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 office action in response to the RCE and amendment filed 8/8/2026.
Claims 1-3 and 17 are amended.
Claims 1-29 are pending and examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/18/2026 has been entered.
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 1-2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirby(U.S. Pat. Appl. Publ. 2019/0186198, E.F.D. 12/20/2017; cited on IDS filed).
Regarding claims 1-2, Kirby discloses a manually operated window treatment system(10, see para. [0014]), comprising: a roller tube(12) that is supported at opposed ends thereof(16, see para. [0015] and Fig. 1);
a covering material(14, see para. [0014]) that is attached to the roller tube(see Fig. 1), the covering material operable between a raised position and a lowered position via rotation of the roller tube; and
a chain having a longitudinal axis(100, see Fig. 2) configured to be operated by a user to rotate the roller tube, the chain including a plurality of members(110, see Fig. 2-7) joined in a continuous loop(see Figs. 2-4), wherein the chain has a first minimum bend radius(R1, see para. [0019] and Fig. 4) when bent in a first direction with respect to the longitudinal axis of the chain(bent upwardly, see Figs. 2-4) and a second minimum bend radius(top radius, see para. [0019]) when bent in a second direction with respect to the longitudinal axis of the chain(bent downwardly, see Figs. 2-4), wherein the second direction is opposite the first direction(the directions are up and down and considered opposite meeting the claim limitation), and wherein the first minimum bend radius(R1) is less than the second minimum bend radius(see para. [0019]; the upper and lower ends of the chain are bent in opposite directions with differing radii with respect to the axis of the chain meeting the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 11, Kirby discloses the chain of claim 2, wherein each of the plurality of members(114) comprises a body(116, see Figs. 5-8) and an arm(114 or 132) extending from the body, and wherein the arm of each of the plurality of members is coupled to a body of an adjacent member.
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 3, 17 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirby.
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Kirby discloses the chain of claim 2, wherein each member of the chain is configured to contact an adjacent one of the members of the chain to restrict bending of the chain in the second direction such that a minimum bend radius of the chain in the second direction is greater than or equal to a specific length but lacks the specific length. Kirby sets forth, in para. [0019] possible sizes for the rod and bends radii of the chain, as well as the radius "may be configured based on a size of the drive element".
Applicant's disclosure lends no criticality to the specific bend radius(see paras. [0005], [0019], [0021], [0066] and [0085]).
Therefore, the specific bend radius is considered a feature best determined by a skilled artisan given the intended use of the chain and specific design requirements thereof, such as sprocket/drive element size.
Regarding claim 25, Kirby discloses the chain of claim 17, wherein each of the plurality of members(114) comprises a body(116, see Figs. 5-8) and an arm(114 or 132) extending from the body, and wherein the arm of each of the plurality of members is coupled to a body of an adjacent member.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendment regarding the longitudinal axis of the chain in claim 1 and 2 is not persuasive. As discussed in the above rejection, the examiner contends that the chain is bent upward and downward with respect to the longitudinal axis to result in the loop shape of the chain with the differing radii and bend directions, as shown at least in Fig. 2 of Kirby. While the Kirby reference does not allow the upper or lower end of the chain to each bend with respect to the longitudinal axis in differing radii and opposite direction, the claim is considered to set forth the chain of Figs. 1 and 2 showing a chain of differing bend radii and bent in opposite directions with respect to the longitudinal ais of the chain. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s amendment regarding the minimum bend radius of the chain in claim 17 is not persuasive. As discussed in the above rejection, the specific bend radius of the chain is considered a feature best determined by a skilled artisan. Kirby sets forth a chain loop on a stiffening rod useable with rods of differing sizes. The examiner contends that a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Therefore, the specific size, such as greater than or equal to three is considered well within the purview of a skilled artisan when a larger sized rod is used. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the dependent claims have been discussed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10, 12-16, 18-24 and 26-29 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.
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/
Prosecution Insights