Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/763,132

WINDOW SHADE AND ACTUATING SYSTEM THEREOF

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 03, 2024
Examiner
AUBREY, BETH A
Art Unit
3633
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Teh Yor Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
922 granted / 1142 resolved
+28.7% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1181
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§112
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1142 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION This is a non-final First Office Action on the Merits in application 18/763,132, filed 7/3/2024. Claims 1-15 are pending and examined. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/12/2025 is being considered by the examiner. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph 34, line 11, “can fitted” should be “can be fitted”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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. Claims 1, 3-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikegawa(WO2022102521; cit6ed on IDS filed 2/12/2025). Regarding claim 1, Ikegawa discloses an actuating system for a window shade(see Figs.), comprising: a transmission axle(28, see Fig. 1) rotatable about a longitudinal axis thereof; and a speed stabilizer(see Fig.2) including: a housing(4/66, see Figs. 1 and 2) having an inner wall(7); and a rotary plate(46, see Fig. 2) disposed inside the housing(see Fig. 1) and configured to rotationally couple to the transmission axle(28), the rotary plate(46) carrying a plurality of friction elements(38 32, see Figs. 1 and 2; plate 46 carries the elements in as much as the disclosed plate144 carries the friction elements 146 meeting the claim limitation) angularly spaced apart from one another about the longitudinal axis of the transmission axle(see Fig. 1), the rotary plate being rotatable along with the transmission axle with the friction elements rubbing against the inner wall of the housing (see: "As a result, a brake (braking torque) due to friction between the sliding piece 38 of the weight 32 and the inner peripheral surface 7 of the housing 4 acts on the rotating body 6."). Regarding claims 3-4, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1, wherein the friction elements(38) are connected fixedly to a plurality of supporting arms(32A, 32B, 32C, see Fig. 8) that are coupled to the rotary plate(see Fig. 1), the supporting arms(32A, 32B, 32C) being biased by centrifugal forces to displace the friction elements toward and against the inner wall of the housing as the transmission axle and the rotary plate rotate in unison about the longitudinal axis(“the weight 32 swiveling outward in the radial direction around the support shaft 52 due to the rotation of the rotating body 6 swivels inward in the radial direction around the support shaft 52 when the rotation of the rotating body 6 is completed”; the centrifugal force is considered to inherently cause the friction elements 38 to bias toward the wall meeting the claim limitation). Regarding claim 5, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 3, wherein each of the supporting arms is pivotally connected to the rotary plate(via pins 52). Regarding claim 6, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 5, wherein the rotary plate(46) has a pivot pin(52), and multiple ones of the supporting arms(32S< 32B, 32C, see Fig. 2) are pivotally connected about the pivot pin. Regarding claim 7, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 5, wherein the supporting arms)32A, 32B, 32C) include two supporting arms that are respectively connected pivotally to the rotary plate(46) at two locations away from the longitudinal axis(see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 8, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 7, wherein the two supporting arms are respectively connected pivotally to the rotary plate at two diametrically opposite locations(see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 9, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 7, wherein each of the two supporting arms has a coupling end and a distal end(see Fig. 2), each of the two supporting arms being pivotally connected to the rotary plate at the coupling end thereof, the coupling end of one of the two supporting arms being disposed adjacent to the distal end of the other one of the two supporting arms(see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 10, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 9, wherein each of the two supporting arms holds at least one of the friction elements at a location that is closer to the coupling end thereof than the distal end thereof(see Figs. 2 and 5). Regarding claim 11, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1, wherein each of the friction elements is at least partially cylindrical in shape(38 has a curved outer surface making the part “at least partially cylindrical” meeting the claim limitation, see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 13, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1, wherein the housing(4) includes a casing(4) and a lid(66) fastened to each other to at least partially delimit an inner cavity in which the rotary plate(46) and the friction elements are disposed, the transmission axle extending through the casing and the lid(see Fig. 1). Regarding claim 14, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1 wherein a control module in addition to the speed stabilizer is considered to be inherent to move the transmission axle to expand and collapse the slats given the structure of Figs.1-8, the control separate from the stabilizer. 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 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikegawa. Regarding claim 2, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1, but lacks the use of a lubricant with the friction elements. The use of lubricant is considered well known between two elements that come in rotating contact with one another. Therefore, the use of a lubricant with the friction elements is considered a feature best determined by a skilled artisan given the intended use of the element and specific design requirements thereof. Regarding claim 12, Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1, wherein the friction elements are made of a material including oil resistant material but lacks the specific material. Applicant’s disclosure lends no criticality to the specific material of the friction elements(see para. [0036]). Therefore, the specific material of the friction elements is considered a feature best determined by a skilled artisan given the intended use of the element and specific design requirements thereof. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokota(JP4994778; cited on IDS filed 2/12/2025) in view of Ikegawa. Yokota discloses a window shade(see Fig. 1) having a headrail(2) and a shading structure(5) and an actuating system(see Fig. 3) with speed stabilizer(20) mounted to the headrail, the system operable to expand and collapse the structure. Yokota lacks the specific speed stabilizer. Ikegawa discloses the actuating system according to claim 1. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have substituted the actuating system with speed stabilizer of Yokota with that of Ikegawa given that KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ.2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2005), cert. granted, 547 U.S. __ (2006) has found that the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Prior Art 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 BETH A. AUBREY whose telephone number is (571)272-1851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4:30p. 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, Brian Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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. BETH A. AUBREY Primary Examiner Art Unit 3633 /Beth A Aubrey/
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 03, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595660
PANEL-LAYER SYSTEM FOR THERMAL INSULATION OF THE SHADED SURFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590459
A JOINT FOR WALL PANELS MADE OF CROSS LAMINATED TIMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584351
SCREEN CHANNEL INSERTS FOR FENESTRATION UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584352
MOTORIZED DOOR SCREEN AND SHADE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584353
MOTORIZED WINDOW COVERING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
81%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+16.8%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1142 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