DETAILED ACTION
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
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-20, in the reply filed on 8/13/2026 is acknowledged. Because Applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 1-9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Horn (US 1,385,131).
Regarding claim 1, Horn discloses a retractable screen assembly comprising: a screen housing (element 10) [configured for attachment to a first side of a building opening]*; a core (element 14) retained in the screen housing, the core comprising a core length extending along a winding axis from a first end to a second end (See Figures 1-2, either of top and bottom ends of element 14); screen material (element C) wound on the core in the screen housing, the screen material comprising a first edge (See Figures 1-2) proximate the first end of the core, a second edge (See Figures 1-2) proximate the second end of the core, a leading edge (portion of element C connected to element 24a) extending from the first edge to the second edge, and a trailing edge (portion of element C connected to element 14, See claim 2) extending from the first edge to the second edge, wherein the trailing edge is attached to the core and remains in the screen housing during use of the retractable screen assembly and wherein the screen material comprises a length measured between the leading edge and the trailing edge; and a pull bar (element 24a) attached to the leading edge of the screen material, the pull bar [configured to unwind the screen material from the core when moved away from the screen housing]*; wherein the core comprises a tension section (Figures 1-2, considered top portion of element 14) occupying only a portion (top portion) of the core length between the first edge of the screen material and the second edge of the screen material, wherein the tension section comprises a tension section effective diameter (considered average diameter of top portion of element 14) that is greater than an effective core diameter outside of the portion of the core length occupied by the tension section, such that the screen material is in tension along a tension zone aligned with the tension section along the length of the screen material (Examiner notes that element C is considered to be in tension throughout many “zones”, See Figure 1), the tension zone also aligned with but spaced apart from the first edge of the screen material (Examiner notes that “the first edge” can be considered either of the larger or smaller arcuate edges of element C as shown in Figure 1. Examiner further notes that the term “tension zone” is considered to be very broad, and the retractable screen assembly of Horn is considered to include several “zones” where the screen is in tension with the roller 14 during operation).
Examiner’s note: *The above/below statements in brackets are examples of an intended use statement that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to the structure of a retractable screen assembly, the prior art must only be capable of meeting the structural recitation in order to be applicable, and in this case, the examiner maintains that the retractable screen assembly disclosed by Horn is entirely capable of the intended use statement. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Regarding claim 2, Horn discloses [wherein the screen material in the tension zone is configured to deliver an unwinding force to the core through the tension section as the pull bar is moved away from the core during deployment of the screen material and deliver a winding force to the pull bar as the screen material is wound on the core]* (See Figures 1-2).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Examiner notes that the entirety of the curtain of Horn is in tension with the roller 14, and therefore the portion considered as the “tension section” is considered as the top portion of the roller that includes a diameter larger than the effective diameter (considered average diameter of the lower portion of the roller 14), and the “tension section” is entirely capable of being considered a portion of the top part of element 14, such that the tension section effective diameter is 105 percent or more of the effective core diameter between the tension section and the first edge of the screen material, and wherein the tension section effective diameter is 150 percent or less of the effective core diameter between the tension section and the edge of the screen material.
Regarding claim 5, Horn discloses wherein the tension section comprises a section length measured along the winding axis that is 10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the length of the top portion of element 14 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of being “10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter”.
Regarding claim 6, Horn discloses wherein the section length is 10 times or less of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the length of the top portion of element 14 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of being “10 times or less of the tension section effective diameter”.
Regarding claim 7, Horn discloses wherein the tension section extends along the core from an outer section end (Figure 2, top of element 14) to an inner section end (Figure 2, bottom of element 14), wherein the outer section end is located closer to the first edge (Figure 1, considered large outer edge of element C) of the screen material than the inner section end, and wherein a section distance between the first edge of the screen material and the outer section end is 15 times or less of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the top portion of element 14 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of this requirement.
Regarding claim 8, Horn discloses wherein the section distance between the first edge of the screen material and the outer section end of the tension section is 10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the top portion of element 14 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of this requirement.
Regarding claim 9, Horn discloses wherein the tension section comprises a tension clip (Figure 2, considered at least elements 16, 19, 22) attached to the core, wherein the tension clip occupies a clip arc measured from the winding axis on a perimeter of the core, wherein the clip arc is greater than 180 degrees (Examiner notes that plate 16 includes a “clip arc” of 360 degrees).
Regarding claim 20, Horn discloses wherein the tension section comprises a section length measured along the winding axis (Figures 1-2, considered top portion of element 14) and wherein the tension section effective diameter increases over at least a portion of the section length when moving away from the first edge of the screen material (See Figures 1-2, diameter of element 14 increases moving away from bottom of element 14).
Claims 1-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Persson (US 2,311,413).
Regarding claim 1, Persson discloses a retractable screen assembly comprising: a screen housing (element 2) [configured for attachment to a first side of a building opening]*; a core (element 4) retained in the screen housing, the core comprising a core length extending along a winding axis from a first end to a second end (See Figure 1); screen material (element 7) wound on the core in the screen housing, the screen material comprising a first edge (See Figure 1) proximate the first end of the core, a second edge (See Figure 1) proximate the second end of the core, a leading edge (portion of element 7 connected directly to element 12) extending from the first edge to the second edge, and a trailing edge (edge of element 7 attached to element 4) extending from the first edge to the second edge, wherein the trailing edge is attached to the core and remains in the screen housing during use of the retractable screen assembly and wherein the screen material comprises a length measured between the leading edge and the trailing edge; and a pull bar (element 12) attached to the leading edge of the screen material, the pull bar [configured to unwind the screen material from the core when moved away from the screen housing]*; wherein the core comprises a tension section (considered upper section of element 4) occupying only a portion of the core length between the first edge of the screen material and the second edge of the screen material, wherein the tension section comprises a tension section effective diameter (considered average diameter of upper portion) that is greater than an effective core diameter outside of the portion of the core length occupied by the tension section, such that the screen material is in tension along a tension zone aligned with the tension section along the length of the screen material, the tension zone also aligned with but spaced apart from the first edge of the screen material (Examiner notes that “the first edge” can be considered either of the larger or smaller edges of element 7 as shown in Figure 1. Examiner further notes that the term “tension zone” is considered to be very broad, and the retractable screen assembly of Persson is considered to include several “zones” where the screen is in tension with the roller 4 during operation).
Examiner’s note: *The above/below statements in brackets are examples of an intended use statement that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to the structure of a retractable screen assembly, the prior art must only be capable of meeting the structural recitation in order to be applicable, and in this case, the examiner maintains that the retractable screen assembly disclosed by Persson is entirely capable of the intended use statement. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Regarding claim 2, Persson discloses [wherein the screen material in the tension zone is configured to deliver an unwinding force to the core through the tension section as the pull bar is moved away from the core during deployment of the screen material and deliver a winding force to the pull bar as the screen material is wound on the core]* (See Figures 1-2).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Examiner notes that the entirety of the curtain of Persson is in tension with the roller 4, and therefore the portion considered as the “tension section” is considered as the top portion of the roller that includes a diameter larger than the effective diameter (considered average diameter of the lower portion of the roller 4), and the “tension section” is entirely capable of being considered a portion of the top part of element 4, such that the tension section effective diameter is 105 percent or more of the effective core diameter between the tension section and the first edge of the screen material, and wherein the tension section effective diameter is 150 percent or less of the effective core diameter between the tension section and the edge of the screen material.
Regarding claim 5, Persson discloses wherein the tension section comprises a section length measured along the winding axis that is 10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the length of the top portion of element 4 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of being “10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter”.
Regarding claim 6, Persson discloses wherein the section length is 10 times or less of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the length of the top portion of element 4 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of being “10 times or less of the tension section effective diameter”.
Regarding claim 7, Persson discloses wherein the tension section extends along the core from an outer section end (top of element 4) to an inner section end (bottom of element 4), wherein the outer section end is located closer to the first edge (Figure 1, considered top edge of element 7) of the screen material than the inner section end, and wherein a section distance between the first edge of the screen material and the outer section end is 15 times or less of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the top portion of element 4 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of this requirement.
Regarding claim 8, Persson discloses wherein the section distance between the first edge of the screen material and the outer section end of the tension section is 10 percent or more of the tension section effective diameter. Examiner notes that the top portion of element 4 that is considered to be “the tension section” is entirely capable of this requirement.
Regarding claim 20, Persson discloses wherein the tension section comprises a section length measured along the winding axis (Figures 1-2, considered top portion of element 4) and wherein the tension section effective diameter increases over at least a portion of the section length when moving away from the first edge of the screen material (See Figures 1-2, diameter of element 4 increases moving away from bottom of element 4).
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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn (US 1,385,131) in view of Haberland et al. (US 9,593,529) (hereinafter Haberland).
Regarding claim 17, Horn discloses wherein the screen material (element C) is attached to the roller 14 (Claim 2, “a tapered roller, an arcuate curtain wound upon the roller and having one end secured thereto”). Although Horn does not explicitly disclose how the curtain is secured to the roller, Haberland teaches that it is known in the art to configure a retractable roller assembly that includes a core (element 15) around which a flexible material is wound (See column 6, lines 43-46, “The shaft 15 is further provided with a channel 16 in which an end of a flexible material (either a blind or screen) is adapted to be received or retained. In this way, a blind or screen (not shown) may be connected to the shaft 15 for winding about the shaft 15”), and a first retainer (considered portion of channel 16 corresponding with a first edge of the blind or screen) attached to the first edge of the screen material and a second retainer (considered portion of channel 16 corresponding with a first edge of the blind or screen) attached to the second edge of the screen material, wherein the first retainer is wound about the winding axis within the screen housing proximate the first end of the core, and wherein the second retainer is wound about the winding axis within the screen housing proximate the second end of the core. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure element 14 of Horn such that it includes a channel for fixedly retaining a side-edge of the curtain of Horn (including both the first edge and second edge of the curtain, since Horn discloses that one edge of the curtain is secured to the roller, and since this manner of retention device would function as intended for the purpose of Horn. Additionally, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art as evidenced above, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed, or substituted one known element for another, using known methods with no change in their respective functions. Such a combination or substitution would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, since the elements perform as expected and thus the results would be expected. MPEP 2143
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-16 and 18-19 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN B REPHANN whose telephone number is (571)270-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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.
/JUSTIN B REPHANN/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights