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 final office action in response to the amendment filed 6/2/2026.
Claims 1-29 are pending and examined.
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 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(100) 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(bent upwardly, see Figs. 2-4) and a second minimum bend radius(top radius, see para. [0019]) when bent in a second direction(bent downwardly, see Figs. 2-4), and wherein the first minimum bend radius(R1) is less than the second minimum bend radius(see para. [0019]).
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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the previous drawing and claim objections and double patenting rejection.
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.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/2/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the claim and drawing objections and double patenting rejection are moot given that the objections/rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the Kirby reference and the chain lacking a bend radius in first and second directions have been carefully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments are directed to the Kirby reference having a stiffening rod preventing the chain from bending in a first and second direction adjacent the rod. The examiner does not argue that the reference functions in this manner but contends that the claim does not require the chain bend in the fist and second direction at the stiffening rod. As discussed in the above rejection the chain bends in a first direction, also regarded as upwardly, and a second direction, also regarded as down ward direction, and thus discloses a chain bent in a first and second direction with differing bend radii and meets the claim limitations.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the Kirby reference and the specific bend radius of the chain have been carefully considered but they are not persuasive. As discussed in the above rejection, the size of the bend radius is dependent on the drive element, as discussed in para. [0019] of the Kirby reference. The examiner contends that the use of a differing drive element with a larger radius would result in a larger bend radius meeting the claim limitation. The use of differing drive elements, such as differing radius drive elements as discussed in the Kirby reference resulting in differing, such as a larger bend radius for the chain, would be obvious for a skilled artisan in to order to have allowed for further uses for the system potentially increasing need for the system and sales of the chain.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETH A. AUBREY(STEPHAN) 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