DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed on 04/14/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, and 19 have been amended, claim(s) 9, 10, 15, and 18 have been cancelled, claim(s) 6-8, 11-14, 16, and 17 have been withdrawn, and claim(s) 24-27 have been added. Therefore, claims 1-8, 11-14, 16, 17, and 19-27 are now pending in the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “top pin configured to insert into a corresponding hole along the top bracket and a bottom pin configured to insert into a corresponding hole along the bottom bracket” of claim 27 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, at lines 2-3, the recitation “an extendible rod; a bracket coupled to the extendible rod; and a rack coupled to the bracket” renders the claim indefinite because it was already recited in claim 1 and therefore fails to further limit the claim. For the purpose of this office action, it is best understood that the claim recitation is as detailed in the claim 4 rejection below.
Regarding claim 21, at line 2, the recitation "a bracket" renders the claim indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis or creates ambiguity as to whether it is referring to the same previously recited limitation “a bottom bracket”. For the purpose of this office action, it is best understood that the claim recitation regarding the bracket are the same element.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 27 is 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. In particular, in the limitation “the first wheel comprises a top pin configured to insert into a corresponding hole along the top bracket and a bottom pin configured to insert into a corresponding hole along the bottom bracket”, the aggregate of these features—in conjunction with the elements of the base claim—results in a structure not disclosed or suggested by the cited prior art. Modifying the prior art to achieve this arrangement would require hindsight reasoning and an impermissible reconstruction of disparate teachings.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 19-23, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He (CN 112854883 A) with Espacenet translation.
Regarding claim 1, He teaches an outdoor structure (paragraph 1), comprising: a front beam (21-front); a back beam (21-back) opposite the front beam (figure 1); a first side beam (21-first side) and a second side beam (21-second side) opposite the first side beam (figure 1), each of the first and second side beams coupled to the front beam and the back beam (figure 1); a plurality of posts (3) coupled to one or more of the front beam and the back beams (figure 1); a plurality of louvers (11) coupled to the front and back beams (figure 1); a motor assembly (54) operably coupled to the plurality of louvers (figure 12) and configured to rotate the plurality of louvers (paragraph 45), the motor assembly comprising an extendible rod (53), a bracket (bracket [not labeled] attaching 53 to 4; figure 14) coupled to the extendible rod (figure 14), and a rack (4) coupled to the bracket (figure 14).
Regarding claim 4, He teaches the motor assembly is operable to extend or retract the extendible rod to cause translation of the rack (paragraph 45).
Regarding claim 19, He teaches an assembly for an outdoor structure (paragraph 1), comprising: a beam (22); a motor (54) positioned within a cavity of the beam (figure 13); a top bracket (bracket [not labeled] attaching 53 to 4; figure 14) engaged with a first wheel (132) along an upper portion of the beam (figures 2 and 13); a bottom bracket (4) engaged with the first wheel along a lower portion of the beam (figure 2); and the first wheel operatively coupled to the motor (paragraph 45) and comprising an opening (square opening; figure 11) configured to receive a shaped pin (it is understood that the opening is capable of receiving a shaped pin 131).
Regarding claim 20, He teaches the first wheel is coupled to the motor by a toothed sliding bar (at 41).
Regarding claim 21, He teaches a second wheel (multiple wheels 132; figure 12) operatively coupled to the first wheel by the bracket (4).
Regarding claim 22, He teaches the shaped pin is coupled to a louver (figure 10).
Regarding claim 23, He teaches the motor shifts longitudinally within the cavity of the beam (paragraphs 31 and 45).
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 of this title, 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 24, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (CN 112854883 A) with Espacenet translation.
Regarding claim 5, He teaches at least one wheel gear (132) engaged with the rack (figure 12), and wherein each of the at least one wheel gear is coupled to a louver of the plurality of louvers (figure 12).
He does not specifically disclose the wheel gear is comprised in the front beam. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the wheel gear in the front beam, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention in a manner which does not alter its operation involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 24, He teaches a top bracket (bracket [not labeled] attaching 53 to 4; figure 14) and a bottom bracket (4), and wherein at least one wheel gear (132) is engaged with the top bracket along an upper portion of the front beam (figures 2 and 13) and engaged with the bottom bracket along a lower portion of the front beam (figure 2).
He does not specifically disclose the wheel gear assembly is comprised in the front beam. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the wheel gear in the front beam, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention in a manner which does not alter its operation involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim(s) 2 and 3, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (CN 112854883 A) with Espacenet translation in view of Jackson (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0349182).
Regarding claim 2, He does not specifically disclose one or more of the front beam, the back beam, the first side beam, and the second side beam include lighting elements.
Jackson discloses a louvered patio system (title) wherein one or more of the front beam, the back beam, the first side beam, and the second side beam include lighting elements (paragraph 41).
Therefore, from the teaching of Jackson, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the louvre assembly of He such that one or more of the front beam, the back beam, the first side beam, and the second side beam include lighting elements, as taught by Jackson, in order to provide night time lighting under the outdoor structure for a more pleasing atmosphere.
Regarding claim 3, He does not specifically disclose a display unit communicatively coupled to the motor assembly and configured to transmit a first signal to the motor assembly to rotate the plurality of louvers.
Jackson discloses a louvered patio system (title) including a display unit (54) communicatively coupled (configured to communicate with one or more other components of the system wirelessly and/or via wires; paragraph 28) to the motor assembly and configured to transmit a first signal to the motor assembly to rotate the plurality of louvers (it is understood that the network is capable of communicating with the motor assembly and being configured to transmit a first signal to the motor assembly to rotate the plurality of louvers; paragraph 28 and figure 1A).
Therefore, from the teaching of Jackson, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the louvre assembly of He to include a display unit communicatively coupled to the motor assembly and configured to transmit a first signal to the motor assembly to rotate the plurality of louvers, as taught by Jackson, in order to provide a modern interface that can control the slat assembly for simplified ease of use and a better user experience.
Claim(s) 25 and 26, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (CN 112854883 A) with Espacenet translation in view of Swapp (U.S. Patent No. 5,379,551).
Regarding claim 25, He teaches each louver of the plurality of louvers comprises a shaped pin (131) at one end (figure 10) but does not specifically disclose a smooth pin at an opposite end.
Swapp discloses a louver assembly (abstract) including a smooth pin (100A) at an opposite end of the louver (figure 12).
Therefore, from the teaching of Swapp, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the louvre assembly of He to include a smooth pin at an opposite end, as taught by Swapp, in order to facilitate rotation of the louver for improved rotation and stability.
Regarding claim 25, He does not specifically disclose a spacer configured to be placed on the shaped pin to restrict lateral movement of a louver coupled to the shaped pin.
Swapp discloses a louver assembly (abstract) including a spacer (136) configured to be placed on the shaped pin (figure 9G) to restrict lateral movement of a louver coupled to the shaped pin (in the combination, it is understood that the spacer would restrict lateral movement of a louver coupled to the shaped pin).
Therefore, from the teaching of Swapp, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the louvre assembly of He to include a spacer configured to be placed on the shaped pin to restrict lateral movement of a louver coupled to the shaped pin, as taught by Swapp, in order to align the louvers to prevent a misaligned or uneven appearance to provide a cleaner aesthetic.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
New reference(s) He (CN 112854883 A) and Swapp (U.S. Patent No. 5,379,551) have been added to overcome the newly added limitations. Applicant’s amendment regarding the extendible rod, overcomes the previous rejection in view of Brutsaert. In addition, the argument that Brutsaert does not specifically disclose the top bracket and bottom bracket configuration with the first wheel is found persuasive, and the rejection is overcome. The Brutsaert the reference is hereby withdrawn.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR F HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached on (571) 270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights