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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-17, 26-30, and 38-48 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/10/26.
Claim 38 has been identified in the reply filed 8/10/26 as a claim encompassed by the elected Species and Group, but it is listed with the claim identifier “Withdrawn”. New claim 53 has also been presented, which is identical to claim 38, so claim 38 is treated as being withdrawn. Claim 38 is not examined on the merits in this Office action.
Claim Objections
Claims 21, 24, 33, and 49-53 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 21, 24, 33, and 49-53 each recite the term “curtain-type”. This term is clear in the context of the disclosure, but the word “type” should not be used in the claims as it raises concerns as to the scope of the limitation. It is recommended that the term “curtain-type” be deleted from the claims
Appropriate correction is required.
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 49-53 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.
Claims 49 and 51-53 recite “A curtain-type vertical blind manufactured by the light-shielding fabric according to claim [18/21/24]” or a similar limitation. It is not readily clear what the scope of the limitation “manufactured by” is. This is generally considered to be a product-by-process recitation, but the structure required by the limitation is not clearly set forth in the disclosure or in the claims. For the purpose of this Office action, this limitation is treated as requiring a blind including at least one section or piece of the light-shielding fabric set forth in the referenced claims, and does not require any additional structure resulting from the steps or processes that is not explicitly set forth in the claims.
All claims are examined as best understood.
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 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 31, 33-37, and 49-53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byun (KR 200261897) in view of Ronkholz-Tolle (U.S. Patent No. 3,946,789), hereinafter referred to as Ronkholz. Note: A copy of a machine translation of the Byun patent document has been provided with this Office action. References to the disclosure of Byun are directed to the machine translation.
Regarding claims 18, 21, 24, 25, and 33-37 Byun discloses a light-shielding fabric for a curtain-type vertical blind (paragraphs 0013 and 0025 disclose a fabric composition and light-blocking), the light-shielding fabric comprising: a single light-transmitting portion (15) capable of transmitting light (paragraphs 0025 and 0035 disclose the use of mesh, net, or lace, which are materials inherently capable of transmitting light); a first light-shielding portion (11, on a first side of the unit as shown in Figure 5b) disposed at one side of the light-transmitting portion [FIG. 5b] and attached or coupled to the light-transmitting portion (via adhesive 16); and a second light-shielding portion (11, on a second side of the unit) disposed at the other side of the light-transmitting portion [FIG. 5b] and attached or coupled to the light-transmitting portion (via adhesive 16), wherein the light-transmitting portion is attached or coupled to the first and second light-shielding portions from a point exceeding half a width of the front or rear surface of each of the first and second light-shielding portions to an outer edge of the first and second light-shielding portions (as shown in Figure 5b, the light-shielding portions 11 are attached to the light-transmitting portion 15 at the adhesive sections 16, which are positioned at a point past half of the width of the shielding portions and extend to an outer edge thereof), wherein the light-transmitting portion is arranged to cover the entire front or rear surfaces of the first and second light-shielding portions [FIGS. 5a, 5b].
Byun does not explicitly disclose a color or light reflection/absorption characteristic of the light-shielding portions.
Nonetheless, Ronkholz discloses a light-shielding fabric [FIG. 6] (column 2, lines 46-56) having light-shielding portions (1) with front and rear surfaces (opposite surfaces of the shielding portions 1) having first and second colors that are different from each other or the same as each other (column 2, lines 33-42 discloses using different colors, e.g. red and blue, on opposite surfaces of the shielding portions), or a light reflective layer and a light absorption layer formed on different surfaces of the shielding portions (column 2, lines 43-45 and column 5, lines 4-19 disclose using surfaces that reflect or absorb light on opposite faces of the shielding portions).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the light-shielding portions of Byun to have the desired colors or light reflection/absorption characteristics, as taught by Ronkholz, in order to allow for greater variation in the aesthetic appearance for the blind assembly, or to enable better heat insulation or retention for a space when the blind is installed at an exterior window and provided with optional reflection or absorption of sunlight. Selection of colors on outward facing surfaces of window blinds constitutes an ornamentation or aesthetic design choice that does not have a mechanical function, and therefore cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947); MPEP 2144.04(I). It is further noted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected any combination of colors, reflective layers, and/or absorption layers for each of the light-shielding portions, such that the front and/or rear surfaces have different or the same colors or properties as a routine matter of rearranging or reversing parts, which has been held to be an obvious matter of design choice.
Regarding claims 19, 22, and 31, Byun discloses that the first and second light-shielding portions and the light-transmitting portion are attached or coupled by a hot-melt adhesive or a bonding agent (16; paragraphs 0037-0038).
Regarding claim 49, Byun, as modified by Ronkholz above, discloses a curtain-type vertical blind [Byun: FIGS. 2, 5b] manufactured by using the light-shielding fabric for a curtain-type vertical blind of claim 24 (as set forth above), and by cutting the light-shielding fabric into a plurality of light-shielding fabrics sections (the step of “cutting” is a product-by-process limitation and is not positively required for the resulting apparatus claim; since the blind of Byun, as modified above, is capable of being manufactured using the step of cutting, it meets the requirements of the limitation; MPEP 2113) having predetermined length [Byun: FIG. 2], disposing the adjacent light-shielding fabric sections so that the rear surface of the first light-shielding portion of one section of the plurality of light-shielding fabrics sections and the rear surface of the second light-shielding portion of another section are in contact with each other (Byun: as shown in Figure 5b, the rear surfaces of the light-shielding portions of respective sections are disposed in contact with each other), and then fixing together an upper end of the first light-shielding portion of one section and an upper end of the second light-shielding portion of another section (Byun: via upper clip 20; paragraph 0042) wherein when the first light-shielding portions and the second light-shielding portions of the plurality of light-shielding fabric sections are rotated about a vertical axis in one direction in a state in which the curtain-type vertical blind is unfolded, the front surface of the first light-shielding portions is exposed to an outdoor side, and when the first light-shielding portions and the second light-shielding portions are rotated in a direction opposite to one direction, the front surface of the second light-shielding portions is exposed to the outdoor side (Byun: paragraph 0028 discloses rotation of the blind units to expose different sides of the units to an outdoor side).
Ronkholz further discloses light reflective layers and light absorbing layers that are rotated to expose the surfaces having said layers to the outdoor side (column 2, lines 43-45 and column 5, lines 4-19). As set forth with respect to claim 24 above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blinds of Byun to have the absorbing and reflecting layers taught by Ronkholz, in order to improve the heat reflection and insulation capabilities of the blind.
Regarding claim 50, Byun discloses that the separate light-shielding portions are additionally attached and disposed at outermost sides of left and right sides of the curtain-type vertical blind, respectively [FIGS. 2, 5b].
Regarding claims 51-53, Byun, as modified above, discloses a curtain-type vertical blind [FIGS. 2, 5b] manufactured by the light-shielding fabric according to claim 18, 21, or 24 (as set forth above).
Claims 20, 23, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byun (KR 200261897) in view of Ronkholz (U.S. Patent No. 3,946,789), as applied to claims 18, 21, and 24 above, and further in view of Corey (U.S. Patent No. 6,302,982).
Regarding claims 20, 23, and 32, Byun, as modified above, discloses the first and second light-shielding portions, but does not disclose that the connection between the portions is formed by sewing or ultrasonic welding.
Nonetheless, Corey discloses a light-shielding fabric including portions attached or coupled by sewing or ultrasonic welding (column 3, lines 37-46).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the connection between portions of Byun, as modified above, to be formed by sewing or ultrasonic welding, as taught by Corey, in order to facilitate manufacturing of the blind units, and to ensure a continuous connection between the edges of the portions along a full height of the units.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABE L MASSAD whose telephone number is (571)272-6292. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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.
/ABE MASSAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights