DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application filed 7/15/2024.
Status of the claims: Claims 1-18 are hereby examined below.
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 § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, lines 9-10 recites “the other end”. This is indefinite with respect to “the other end” recited in line 5. Are these referring to the same ends?
Claim 1, lines 11 and 12 recite “the reel”. It is unclear whether this should be “each reel” or “the corresponding reel” as recited in lines 9 and 11.
Claim 2 recites “at least two axial reels” while claim 1 recites “reels respectively rotatably mounted to the bases”. Are the at least two axial reels in claim 2 the same as the reels in claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “at least two bases”. Are these the same as the “bases” recited in claim 1.
Claim 8 recites “a long hole”. It is unclear what defines “long”.
Claim 1, line 11 recites “small”. This is a term of relative degree. It is unclear what defines “small”.
Claim 1, line 12 recites “the cord”. Examiner presumes this should read – the corresponding cord – to be consistent with claim 11.
What about In line 11 of claim 1 (for example), “small” is a relative term of degree. Please address this term too.
Dependent claims are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
Claims are being examined as best understood.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 3 recites “to drive the activity of”. Examiner presumes this should read – to drive activity of -- . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1, line 5 recites “the other end”. Examiner presumes this should read – another end --.
Claim 1, line 11 recites “one end of a corresponding cord”. Examiner presumes this should read – the one end of a corresponding cord --.
Claim 3 recites “the transmission shaft” in line 3. Should this be – each transmission shaft--?
Claim 4, line 2 recites “the bottom plate”. Should this be – each bottom plate --?
Claim 7 recites “the first cord guide”. Should this be – each cord guide --?
Claim 10-18 recite “with two reels”. Should this be “with the corresponding two reels--?
Applicant should thoroughly check the claims for similar antecedent issues.
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 1,4,5-7,10 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou CN208486805 in view of Morris US 9,732,555.
In regard to claim 1, Zhou ‘805 discloses a blind driving device, comprising: a cord winding and unwinding mechanism (4,5,7,8,9 Fig. 2) connected to parts of a blind body (2, Fig. 1) of a blind to drive the activity of the blind body (2), wherein the cord winding and unwinding mechanism comprises a base (9) , reels (4,5) respectively rotatably mounted to the base (9), cords (7, Fig 2) each with one end being wound on a corresponding reel (4,5) and the other end extending through the base (9) and extending down to connect the blind body (2), and a power component (6, Fig. 2) for driving the reels (4,5) to rotate; the cords (7) of the cord winding and unwinding mechanism (4,5,7,8,9) are connected the blind body (2) ; wherein each reel (4,5) is a conical cylinder whose diameter gradually decreases from one end to the other end, one end of a corresponding cord (7) is fixed to a small diameter end of the reel (4,5), while the other end of the cord is led out from the great diameter end of the reel after being wound along the reel ( translation specification states “that the transmission rope 7 from tapered tube 5 of the small end is wound to the big end” which must require the cord to be fixed at the small end), and then extends down to be connected to the blind body after extending about the first cord guide, wherein the reels (4,5) of the cord winding and unwinding mechanism are arranged in an axial direction, with the great diameter ends facing opposite to each other (Fig. 2).
Zhou ‘805 fails to disclose two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms connected to different parts of a blind body such that cords are connected to the different parts of the blind body and each base forms a first cord guide on a position corresponding to a great diameter end of a corresponding reel.
Morris ‘555 discloses two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms (74,78, Fig. 2) connected to different parts of a blind body such that cords (94a,94b, Fig. 3) are connected to the different parts (intermediate rail 18 and lower rail 22) of the blind body and each base (102, Fig. 5) forms a first cord guide (142) on a position corresponding to a great diameter end of a corresponding reel (The cord guide of Morris ‘555 extends along the entire length of the reel. As such, it would correspond to both the smaller and greater diameter ends of the reel of Zhou ‘805).
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 Zhou ‘805 to have two cord winding mechanisms connected to different parts of a blind body such that cords are connected to different parts of a blind body as taught by Morris ‘555 for the purpose of having a blind with adjustable shading abilities.
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 Zhou ‘805 to include a first cord guide as taught by Morris ‘555 to use with a pivoting coving to help creating a braking force between the cover and the winding reel.
PNG
media_image1.png
553
580
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 4, Zhou ‘805 as modified by Morris ‘555 discloses wherein each base (9, Fig. 4) comprises a bottom plate and two supporting plates (shown above) extending from two opposite ends of the bottom plate and each supporting plate defines a rotation hole (shown above), for a corresponding end of the reel (4,5) to be rotatably engaged in.
Zhou ‘805 fails to explicitly disclose the bottom plate defines a cord guiding hole in a position corresponding to a middle or the small diameter end of a corresponding reel. Morris ‘555 discloses a cord guiding hole (154, Fig. 5) in a position corresponding to a middle of a corresponding reel (90)
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 Zhou ‘805 to include a cord guiding hole corresponding to a middle of the reel as taught by Morris ‘555 for the purpose of reducing a potential misalignment between the head rail, base and the cord route holes.
In regard to claim 5, Zhou ‘805 discloses wherein a plurality of snapping arms extends up from opposite sides of the bottom plate, to be snapped and positioned by an upper beam of the blind. (shown below)
PNG
media_image2.png
553
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 6, Zhou ‘805 discloses wherein the plurality of snapping arms (shown above) is formed at opposite ends of each side of the bottom plate, lower portions of the supporting plates are integrally connected to lower portions of corresponding snapping arms, while upper portions of the supporting plates are separated from upper portions of the corresponding snapping arms. (shown above)
In regard to claim 7, Zhou ‘805 as modified by Morris ‘555 discloses wherein the first cord guide (142) is a round rod fixed on the bottom plate (via 126).
In regard to claims 10 and 13-16, Zhou ‘805 as modified by Morris ‘555 disclose wherein the bases (9, Zhou ‘805) at a same end of the two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms (as taught by Morris ’55 to have two) are integrally formed, each base is rotatably mounted with two reels (4,5, Zhou ‘805) that respectively belong to the two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms and are parallel to each other.
Claims 2-3 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou CN208486805 and Morris US 9,732,555 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Wang WO2022116360.
In regard to claim 2, Zhou ‘805 discloses wherein each cord winding and unwinding mechanism comprises at least two axial reels (4,5) set at a predetermined distance in the axial direction. Zhou ‘805 fails to disclose and at least two bases for rotatably mounting the at least two reels, respectively.
Wang ‘360 discloses at least two bases for rotatably mounting the at least two reels, respectively.
PNG
media_image3.png
346
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 Zhou ‘805/Morris ’555 to include two bases for the reels as taught by Wang ‘360 as such is shown to be a known alternative mounting to a single base for two reels. (Wang ‘360 Fig. 3 shows a single base) Furthermore, it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlicnrnan, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
In regard to claim 3, Zhou ‘805 as modified by Morris ‘555 discloses wherein each cord winding and unwinding mechanism further comprises a transmission shaft (66,70 Morris ‘555) connecting the power component (6, Zhou ‘805) and the corresponding reels (4,5 Zhou ‘805), the transmission shaft (66,70 Morris ‘555) coaxially extends through centers of the corresponding reels and is relatively fixed to the reels in a circumferential direction.
In regard to claims 11-12 Zhou ‘805 as modified by Morris ‘555 disclose wherein the bases (9, Zhou ‘805) at a same end of the two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms (as taught by Morris ’55 to have two) are integrally formed, each base is rotatably mounted with two reels (4,5, Zhou ‘805) that respectively belong to the two cord winding and unwinding mechanisms and are parallel to each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8,9, 17 and 18 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.
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