Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/709,554

WINDOW BLIND FRAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 13, 2024
Examiner
SHABLACK, JOHNNIE A
Art Unit
3634
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Louver-Lite Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
648 granted / 1000 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+34.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1029
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
27.4%
-12.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1000 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 102 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 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. Claims 17-22, 24, 26, 27, 30, 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (CN 213391722, English translation relied upon is attached). Regarding claim 17, Huang discloses a window blind frame (Fig 1) for attachment to a window frame, comprising: a top frame element (2); a bottom frame element (5); and a pair of opposed side frame elements (3, 4); PNG media_image1.png 748 814 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein the frame elements are secured together via respective corner brackets (7a, 7b; Figs 1 and 5); wherein the top frame element (2 formed of 21, 22) is a two part component; wherein the bottom frame (5 formed of 51, 52) is a two-part component; PNG media_image2.png 620 844 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein the window blind frame further includes an upper T-shaped bracket (6a; Fig 17), a lower T- shaped bracket (6b; Fig 17), and a supporting member (6; Fig 6); PNG media_image3.png 685 1142 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein the upper T-shaped bracket (6a) connects the two top frame components (21, 22) and an upper end of the supporting member (6); and wherein the lower T-shaped bracket (6b) connects the two bottom frame elements (51, 52) and a lower end of the supporting member (6). Regarding claim 18, wherein each of the top frame element components (21, 22) defines a respective channel (Fig 6) and respective arm portions of the upper T- shaped bracket (6a) are received within the top frame element channels (Fig 7); and PNG media_image4.png 820 730 media_image4.png Greyscale wherein each of the bottom frame element components defines a respective channel and respective arm portions of the lower T-shaped bracket (6b) are received within the bottom frame element channels (Fig 6). Regarding claim 19, the arms of the upper and lower T-shaped brackets form a friction fit (arms are inserted and retained) or snap fit within the respective channels of the top frame element and the bottom frame element. Regarding claim 20, wherein the supporting member (6) defines an elongate channel along its length and respective arms of the upper and lower T-shaped brackets are received within the channel (Figs 6 and 7). Regarding claim 21, wherein the arms of the upper and lower T-shaped brackets form a friction fit (arms are inserted and retained) or a snap fit within the elongate channel of the supporting member (6). Regarding claim 22, wherein the frame further comprises an upper cover plate (Fig 3) and a lower cover plate (Fig 4), wherein the upper cover plate covers the upper T- shaped bracket and the lower cover plate covers the lower T-shaped bracket. Regarding claim 24, wherein the upper cover plate and the lower cover plate are integrally formed with the respective T-shaped brackets. Regarding claim 26, Huang discloses a window blind apparatus comprising: a window blind frame (Fig 1); a first deployable window blind (left 23, 24); and a second deployable window blind (right 23, 24); wherein the window blind frame comprises a top frame element (2), a bottom frame element (5), and a pair of opposed side frame elements (3, 4); wherein the frame elements (2, 3, 4, 5) are secured together via respective corner brackets (7a, 7b); wherein the top frame element is a two part component (21, 22); wherein the bottom frame is a two-part component (51, 52); wherein the window blind frame further includes an upper T-shaped bracket (6a), a lower T- shaped bracket (6b), and a supporting member (6); wherein the upper T-shaped bracket (6a) connects the two top frame components (21, 22) and an upper end of the supporting member (6); wherein the lower T-shaped bracket (6b) connects the two bottom frame elements (51, 52) and a lower end of the supporting member (6); wherein the first and second deployable window blinds (of 23 and 24) each comprises a blind substrate (curtain 24) which is deployable from a headrail or a roller tube (23); wherein the headrail or roller tube (23) of the first deployable window blind (24) is secured to a first portion of the window blind frame defined between a first one of the side frame elements and the supporting member; and wherein the headrail or roller tube (23) of the second deployable window blind (24) is secured to a second portion of the window blind frame defined between a second one of the side frame elements and the supporting member (Fig 5) (Huang teaches a roller blind in each of the two “chambers” left and right portions defined by the frame and supporting member 6; Huang recites “in each chamber, a roller shutter shaft, a curtain cloth and a bottom beam are set, and the lifting and lowering of the curtain cloth is controlled by a control device”). Regarding claim 27, wherein each of the first and second deployable window blinds includes a blind substrate (24) which is deployable from a respective roller tube (23) and the roller tubes are secured to the respective portions of the frame via roller tube supports (bearing seats). Regarding claim 30, wherein the first deployable window blind includes a first operating apparatus (9), and the second deployable window blind includes a second operating apparatus (9) (Fig 6). Regarding claim 31, wherein the first deployable window blind is operated independently of the second deployable window blind. 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 23, 28, 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, as applied in claims 22 and 26, in further view of Allsopp (US 8,074,698) Regarding claim 23, although Huang shows upper and lower cover plates, they are integrally formed with the brackets and Huang fails to teach wherein the upper cover plate and the lower cover plate are coupled to the respective T-shaped bracket via a friction fit coupling or a snap fit coupling. However, Allsopp teaches that it is known for a cover plate (50) covering brackets (45) of a frame (Fig 5a) to be separately formed and coupled via a friction fit coupling or a snap fit coupling (Fig 5a). 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 modify the cover plates of Huang such that they are separably formed so that the cover plates are coupled to the respective T-shaped bracket via a friction fit coupling or snap fit coupling since such technique is known, as taught by Allsopp. One would be motivated to modify the cover plates of Huang with the teachings of Allsopp in order to hide the brackets from view (col 13, lines 59-63 of Allsopp). Such modification would not lead to any new or unpredictable results. Regarding claims 28 and 29, Huang teaches that each of the first and second deployable window blinds include a blind substrate (24) which are roller blinds deployable from a respective roller tube (23) and thus fails to disclose each of the first and second deployable window blinds includes a blind substrate which is deployable from a respective headrail or via a respective headrail and the headrails are secured to the respective portions of the frame via headrail supports wherein each of the blind substrates is formed from a plurality of blind substrate elements, wherein each blind substrate element defines a longitudinal axis and is arranged to move laterally and to be rotated about its longitudinal axis. However, Allsopp teaches that it is known for a framed blind apparatus to be a roller blind or alternatively a Venetian blind (col 12, lines 36-39). 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 substitute the window blinds of Huang with Venetian blinds since it is a known equivalent alternative blind means. As modified, the Venetian blinds include first and second deployable window blinds (in each of the chambers of Huang) and further includes a blind substrate (slats of a Venetian blind) which is deployable from a respective headrail (blind head rail) or via a respective headrail and the headrails are secured to the respective portions of the frame via headrail supports wherein each of the blind substrates is formed from a plurality of blind substrate elements (plurality of slats), wherein each blind substrate element defines a longitudinal axis and is arranged to move laterally and to be rotated about its longitudinal axis Claims 25 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, as applied in claims 17 and 26 above, in further view of Jelic (US 6,571,851). Regarding claim 25, Huang teaches that the window blind frame includes one supporting member (6) and the top frame and bottom frame elements are each two part elements, thus are each a multi-part component, and further teaches upper and lower T-shaped brackets coupled to the supporting member and the frame elements. Huang fails to disclose the window blind frame includes two or more supporting members and each supporting member is coupled to the top frame element and the bottom frame element via a respective pair of upper and lower T- shaped brackets. However, Jelic teaches that it is known for a window blind apparatus to have a plurality of supporting members (Fig 2) in order to provide a multi-section frame with a plurality of window blinds. Jelic teaches at least two supporting elements between top and bottom frame elements. 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 modify Huang in view of the teachings of Jelic and provide Huang with at least two supporting members each coupled to the top and bottom frame elements in order to form a multi-section frame with a plurality of window blinds. As modified, there would not be any new or unpredictable results as each of the claimed elements are known in the prior art. Regarding claim 32, Huang as modified with Jelic in the manner discussed in claim 25, the window blind frame includes two supporting members and the apparatus further includes a third window blind (Fig 2 of Jelic). Huang teaches the deployable window blinds have roller tubes (23) thus as modified with the teachings of Jelic the third deployable window blind comprises a blind substrate (24) which is deployable from a headrail or a roller tube; the headrail or roller tube of the first deployable window blind is secured to a first portion of the window blind frame defined between a first one of the side frame elements and a first one of the supporting members; the headrail or roller tube of the second deployable window blind is secured to a second portion of the window blind frame defined between a second one of the side frame elements and a second one of the supporting members; and the headrail or roller tube of the third deployable window blind is secured to a third portion of the window blind frame defined between the two supporting members. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 13, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584350
Light-adjustable shade
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571252
VALANCE ASSEMBLY AND RELATED COVERINGS FOR AN ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571253
WIRING STRUCTURE OF TENSION MEMBER IN SCREEN APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571248
Segmented Closure System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565745
ARTICULATING EXPANDABLE BARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1000 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month