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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed 4/1/2025 has been entered. Claims 4 are cancelled and pending claims 1-3, 5-11 are addressed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Hong (KR 102352591) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hong (KR 102352591) in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644).
Regarding claim 1, Hong discloses a firefighting system (fig. 1) comprising:
a fluid unit (fig. 1, supply pump 400) arranged adjacent to a lower part of a parking area (fig. 1);
a sensing unit (fig. 1, 22) configured to sense an ambient temperature (The fire detection sensor 22 may use any one of a temperature sensor, page 6, par. 3) of the parking area (abs.), and to generate a temperature information (page 6, par. 4, the control unit 500 receives a fire signal from the fire detection sensor 22, therefore the sensor generates temperature information); and
a control unit (fig. 1, 500) electrically connected with the sensing unit and the fluid unit (supply pump 400);
wherein, when the temperature information is greater than or equal to a first
threshold temperature (the inherent function of a temperature sensor is to detect temperature change), the control unit is configured to control the fluid unit to output a fluid (page 3, par. 10 and page 5, par. 7) to the lower part of the parking area (fig. 1, supply pump 400 and fire extinguishing pipe 100, shown underneath parked vehicle)
wherein the fluid unit comprises a spray nozzle (one or more of 13, and 15) facing the lower part of the parking area (fig. 5 shows the nozzle is facing the lower part of the parking area, additionally the nozzle is configured to direct fluid in the direction of the bottom of the vehicle which is located on the bottom parking area, as described in p. 3, par. 2 [of provided translation]), and the spray nozzle is configured to output the fluid along a bottom surface of the lower part of the parking area (fire extinguishing water is sprayed to the lower part of the parked vehicle, p. 3, par. 2 [of provided translation]).
Hong also discloses the spray nozzle can output the fluid a direction parallel to the bottom surface (each fluid sprays via holes 13 shown in fig. 6 has horizontal reach, which is parallel to the bottom surface; the current claim language does not require the spray nozzle positioned parallel to the bottom surface).
Alternatively, if applicant insists Hong fails to explicitly disclose the spray nozzle is configured to output the fluid a direction parallel to the bottom surface.
However, Zimmerman teaches the spray nozzle (118, fig. 6) is configured to output the fluid (128, fig. 6 shows lines depicting fluid direction) a direction parallel to the bottom surface (fig. 6 shows spray lines 128, where some of the spray lines are parallel to the bottom surface).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to have the motivation to make the nozzle of Hong emit fluid in a direction parallel to the bottom surface as taught by Zimmerman for the benefit of “preferably provides a focused forward spray”, this forward spray as shown in fig. 6 will allow spray from one end of the vehicle to reach the other end, thereby increasing firefighting efficiency (p. 8, par. 0116).
Regarding claim 5, Hong modified by Zimmerman teaches wherein, the fluid unit comprises a solenoid valve, and the solenoid valve is electrically connected to the control unit (page 6, par. 6).
Regarding claim 11, Hong modified by Zimmerman discloses wherein, the sensing unit comprises: a first sensing unit (see annotation) configured to sense a first ambient temperature of the parking area, and configured to generate a first temperature information; and a second sensing unit (see annotation) configured to sense a second ambient temperature of the parking area, and configured to generate a second temperature information; wherein, the second ambient temperature is greater than the first ambient temperature (see annotation).
PNG
media_image1.png
671
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Hong (KR 102352591), in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644), further in view of Boyden (US 5,654,684).
Regarding claim 2, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein, when the temperature information is greater than or equal to a second threshold temperature, and less than or equal to the first threshold temperature, the control unit is configured to output a warning message.
However, wherein, when the temperature information is greater than or equal to a second threshold temperature, and less than or equal to the first threshold temperature (“The processor is programmed to trigger this first alarm when the temperature received by the processor 408 from the thermistor 81 exceeds a predetermined threshold warning level. When a received temperature exceeds a second predetermined level indicative of an actual fire”, par. 33. Therefore, an alarm is triggered when the temperature has exceeded a threshold temperature, at this point the temperature must be less than the second predetermined level. I.E. between the two said threshold levels), the control unit (processor, par. 33) is configured to output a warning message (alarm, par. 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit in Hong to output a warning message in response to temperature information is greater than or equal to a second threshold temperature, and less than or equal to the first threshold temperature, as taught by Boyden for the benefit of conveying the information about an active fire system.
Regarding claim 3, Hong modified by Zimmerman teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control the fluid unit to output fluid (see claim 1 rejection).
Hong fails to disclose wherein, when the temperature information is greater than or equal to the first threshold temperature, the control unit is configured to output a warning message.
However, Boyden teaches wherein, when the temperature information is greater than or equal to the first threshold temperature, the control unit (processor 408, par. 33) is configured to output a warning message (par. 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong with the warning message and temperature information as taught by Boyden for the benefit of conveying the information about an active fire system.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (KR 102352591), in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644), further in view of Alden et al. (WO 2022/074484).
Regarding claim 6, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein, the control unit comprises a communication element, and the communication element is configured to transmit the temperature information to a cloud server.
However, Alden et al. discloses wherein, the control unit (controller 102, par. 0062) comprises a communication element (controller 102 includes a communications interface, par. 0062), and the communication element is configured to transmit (configured to receive and transmit data, par. 0062) the temperature information to a cloud server (par. 0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong with the cloud server capability as taught by Alden et al. for the benefit of facilitating wired or wireless communications between controller 102 and sensor(s) 22.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (KR 102352591), in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644), Alden et al. (WO 2022/074484), further in view of McNamara et al. (US 2019/0054333).
Regarding claim 7, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein, the control unit comprises a speaker, and the speaker is configured to generate a warning sound.
However, McNamara et al. discloses wherein, the control unit comprises a speaker, and the speaker is configured to generate a warning sound (par. 0058).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong with a speaker, and the speaker is configured to generate a warning sound as taught by McNamara et al. for the benefit of providing an audio warning to any nearby individuals.
Claim(s) 8, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (KR 102352591), in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644), further in view of McNamara et al. (US 2019/0054333).
Regarding claim 8, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein, the control unit comprises a warning light, and the warning light is configured to generate a warning light effect.
However, McNamara et al. discloses wherein, the control unit comprises a warning light, and the warning light is configured to generate a warning light effect (par. 0058).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong with a warning light, and the warning light is configured to generate a warning light effect as taught by McNamara et al. for the benefit of providing a visual warning to any nearby individuals.
Regarding claim 9, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose wherein, the control unit comprises a control interface, and the control interface is electrically connected to the fluid unit and the sensing unit.
However, McNamara et al. discloses wherein, the control unit comprises a control interface (graphical user interface, par. 0120), and the control interface is electrically connected to the fluid unit (control the location of the emitter 345, par. 0120) and the sensing unit (sensor data, par. 0120).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong by adding a control interface, and the control interface is electrically connected to the fluid unit and the sensing unit as taught by McNamara et al. Doing so would allow a user to access sensor data about a fire and control the fluid unit/emitter.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (KR 102352591), in view of Zimmerman (US 2022/0152644), further in view of Cheol (KR 20220086725).
Regarding claim 10, Hong modified by Zimmerman fails to disclose a water mist unit electrically connected to the control unit, and arranged on an upper part of the parking area.
However, Cheol discloses a water (water-based agents, page 4, par. 8) mist unit (the fire extinguishing nozzle 301, page 3, par. 3) electrically connected to the control unit (abs.), and arranged on an upper part of the parking area (page, 6, claim 2 and fig. 1 and 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Hong by adding a water mist unit electrically connected to the control unit, and arranged on an upper part of the parking area as taught by Cheol for the benefit of extinguishing a parking area fire from overhead and controllable by said control unit.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the “only one single fluid unit…” but the claim does not exclude multiple components for claimed “fluid unit”. Applicant further argues “the spray nozzle of the fluid unit can cover an entire floor of the parking area and a lithium battery array on a chassis part”, however, that’s not found in the claim.
Regarding remarks on p. 7, applicant argues “Hong fails to disclose that the spray outputs the fire water along the bottom surface of the lower part of the parking lot in a manner that the pray direction is parallel to the bottom surface.” Hong also discloses the spray nozzle can output the fluid a direction parallel to the bottom surface (each fluid sprays via holes 13 shown in fig. 6 has horizontal reach, which is parallel to the bottom surface; the current claim language does not require the spray nozzle positioned parallel to the bottom surface). Alternatively, Hong modified by Zimmerman accomplishes the same.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot in light of the alternative new ground of rejection with new Zimmerman reference presented above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to "Kyle Beers" whose telephone number is (571) 270-0460. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday 8:00-4:30 PST. 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, Yashita Sharma can be reached on (571) 270-5417 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KYLE GARRETT BEERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/TUONGMINH N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752