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 § 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.
Claims 1-4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 2018/0135351) in view of Hall et al. (US 2018/0016840), hereinafter referred to as Hall.
Regarding claim 1, Walker discloses a motorized covering for a window (Fig 6), the covering comprising:
a plurality of slats (13) in an extended position and selectively positionable to tilt;
a flexible material layer (14) connected to the plurality of slats, the flexible material layer extending generally parallel to the window when the plurality of slats is in the extended position (Fig 6, shown below);
PNG
media_image1.png
874
502
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of temporary air cells being formed between the plurality of slats, the flexible material layer, and the window when the plurality of slats is in the extended position (air is between the slats and the flexible material layer forming a cell);
a motor system (24) operatively connected to the flexible material layer (14) to selectively lower and raise the flexible material layer into the extended position and the retracted position (paragraph [0034]),
PNG
media_image2.png
280
342
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the motor system being configured to lower and raise the flexible material layer in response to at least one control signal, the at least one control signal (paragraphs [0034]).
Walker fails to disclose a motor system operatively connected to the plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into the extended position and a retracted position, and the motor system being configured to lower and raise the plurality of slats and the flexible material layer in response to the at least one control signal being based on a determination to change an insulation factor for the window. Hall teaches that it is known for a motor system to be connected to a plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into an extended position and a retracted position (paragraphs [0024] and [0031], copied below).
PNG
media_image3.png
228
342
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
66
330
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
206
334
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Hall further teaches the motor system is configured to respond to at least one control signal being based on a determination to change an insulation factor for the window (thermal convention zone; paragraph [0025], copied below).
PNG
media_image6.png
292
348
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the plurality of slats with connection to the motor system in order to selective lower and raise the plurality of slats since it is a known technique for controlling slats of a window covering and allowing selective positioning and the use of a motor system in connection with slats is a known technique, as taught by Hall. Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have the control signal of Walker control the motor system based on a determination to change an insulation factor for the window, as it is a known technique taught by Hall in order to provide automatic energy management. The claim would have been obvious because the particular known techniques were recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
As modified, the motor system of Walker is operatively connected to the plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into the extended position and a retracted position, and the control signal of Walker modified so that the motor system being configured to lower and raise the plurality of slats and the flexible material layer in response to the at least one control signal, the at least one control signal being based on a determination to change an insulation factor for the window, as taught by Hall.
Regarding claim 2, Walker as modified with Hall teaches the motor system is further configured to rotate the plurality of slats in response to the at least one control signal (paragraph [0024] of Hall, copied above).
Regarding claim 3, Walker discloses at least one of the plurality of slats includes a light scattering surface (light reflects off the surface) and as modified with Hall the motor system is further configured to selectively tilt the plurality of slats to scatter incident sunlight thereon in a predetermined direction (paragraph [0025] of Hall, copied above).
Regarding claim 4, Walker as modified with Hall, Hall teaches wherein the motor system is configured to selectively tilt the plurality of slats in order to maximize daylight passing through the covering (paragraph [0002] of Hall).
Regarding claim 8, Walker as modified with Hall, Hall teaches wherein the at least one control signal is produced at least in part by an energy management system (optimization of light and temperature by the control system).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker and Hall, as applied in claim 1 above, in further view of Kolas et al. (US 2012/0011782), hereinafter referred to as Kolas.
Regarding claim 5, Walker and Hall fail to disclose at least one of the plurality of slats includes at least one photovoltaic element; and the motor system is configured to arrange the plurality of slats to maximize the electricity generation by the at least one photovoltaic element in response to an energy harvesting control signal. However, Kolas teaches that it is known to provide at least one of the plurality of slats with at least one photovoltaic element (solar cell); and the motor system is configured to arrange the plurality of slats to maximize the electricity generation by the at least one photovoltaic element in response to an energy harvesting control signal (paragraph [0089] describes an electrical control system and metering devices which would include signal communications and paragraph [0026] describes adjustment with respect to energy production). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to incorporate photovoltaic elements into the covering of modified Walker in order to provide a self-contained powered window covering. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, modified Walker fails to disclose a plurality of optical facets disposed over the at least one photovoltaic element; and wherein scattering of light incident thereon varies by angle of incidence. However, Kolas teaches the technique of optical facets (Figs 11 and 12) for scattering light which improves the distribution of redirected sunlight (paragraphs [0085] and [0086]).
PNG
media_image7.png
270
334
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the covering of Walker as modified above, with a plurality of optical facets disposed over the at least one photovoltaic element; and wherein scattering of light incident thereon varies by angle of incidence in order to optimize sunlight and energy production, as taught by Kolas. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Walker as modified with Kolas teaches the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a first angle of incidence toward the at least one photovoltaic element when the covering is in use; the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a second angle of incidence reflect light incident thereon toward the flexible material layer when the covering is in use; and the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a third angle of incidence reflect light incident thereon away from the flexible material layer and the at least one photovoltaic element when the covering is in use (paragraphs [0085], [0086], [0087] of Kolas).
Claims 9-10 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker, Hall, and Kapany (US 8,230,649).
Regarding claim 9, Walker discloses a motorized covering for a window (Fig 6), the covering comprising:
a plurality of slats (13) in an extended position and selectively positionable to tilt;
a flexible material layer (14) connected to the plurality of slats, the flexible material layer extending generally parallel to the window when the plurality of slats is in the extended position (Fig 6, shown below);
PNG
media_image1.png
874
502
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of temporary air cells being formed between the plurality of slats, the flexible material layer, and the window when the plurality of slats is in the extended position (air is between the slats and the flexible material layer forming a cell);
a motor system (24) operatively connected to the flexible material layer (14) to selectively lower and raise the flexible material layer into the extended position and the retracted position (paragraph [0034]),
PNG
media_image2.png
280
342
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the motor system being configured to lower and raise the flexible material layer in response to at least one control signal, the at least one control signal (paragraphs [0034]).
Walker fails to disclose a motor system operatively connected to the plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into the extended position and a retracted position, and the motor system being configured to lower and raise the plurality of slats and the flexible material layer in response to the at least one control signal. Hall teaches that it is known for a motor system to be connected to a plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into an extended position and a retracted position (paragraphs [0024] and [0031], copied below).
PNG
media_image3.png
228
342
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
66
330
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
206
334
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Hall further teaches the motor system is configured to respond to at least one control signal (thermal convention zone; paragraph [0025], copied below).
PNG
media_image6.png
292
348
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the plurality of slats with connection to the motor system in order to selective lower and raise the plurality of slats since it is a known technique for controlling slats of a window covering and allowing selective positioning and the use of a motor system in connection with slats is a known technique, as taught by Hall.. The claim would have been obvious because the particular known techniques were recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. As modified, the motor system of Walker is operatively connected to the plurality of slats to selectively lower and raise the plurality of slats into the extended position and a retracted position, as taught by Hall.
Modified Walker and Hall fail to disclose each of the plurality of slats includes at least one photovoltaic element and an electrical collection assembly for collecting electrical energy produced by the at least one photovoltaic element of each of the plurality of slats. However, Kapany teaches that it is known to provide each of the least one of the plurality of slats with at least one photovoltaic element (140) and the photovoltaic elements connected to an electrical collection assembly (batteries). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with reasonable expectation of success to incorporate photovoltaic elements and electrical collection assembly into the covering of modified Walker in order to provide a self-contained powered window covering. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention
Regarding claim 10, Walker as modified with Hall above teaches the motor system is configured to selectively lower, raise, and rotate the plurality of slats.
Regarding claim 13, Walker as modified with Hall above teaches the motor system is configured to selectively tilt the plurality of slats in order to maximize daylight passing through the covering (paragraphs [0025] and [0028] of Hall).
Regarding claim 14, Walker as modified with Kapany above teaches wherein the motor system is configured to arrange the plurality of slats to maximize the electricity generation by the at least one photovoltaic element of each slat in response to an energy harvesting control signal (col 6, lines 58-67 of Kapany).
Regarding claim 15, Walker as modified with Hall, Hall teaches wherein the at least one control signal is produced at least in part by an energy management system (optimization of light and temperature by the control system).
Regarding claim 16, Walker as modified with Hall, Hall teaches wherein the motor system and the plurality of slats are configured to be selectively moveable between a plurality of mode positions when the covering is in use and installed on the window, the plurality of mode positions comprising: a privacy mode (fully closed position taught by Hall) with the plurality of slats arranged to block light passage through the covering; a deflection mode (angled slats taught by Hall) with the plurality of slats arranged to reflect at least some incident light back toward the window (angled slats in opposite direction to deflection mode taught by Hall); an illumination mode with the plurality of slats arranged to reflect at least some incident light between the plurality of slats and through the flexible material layer (taught by Walker); a viewing mode (open slat position taught by Hall) with the plurality of slats arranged generally horizontally; and a retracted mode (fully open position taught by Hall) with the plurality of slats gathered at a top portion of the covering. Further, as modified with Kapany above, Kapany teaches an energy harvesting mode with the plurality of slats arranged to direct at least some incident light toward the at least one photovoltaic cell of each of the plurality of slats (maximizing light on the photovoltaic cells).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker, Hall, and Kapan, as applied in claim 9 above, in further view of Kopas.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, modified Walker fails to disclose a plurality of optical facets disposed over the at least one photovoltaic element; and wherein scattering of light incident thereon varies by angle of incidence. However, Kolas teaches the technique of optical facets (Figs 11 and 12) for scattering light which improves the distribution of redirected sunlight (paragraphs [0085] and [0086]).
PNG
media_image7.png
270
334
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the covering of Walker as modified above, with a plurality of optical facets disposed over the at least one photovoltaic element; and wherein scattering of light incident thereon varies by angle of incidence in order to optimize sunlight and energy production, as taught by Kolas. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Walker as modified with Kolas teaches the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a first angle of incidence toward the at least one photovoltaic element when the covering is in use; the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a second angle of incidence reflect light incident thereon toward the flexible material layer when the covering is in use; and the plurality of optical facets are configured to direct at least a portion of light incident thereon at a third angle of incidence reflect light incident thereon away from the flexible material layer and the at least one photovoltaic element when the covering is in use (paragraphs [0085], [0086], [0087] of Kolas).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Johnnie A. Shablack whose telephone number is (571)270-5344. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6am-3pm EST, alternate Friday.
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.
/Johnnie A. Shablack/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634