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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 28 November has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-3, 6-18, 20-22, and 24 remain pending in the application. Applicant's amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every rejection previously set forth in the Final Office Action dated 27 August 2025; however, upon further consideration new rejections are set forth as explained below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 6-13, 15-17, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurumiya et al. (US 2019/0091962).
Regarding claim 1, Kurumiya teaches a fire extinguishing device comprising an internal cavity containing a fire extinguishing fluid (par. 287 – “fire extinguisher or extinguishing equipment tubes”), said cavity being delimited by a wall (par. 287 – “tubes” inherently have walls), wherein said wall comprises at least one barrier layer (par. 35 – “layer (b)”), the barrier layer being an innermost layer in contact with the fire extinguishing fluid (par. 35), the innermost layer containing a semi-aromatic polyamide composition (par. 20);
wherein the semi-aromatic polyamide composition contains a polyphthalamide (par. 133 – semi-aromatic polyamides are polyphthalamides) selected from is PA9T (par. 368 – “semi-aromatic polyamide B1-8”); and
wherein the fire extinguishing device comprises a hollow tubular structure (par. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the semi-aromatic polyamide composition contains at least one semi-aromatic polyamide containing aliphatic diamine units in C6 to C12 (par. 134).
Regarding claim 3, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the semi-aromatic polyamide composition contains a semi-aromatic polyamide containing terephthalic acid and/or naphthalene dicarboxylic acid units (par. 134).
Regarding claim 6, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the wall further comprises an external layer (par. 17 – “layer (a)”).
Regarding claim 7, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 6, and further wherein the external layer comprises a thermoplastic polymer composition (par. 129).
Regarding claim 8, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 7, and further wherein the thermoplastic polymer composition comprises an aliphatic polyamide composition (par. 129).
Regarding claim 9, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 8, and further wherein the thermoplastic composition comprises an elastomer (par. 47).
Regarding claim 10, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 6, and further wherein the external layer is adjacent to the barrier layer (par. 15, 18, 35).
Regarding claim 11, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 8, and further wherein the wall comprises an intermediate layer between the barrier layer and the external layer (Table 1, Example 23; par. 469 – intermediate layer is “B-1”, innermost layer is “B-16”, external layer is “A-1”; par. 418 – B-16 includes B1-8).
Regarding claim 12, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 11, and further wherein the intermediate layer comprises a thermoplastic polymer composition (par. 273, 388).
Regarding claim 13, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 12, and further wherein the thermoplastic polymer composition of the intermediate layer comprises an elastomer (par. 388).
Regarding claim 15, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 11, and further wherein the external layer comprises a thermoplastic polymer composition (par. 330).
Regarding claim 16, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 15, and further wherein the intermediate layer is adjacent to the barrier layer (par. 469).
Regarding claim 17, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 16, and further wherein the intermediate layer is adjacent to the external layer (par. 469).
Regarding claim 22, Kurumiya teaches a domestic apparatus (par. 287 – “fire extinguisher”) comprising the at least one fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1.
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 14, 18, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurumiya.
Regarding claim 14, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 12, and further wherein additional thermoplastic layers may be included for additional functionality (par. 273) and that ethylene vinyl alcohol was known to have good barrier properties to chemicals (par. 4), but not specifically wherein the thermoplastic polymer composition of the intermediate layer comprises an ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH). Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kurumiya to further comprise EVOH in the intermediate layer in order to improve the barrier to chemicals.
Regarding claim 18, Kurumiya discloses the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 15, and further wherein the wall comprises: a barrier layer comprising a polyphthalamide (par. 469 – barrier layer is “B-16”; par. 418 – B-16 includes B1-8; par. 368 – “semi-aromatic polyamide B1-8”), and an external layer comprising an aliphatic polyamide in C6-C12 (par. 51 – “polyamide 12”).
Kurumiya does not explicitly disclose an embodiment wherein the intermediate layer comprises an aliphatic polyamide in C6-C12, but does disclose wherein additional thermoplastic layers may be included for additional functionality (par. 273) and that a layer having an aliphatic polyamide in C6-C12 was known to have superior strength, toughness, chemical resistance, and flexibility (par. 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device of Kurumiya to further comprise an intermediate layer comprising an aliphatic polyamide in C6-C12 in order to provide strength, toughness, chemical resistance, and flexibility.
Regarding claim 24, Kurumiya discloses a fire extinguishing device (par. 287 – “fire extinguisher or extinguishing equipment tubes”) for a motor vehicle, comprising an internal cavity containing a fire extinguishing fluid, said cavity being delimited by a wall (par. 287 – “tubes” inherently have a cavity and wall), wherein said wall comprises:
one barrier layer (par. 35 – “layer (b)”), the barrier layer being an innermost layer in contact with the fire extinguishing fluid (par. 35), the innermost layer containing a semi-aromatic polyamide composition, wherein the semi-aromatic polyamide composition contains PA9T (par. 368 – “semi-aromatic polyamide B1-8”);
an external layer containing a polyamide 12 (par. 31);
an intermediate layer between the one barrier layer and the external layer (Table 1, Example 23; par. 469); and
wherein the fire extinguishing device comprises a hollow tubular structure (par. 1).
Kurumiya does not explicitly disclose a fire extinguishing fluid contained within the internal cavity or wherein the intermediate layer comprises an ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH). But, Kurumiya does further disclose that the intermediate layer comprises a thermoplastic polymer composition (par. 273, 388) and that additional thermoplastic layers may be included for additional functionality (par. 273) and that ethylene vinyl alcohol was known to have good barrier properties to chemicals (par. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kurumiya to further comprise EVOH in the intermediate layer in order to improve the barrier to chemicals. Further, it would have been obvious to contain a fire extinguishing fluid within the internal cavity since Kurumiya discloses that the device can be used in the application of an “extinguishing equipment tube”.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurumiya in view of Taniguchi et al. (US 2016/0193489).
Regarding claim 20, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1, but not further wherein it is included with a battery pack.
Taniguchi teaches a battery pack (fig. 7) comprising a fire extinguishing device (10).
it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kurumiya to include it with a battery pack, as taught by Taniguchi, since batteries were a known fire risk (par. 4) and providing the fire extinguishing device would help to mitigate this risk.
Regarding claim 21, Kurumiya teaches the fire extinguishing device described regarding claim 1, but not further wherein it is included as part of a motor vehicle. Kurumiya in view of Taniguchi further disclose the battery pack described regarding claim 20, and Taniguchi further teaches that the battery pack is part of a vehicle (par. 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the interpretation of the prior art being used in the current rejection. Therefore, Kurumiya is interpreted to teach each and every limitation of amended claims 1 and 24, as explained in the rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CODY J LIEUWEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8-5, Friday varies.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/CODY J LIEUWEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752