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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/2025 has been entered.
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) 8, 13, 19, 23-24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoogland (US 20190226270) in view of Holevas (US 20070033880) and Morin (US 7819167).
Regarding claim 8, Hoogland teaches a fenestration unit comprising:
a frame (10) having a first portion (top of frame, 18), a second portion (bottom of frame, 20) opposite the first portion, a first jamb (left portion 22) extending between the first portion and the second portion, and a second jamb (right portion 22) opposite the first jamb and extending between the first portion and the second portion, wherein the first jamb and the second jamb each include a first pocket (see fig. 3, into which the sash moves);
a sash (14) including a first rail (24), a second rail (26) opposite the first rail, a first stile (28 on left) extending between the first and second rails, and a second stile (28 on right) opposite the first stile and extending between the first and second rails, wherein the first and second stiles include extensions (portion of stiles that extend into the respective rails) positioned in a respective one of the first pockets of the first and second jamb such that the extensions are configured to translate within each corresponding first pocket relative to the frame (both the sash and the screen assembly are engaged in the same pocket); and
a screen assembly (40) operable to extend between the first portion of the frame and the first rail of the sash (fig. 2), the screen assembly including a housing having a second housing member (56) maintained between the first jamb and the second jamb of the frame, wherein the housing forms a screen retention space when the screen assembly is in a closed position, a screen (48), wherein the screen includes a second end (bottom end in fig. 2) coupled to the second housing member (fig. 2), and a catch element (52) configured to releasably engage with a side of the first rail of the sash (the catch element is capable of this).
Hoogland does not teach the housing having a first and a second housing member, the housing forming a screen retention space that is between the first and second housing members, the screen being a pleated screen that is positioned between the first and second housing members when the screen assembly is in the closed position, the pleated screen including a first end coupled to the first housing member.
Holevas teaches a fenestration unit (fig. 5a) with a sash (12) and a screen assembly (18) with a housing having a first (36) and a second housing member (35), the housing forming a screen retention space that is between the first and second housing members (fig. 1a), a screen (16) that is positioned between the first and second housing members when the screen assembly is in the closed position (fig. 1a), the screen including a first end coupled to the first housing member (fig. 5a) with a second end coupled to the second housing member (fig. 5a), and a catch element (36d) configured to releasably engage with a first rail of the sash (via element 20). 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 Hoogland with teachings of Holevas by replacing the housing and catch member with that of Holevas so that there is a first and a second housing member, the housing forming a screen retention space that is between the first and second housing members, the screen being positioned between the first and second housing members when the screen assembly is in the closed position, the pleated screen including a first end coupled to the first housing member, and by adding element 20 of Holevas to the with rail of the sash to releasable engage with the catch element. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of better protecting the screen element when it is in the closed position.
Morin teaches a fenestration unit with a sash (10) and a screen assembly with a pleated screen (fig. 4). 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 further modify Hoogland by replacing the screen with a pleated screen. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of an equivalent screen that takes up less space in the closed position.
Regarding claim 13, modified Hoogland teaches that the screen assembly is engaged with the first pockets of the frame (see claim 8 rejection above, the screen assembly engages the first pocket).
Regarding claim 19, modified Hoogland teaches a second sash (16), wherein the frame includes a second pocket (fig. 3 shows that there is a pocket for each sash) with which the second sash is engaged and in which the second sash is operable to translate relative to the frame;
a second screen assembly (fig. 2 shows a screen assembly for each sash) operable to extend between the second portion of the frame and the second sash.
Regarding claim 23, modified Hoogland teaches that the pleated screen transitions from the closed position to an open position in which the pleated screen extends from the first rail to the second rail of the sash (after the modification above, this is the case).
Regarding claim 24, modified Hoogland teaches that the pleated screen is in a relatively flatter configuration in the open position relative to the closed position, and wherein the pleated screen maintains pleats in both the open and closed positions (after the modification above).
Regarding claim 28, modified Hoogland teaches that the catch element is configured to releasably engage with a side of the first rail of the sash (capable of this).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoogland (US 20190226270) in view of Holevas (US 20070033880) and Morin (US 7819167) as applied above, and further in view of Strand (US 20150184454).
Regarding claim 9, modified Hoogland does not teach end caps positioned at first and second longitudinal ends of the housing.
Strand teaches a fenestration unit with an end cap (108) at a longitudinal end of a housing (106). 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 further modify Hoogland with teachings of Strand so that there are end caps positioned at first and second longitudinal ends of the housing. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of protecting the side of the device and the side of the housing.
Claim(s) 18, 21-22, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoogland (US 20190226270) in view of Holevas (US 20070033880) and Morin (US 7819167) as applied above, and further in view of Voss (US 6412537).
Regarding claim 18, modified Hoogland does not explicitly teach a first cord portion and a second cord portion extending from the frame and coupled to the housing of the screen assembly, wherein the first and second cord portions both extend along a shared length of a longitudinal length of the housing.
Voss teaches (figs. 1-3) a pleated screen with a first cord portion and a second cord portion (annotated fig. 1 below) extending from the housing (as the cords go through the holes in component 12, they extend from the upper portion of the housing), wherein the first and second cord portions both extend along a shared length (they both share the longitudinal length as they each extend along sections of it) of a longitudinal length (the entire width of the assembly as shown in fig. 1) of the housing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hoogland by having a first cord portion and a second cord portion extending from the housing, wherein the first and second cord portions both extend along a shared length of a longitudinal length of the housing. This alteration provides the predictable and expected result of cords being used to control deployment of the screen.
PNG
media_image1.png
820
912
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 21-22, modified Hoogland does not teach one or more pleat restrictors coupled to the housing, wherein the one or more pleat restrictors extend at least partially into the screen retention space and engage pleats of the pleated screen, wherein the one or more pleat restrictors are staggered along a length of the housing to control release of the pleated screen.
Voss teaches (fig. 3) one or more pleat restrictors (arms 30 and 44) coupled to a housing, wherein the one or more pleat restrictors extend at least partially into a screen retention space and engage pleats of the pleated screen (fig. 3), wherein the one or more pleat restrictors are staggered along a length of the housing to control release of the pleated screen (as shown in fig. 3, they are considered staggered).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hoogland by adding one or more pleat restrictors coupled to the housing, wherein the one or more pleat restrictors extend at least partially into the screen retention space and engage pleats of the pleated screen, wherein the one or more pleat restrictors are staggered along a length of the housing to control release of the pleated screen. This alteration provides the predicable and expected result of the added resistance more tightly holding onto the pleated screen.
Regarding claim 25, modified Hoogland does not teach including one or more cords extending from the frame and coupled to the housing of the screen assembly, wherein the one or more cords extend along a longitudinal length of the housing.
Voss teaches (figs. 1-3) a pleated screen with a first cord (on left) and a second cord (on right in fig. 1) cords extending from a frame (14 is considered a frame) and coupled to a housing (18) of a screen assembly, wherein the one or more cords extend along a longitudinal length of the housing (fig. 1 shows this). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Hoogland by having one or more cords extending from the frame and coupled to the housing of the screen assembly, wherein the one or more cords extend along a longitudinal length of the housing. This alteration provides the predictable and expected result of cords being used to control deployment of the screen.
Regarding claim 26, modified Hoogland now teaches that a first cord (left cord) of the one or more cords is operably coupled to the pleated screen at a position near the first stile of the sash (after the modification above, this cord is considered coupled at a position near the first stile) and a second cord (right cord) of the one or more cords is operably coupled to the pleated screen at a position near the second stile of the sash (after the modification above, this cord is considered coupled at a position near the second stile), such that the first and second cords stabilize the pleated screen.
Claim(s) 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoogland (US 20190226270) in view of Holevas (US 20070033880), Morin (US 7819167) and Voss (US 6412537), and further in view of Schnebly (US 4647488).
Regarding claim 27, although modified Hoogland teaches that the one or more cords extend into the screen retention space (after the modification above), it does not teach that the housing including grommets through which the one or more cords extend.
Schnebly teaches a housing (12) with a grommet (63) through which a cord extends (62, fig. 1). 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 further modify Hoogland so that the housing includes grommets through which the one or more cords extend. This alteration provides the predictable and expected results of protecting the cords from fraying, so they last longer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 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.
Claim 29 is allowed. Although many of the limitations found within the claims are known in the art, claim 29 is found to be allowable because the examiner finds that the combination of positively required structure recited in the independent claim would require hindsight to apply art and/or a piece- meal rejection and/or an unreasonable interpretation in order to reject the claims.
Regarding claim 29, the closest prior art of record is not found to teach “a screen assembly operable to extend between the first portion of the frame and the first rail of the sash, the screen assembly including, a housing having a first housing member and a second housing member maintained between the first jamb and the second jamb of the frame, wherein the housing forms a screen retention space between the first and second housing members when the screen assembly is in a closed position, a first end cap and a second end cap positioned at respective first and second longitudinal ends of the housing, a pleated screen positioned between the first and second housing members when the screen assembly is in the closed position, wherein the pleated screen includes a first end coupled to the first housing member and a second end coupled to the second housing member, and a catch element configured to releasably engage with the first rail of the sash wherein the catch element is positioned directly on the first end cap” as is required by the claim. Any possible combination was found to require impermissible hindsight.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 regarding claim 8 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
All the limitations as claimed are taught by the rejection above. Hoogland is found to teach “a screen assembly (40) operable to extend between the first portion of the frame and the first rail of the sash (fig. 2), the screen assembly including a housing having a second housing member (56) maintained between the first jamb and the second jamb of the frame, wherein the housing forms a screen retention space when the screen assembly is in a closed position, a screen (48), wherein the screen includes a second end (bottom end in fig. 2) coupled to the second housing member (fig. 2), and a catch element (52) configured to releasably engage with a side of the first rail of the sash (the catch element is capable of this).”
Conclusion
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