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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 6,8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US 9,765,566.
In regard to claim 1, Chen ‘566 discloses a Roman blind, wherein Roman blind comprises comprising:
An upper beam (13), a rolling shaft (111), a Roman blind body (21), and a rolling body (112).
Wherein both ends of the rolling tube (111) are connected to both ends of the upper beam (13) respectively through a connection piece (132)(133)
An upper end of the rolling body (112) is wound on the rolling tube (111).
An upper end of the Roman blind body (21) is fixed on the upper beam (13).
A lower end of the rolling body (112) can ascend or descend in synchronization with a lower end of the Roman blind body (21).
A surface of the Roman blind body (21) facing toward the rolling body (112) is provided with a plurality of limiting pieces (23) arranged in equal spacing.
The lower end of the rolling body (112) is provided with a drive piece (113) in cooperation with the limiting pieces (23) to drive the Roman blind body to fold up layer by layer from bottom up.
Chen ‘566 fails to explicitly disclose that he rolling shaft is a tube. However, the examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known to use tubes as drive shafts and 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 use a tube for the purpose of making the device lighter while maintaining strength compared to a solid rod.
In regard to claim 2, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the limiting pieces (23) are elongated and horizontally disposed on the Roman blind body (21).
Both ends of the limiting pieces (23) are protruded outwardly along their thickness direction and fixedly connected to the Roman blind body (21).
The limiting pieces (23) are connected with the Roman blind body (21) to enclose corresponding closed through grooves (between 232 and 231) to allow the rolling body (112) to run through freely but block the drive piece (113) from running through.
In regard to claim 3, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the limiting pieces (23) comprise two U-shaped clips (Formed by 231,232) symmetrically disposed.
The U-shaped clips (231,232) are fixedly connected to both sides of the Roman blind body (21).
A U-shaped mouth in the U-shaped clips (232,232) allows the rolling body (112) to run through freely but blocks the drive piece (113) from running through.
In regard to claim 4, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the drive piece (113) is shaped like an elongated rod and disposed below the limiting pieces (23).
In regard to claim 6, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the width of the Roman blind body (21) covers the upper beam (13)and the connection pieces (132,133) at both ends of the upper beam (13)
The width of the rolling body (112) is less than the width of the Roman blind body (21).
In regard to claim 8, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein one of the connection pieces (132) is provided with a motor component (1) to drive the rolling tube (111) to rotate.
In regard to claim 9, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the drive piece (113) is shaped like an elongated rod and disposed below the limiting pieces (23).
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US 9,765,566 in view of Tu CA 2719417.
In regard to claim 5, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein the drive piece (113) is fixedly connected to the lower end of the rolling body (112).
Chen ‘566 fails to disclose:
Wherein the drive piece is fixedly connected to the lower end of the Roman blind body.
Tu ‘417 discloses:
Wherein the rolling body (40) is fixedly connected to the lower end of the Roman blind body (20).
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 Chen ‘566 to fixedly connect the rolling body (and the drive piece) to the lower end of the Roman blind body as taught by Tu ‘417 as such is shown to be an effective means of transmitting the pulling motion of the rolling body to the Roman blind body.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US 9,765,566 in view of Vestal et al US 20110308745.
In regard to claim 7, Chen ‘566 discloses:
Wherein one of the connection pieces is provided with a motor component (1) to drive the rolling tube to rotate.
Chen ‘566 fails to disclose:
Wherein one of the connection pieces is provided with a pull bead component to drive the rolling tube to rotate.
Vestal et al ‘745 discloses:
A pull bead component (116) to drive the rolling tube to rotate.
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 Chen ‘566 to include a pull bead component as taught by Vestal et al ‘745 in order to provide a means to manually operate the device if needed.
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