springs, and in the live position the locking mechanism is positioned within the suspension assembly to allow the one or more springs to bias the housing to press the driven wheel against the rod or rail.” as recited in claim 7. This is not persuasive. Applicant is reminded that during prosecution, claim terms are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the applicant’s specification. As noted in the rejection of claim 7 above, Zhu discloses “…wherein in the first assembly position the locking mechanism (221, fig 7) extends from the suspension assembly (20, fig 5) and engages (See fig 5) with the housing (10, fig 5) to resist a force (geometry of 221 is such that it cannot be pulled further into the housing when the driven wheel is not engaged with the rod or rail.) of the one or more springs (See fig 6), and in the live position the locking mechanism is positioned within the suspension assembly to allow the one or more springs to bias the housing to press the driven wheel against the rod or rail (See fig 6).”.
Applicant’s arguments with regard to claims 14 and 15 are persuasive. The rejections of claim 14 and its dependents has been withdrawn.
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 JOHN W HANES JR whose telephone number is (571)272-8840. 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.
/J.W.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/DANIEL P CAHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights