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
The amendment filed December 19th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed August 26th, 2025.
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 15-20 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.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "said second valve" in ln. 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no “a second valve” to refer back to for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "said second valve" in ln. 13. There is a lack of clarity for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether the applicant is referring to the second solenoid valve previously recited in the claim or the applicant is introducing a new feature. For examination purposes, it will be interpreted that the applicant is referring to the second solenoid valve previously recited in the claim.
Claims 16-20 are rejected by virtue of dependency under claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 3-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkins et al. (US Patent 8,297,370) in view of Grant et al. (US Patent 7,647,981).
Regarding claim 1, Wilkins discloses a method for testing activation of a supervisory switch in a dry pipe fire sprinkler system (Col. 6, Ln. 12-27, Claim 27), the method (Col. 6, Ln. 12-27, Claim 27) comprising:
providing in a dry pipe fire sprinkler system (entire system, shown in Figs. 2-2A), a supervisory switch (20, “first pressure switch”, Figs. 1-2A, Col. 6, Ln. 45-56) for determining deviation of fluid pressure in piping (100, Figs. 2-2A) from a supervisory pressure (pressure is limited to a maximum of 25 psi, and first sensor 20 detects any pressure over 16 psi to provide for a fault detection of the system pressure, first sensor 20 provides an indicator of a magnitude of pressure, Col. 10, Ln. 5-7, 29-33), said piping (100, Figs. 2-2A) being in fluid communication with a riser (30, the network of pipes 100 is coupled to the RCP that includes riser 30, Fig. 1, Col. 11, Ln. 34-36) at a first end of said piping (40, 100, upstream end of piping network 100 connecting to main pipe 40, shown in Figs. 1-2A) via a first valve (12a, Figs. 1-2A), which is open (valve 12a is in a normally open position, Col. 11, Ln. 11-13), upstream of said supervisory switch (20, shown in Figs. 1-2A) and between said riser (30, shown in Fig. 1) and said supervisory switch (20, shown in Fig. 1);
providing a second valve (16, Figs. 1-2A), which is closed (control valve 16 is in a normally-closed state, Col. 9, Ln. 35-39),
allowing pressure in said piping and said riser (30, Fig. 1) to equalize at a pressure between an original low pressure threshold and an original high pressure threshold (controller has at least one input to receive a low pressure signal and a high pressure signal, the second sensor 22 maintains pressure at a sufficient pressure within high or low pressure values determined by the second sensor 22, and method includes operating the gas supply source to raise the network gas pressure to a magnitude at least equal the first magnitude which is a minimum low pressure value, Col. 6, Ln. 50-53, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33, Claims 27, 29);
closing said first valve (12a, Figs. 1-2A) to isolate fluid in said piping (100, valve 12a is placed in a closed position to prevent flow of liquid to the system connection 14, Figs. 2-2A, Col. 15, Ln. 62-65);
after said piping (100, Figs. 2-2A) is isolated, opening said second valve (16, Figs. 1-2A) to exhaust fluid in said piping (100, Figs. 2-2A) out said orifice (opening at downstream end of piping network 100 connecting to sprinklers 50, controller actuates control valve 16 to open from the normally closed position as a function of various operating conditions or signals, which can include after the valve 12a isolates pipe network 100, and once control valve 16 is opened, liquid flows through main pipe 40, branch pipes 34a and 34b, and the sprinklers 50, shown in Fig. 2, Col. 10, Ln. 29-60, Col. 16, Ln. 20-44);
monitoring said exhausting of said fluid (pressure sensor 17b monitors and provides notification of the waterflow to the CMU, Col. 9, Ln. 50-58);
detecting at a location remote (interpreting remote as using or involving a network connection between computers or systems in different locations, Merriam-Webster Dictionary) from said dry pipe fire sprinkler system (100, Figs. 2-2A), said supervisory switch (20, “first pressure switch”, Figs. 1-2A, Col. 6, Ln. 45-56) activating during said monitoring (RCP can be used to actuate the control valve 16 based on various combinations of the signals from the first sensor 20 to allow the sensor 20 to activate while fluid is exhausted from valve 16 and pressure sensor 17b monitors and provides notification of the waterflow to the CMU, and first sensor 20 provides indication of a magnitude of pressure in the branch pipes or body of the residential sprinklers as fluid is being exhausted from control valve 16 and pressure sensor 17b monitors and provides notification of the waterflow to the CMU, Col. 13, Ln. 29-39, Col. 9, Ln. 50-58, Col. 10, Ln. 29-33); and
determining if said activating occurred at a fluid pressure in said piping corresponding to said original low pressure threshold (first sensor 20 provides an indicator of a magnitude of pressure which can be compared to a threshold set by the system, Col. 10, Ln. 29-33).
However, Wilkins does not disclose the method comprising providing a second valve at a second end of said piping, which is closed, downstream of said supervisory switch and between said supervisory switch and an orifice as claimed. Grant teaches a method for testing activation of a supervisory switch in a dry pipe fire sprinkler system (Col. 1, Ln. 53-61, Col. 3, Ln. 35-40), the method (Col. 1, Ln. 53-61, Col. 3, Ln. 35-40) comprising:
a first valve (30, Fig. 1), which is open (one-way valve 30 is open and allows water from water delivery pipe 14 to be delivered through valve 25, pump 18, and the pipes 19 and 21, shown in Fig. 1, Col. ), upstream of said supervisory switch (18C, shown in Fig. 1) and between said riser (14, shown in Fig. 1) and said supervisory switch (18C, shown in Fig. 1);
providing a second valve (20, Fig. 1) at a second end (18B, end of pipe 19 connecting to pump 18, shown in Fig. 1) of said piping (19, 21, annotated in Fig. 1), which is closed (shut-off valve 20 is closed when testing the system, Col. 3, Ln. 35-40), downstream of said supervisory switch (18C, shown in Fig. 1) and between said supervisory switch (18C, shown in Fig. 1) and an orifice (opening of pipe 19 connecting to sprinkler pipe 21, shown in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
772
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wilkins and Grant are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of methods for fire sprinkler systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the method taught by Grant to Wilkins’ method, to have the method comprising providing a second valve at a second end of said piping, which is closed, downstream of said supervisory switch and between said supervisory switch and an orifice. The second valve and the supervisory switch taught in Grant would be combined and added to the end of the main pipe 40 opposite of the end of main pipe 40 connecting to riser 30 disclosed in Wilkins, and the second valve taught in Grant would be combined and added in Wilkins between the supervisory switch and the opening of pipe 40 at a branch line 34a, 34b, 34c, 34d, to have the method comprising providing a second valve at a second end of said piping, which is closed, downstream of said supervisory switch and between said supervisory switch and an orifice. Doing so allows testing of the system while reducing expenses of installing a sprinkling system (Grant, Col. 1, Ln. 51-61, Col. 3, Ln. 35-40).
With respect to claim 3, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 1. Wilkins further discloses said supervisory switch (20, “first pressure switch”, Figs. 1-2A, Col. 6, Ln. 45-56) is a digital device (interpreting as an electronic device or a device that can be used electronically, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, sensor 20 sends electronic signals to the controller, Col. 10, Ln. 29-60).
In regards to claim 4, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 3. Wilkins further discloses said original low pressure threshold and said original high pressure threshold are programmed into said supervisory switch (CMU is a microprocessor that performs pre-programmed or programmable instructions, low pressure threshold for first sensor 20 is 8 psi or less and high pressure threshold for first sensor 20 is 16 psi or more, Col. 10, Ln. 35-38, Col. 11, Ln. 25-27).
Regarding claim 5, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 4. Wilkins further discloses said original low pressure threshold is altered during said testing (various magnitudes for low pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like altering the original low pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
Regarding claim 6, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 3. Wilkins further discloses after said detecting, said second valve (16, Figs. 1-2A) is closed newly isolating fluid in said piping (100, sensor 20 detects when pressure is reduced below a threshold value, and causes the system to interlock to prevent the flow of liquid through the network of pipes 100, and control valve 16 is in a normally-closed state until actuated in an open position in a suitable time frame when configured to by the RCP, Figs. 2-2A, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26, Col. 9, Ln. 35-39), said newly isolated fluid being at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold (liquid that is interlocked by the system has pressure that is reduced below a threshold value, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26).
In regards to claim 7, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 6. Wilkins further discloses while said newly isolating fluid is at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold (liquid that is interlocked by the system has pressure that is reduced below a threshold value, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26), altering said original high pressure threshold to a modified high pressure threshold below said original high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
In regards to claim 8, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 7. Wilkins discloses the method further comprising:
opening said first valve (20a, Figs. 1-2A) to allow fluid to flow from said riser (30, Fig. 1) into said piping (100, Figs. 2-2A) to increase pressure in said piping (100, when a specific gas pressure is reached, valve 12a is opened to permit liquid to flow into pipe network 100 through main pipe 40 and branch pipes 34a and 34b, and increases the pressure in the pipes 100, Figs. 2-2A, Col. 16, Ln. 1-44);
detecting at a location remote from said dry pipe fire sprinkler system (100, Figs. 2-2A), said supervisory switch (20, “first pressure switch”, Figs. 1-2A, Col. 6, Ln. 45-56) activating during said opening (first sensor 20 provides indication of a magnitude of pressure in the branch pipes or body of the residential sprinklers as fluid is being exhausted from control valve 12a when it is opened and pressure sensor 17b monitors and provides notification of the waterflow to the CMU, Col. 13, Ln. 29-39, Col. 10, Ln. 29-33, Col. 16, Ln. 1-44); and
determining if said activating during said opening occurred at a fluid pressure in said piping corresponding to said modified high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold, and pressure condition in the system 100 is monitored by first sensor 20 which the user can compare to a modified high pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33, Col. 16, Ln. 1-44).
Regarding claim 9, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 8. Wilkins discloses the method further comprising:
allowing said pressure in said piping and said riser (30, Fig. 1) to again equalize at a pressure above said modified high pressure threshold (method includes operating the gas supply source to raise the network gas pressure to a magnitude at least equal the first magnitude which can be above the modified high pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33, Claims 27, 29).
With respect to claim 10, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 9. Wilkins discloses the method further comprising:
returning said modified high pressure threshold to said original high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold and then returning the modified high pressure threshold to the original high pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
With respect to claim 11, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 7. Wilkins further discloses said modified high pressure threshold is below said supervisory pressure (pressure is limited to a maximum of 25 psi, and first sensor 20 detects any pressure over 16 psi to provide for a fault detection of the system pressure, various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the supervisory pressure, Col. 10, Ln. 5-7, 29-33, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
In regards to claim 12, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 7. Wilkins further discloses said modified high pressure threshold is a first amount below said original high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold at a first amount, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
Regarding claim 13, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 12. Wilkins discloses the method further comprising:
altering said original low pressure threshold to a modified low pressure threshold which is said first amount below said original low pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold at a first amount, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
In regards to claim 14, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 13. Wilkins further discloses said modified low pressure threshold is below said pressure of said newly isolated fluid (liquid that is interlocked by the system has pressure that is reduced below a threshold value, and various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the pressure of the liquid that is interlocked, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkins et al. (US Patent 8,297,370) in view of Grant et al. (US Patent 7,647,981) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jackson et al. (US Patent 7,185,711).
Regarding claim 2, Wilkins, as modified by Grant, discloses the method of claim 1. Wilkins further discloses said second valve (16, Figs. 1-2A) is a solenoid valve (Col. 9, Ln. 35-39). However, Wilkins does not disclose said first valve is a solenoid valve. Jackson teaches a method (Col. 1, Ln. 53 to Col. 2, Ln. 12, Claims 1, 4) comprising said first valve (46, Fig. 2) and said second valve (48, Fig. 2) are solenoid valves (Col. 4, Ln. 21-40).
Wilkins, Grant, and Jackson are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of methods for fire sprinkler systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the method taught by Jackson to Wilkins’ method, as modified by Grant, to have said first valve and said second valve are solenoid valves. Doing so provides easier and automatic control of the valves in response to a pressure condition (Jackson, Col. 6, Ln. 43-52).
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson et al. (US Patent 7,185,711) in view of Wilkins et al. (US Patent 8,297,370)
Regarding claim 15, Jackson discloses a system (entire structure, Figs. 1-2) for testing activation of a supervisory switch in a dry pipe fire sprinkler system (11, system is a preaction system that detects low supervisory pressure through supervisory pressure switches 58 and 60, which actuate when system supervisory air is lost, and system 11 is preferably a dry pipe system, Figs. 1-1A, Col. 1, Ln. 20-43, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53), the system (11, Figs. 1-1A) comprising:
a supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-1A) for determining deviation of fluid pressure in piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) from a supervisory pressure (supervisory switches 58 and 60 detect when there is a pressure drop in system piping 16, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53), said piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) being in fluid communication with a riser (interpreting as a vertical pipe, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 23, water supply 23 is a vertical pipe, shown in Figs. 1-1A) at a first end (20, Figs. 1-1A) of said piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) via a first solenoid valve (46, 46 is a solenoid valve that controls the opening of control valve 12, which allows water from water supply 23 to enter through inlet 20, Figs. 1, 2, Col. 6, Ln. 44-67), which is open (solenoid valve 46 is normally open, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53),
a second solenoid valve (48, Figs. 1, 2) at a second end of said piping (16, solenoid valve 48 is at a second end that is at a different location from the first end 20 in system piping 16, since the claim does not specify any further details for the recited second end, the location of the solenoid valve 48 is being considered the second end, annotated and shown in Fig. 1), which is closed (solenoid valve 48 is normally closed, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53), and
a controller (52, Figs. 1-2) in communication with said supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-1A), said first solenoid valve (46, Figs. 1, 2) and said second solenoid valve (48, control panel 52 is in communication with supervisory switches 58 and 60, and solenoid valves 46 and 48, Figs. 1, 2, Col. 5, Ln. 58-67);
wherein, said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) closes said first solenoid valve (46, Figs. 1, 2) to isolate fluid in said piping (16, control panel 52 activates to close normally open solenoid valve 46 to prevent water flow from any of the open sprinklers in system piping 16, Figs. 1-1A, Col. 5, Ln. 1-11, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53);
wherein, after said fluid in said piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) is isolated, said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) opens said second valve (48, Figs. 1, 2) to exhaust fluid in said piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) out said orifice (22, when control panel 52 closes solenoid valve 46, control panel 52 opens normally closed solenoid valve 48 to open valve 12 to permit operation of the sprinklers, Fig. 1, Col. 6, Ln. 44-67);
wherein, said supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-1A) activates after said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) opens said second valve (48, Figs. 1, 2) during said monitoring because fluid pressure in said piping (16, Figs. 1-1A) drops below an original low pressure threshold (supervisory switches 58 and 60 detect the supervisory pressure when sprinklers operate in response to a fire and activate when a low pressure condition is detected, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67, Col. 6, Ln. 44-53); and
wherein, said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) remotely detects said supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-1A) activation (control panel 52 receives signals from supervisory switches 58 and 60 when they are actuated, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67).
PNG
media_image2.png
817
931
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Jackson does not teach the first solenoid valve is located upstream of said supervisory switch and between said riser and said supervisory switch, and the second solenoid valve is located downstream of said supervisory switch and between said supervisory switch and an orifice.
Wilkins teaches a dry pipe fire sprinkler system (entire structure, Figs. 1-2A) comprising a first valve (16, Figs. 1-2A) located upstream of said supervisory switch (20, shown in Figs. 1-2A) and between said riser (30, shown in Fig. 1) and said supervisory switch (20, shown in Fig. 1); and
a second valve (40a, Figs. 1-2A), downstream of said supervisory switch (20, shown in Figs. 1-2A) and between said supervisory switch (20, shown in Figs. 1-2A) and an orifice (50, shown in Figs. 2-2A).
Jackson and Wilkins are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dry pipe fire sprinkler systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of locations of the first valve and the second valve taught in Wilkin’s system to Jackson’s system, to have the first solenoid valve is located upstream of said supervisory switch and between said riser and said supervisory switch, and the second solenoid valve is located downstream of said supervisory switch and between said supervisory switch and an orifice as a matter of obvious design choice. It has been held that rearrangement of parts of an invention is routine skill in the art and is recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Japiske 86 USPQ 70. Further, as disclosed in paragraphs 016, 031, and 053 of applicant’s specification, the claimed positioning provides no stated benefit and as such no criticality is apparent.
Regarding claim 16, Jackson, as modified by Wilkins, discloses the system of claim 15. Jackson further discloses wherein after said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) detects said supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-1A) activation, said controller (52, Figs. 1-2) closes said second valve (48, Figs. 1, 2) newly isolating fluid in said piping (16, control panel 52 receives signals from supervisory switches 58 and 60 when they are actuated, and fluid is trapped in solenoid valve 48 which is normally closed in a normal operating condition, Figs. 1-2, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67, Col. 6, Ln. 44-67).
However, Jackson does not explicitly teach said newly isolated fluid being at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold. Wilkins teaches after said controller (CMU, Figs. 2-2A) detects said supervisory switch activation (first sensor 20 can send a signal to the CMU to determine when it is activated, Col. 13, Ln. 16-18), said controller (CMU, Figs. 2-2A) closes a valve (16, Figs. 1-2A) newly isolating fluid in said piping (100, controller is in electronic communication with the control valve 16 and the first sensor 20, sensor 20 detects when pressure is reduced below a threshold value, and causes the system to interlock to prevent the flow of liquid through the network of pipes 100, and control valve 16 is in a normally-closed state until actuated in an open position in a suitable time frame when configured to by the RCP, Figs. 2-2A, Col. 10, Ln. 45-50, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26, Col. 9, Ln. 35-39), said newly isolated fluid being at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold (liquid that is interlocked by the system has pressure that is reduced below a threshold value, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26).
Jackson and Wilkins are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dry pipe fire sprinkler systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the valve taught in Wilkin’s system to the second valve in Jackson’s system, to have said newly isolated fluid being at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold. There is a motivation to combine the function of the valve taught in Wilkins to the second valve disclosed in Jackson because doing so provides various operational modes of a fire protection system based on specified hydraulic design calculation and a pipe arrangement that allows the control valve to be test operated and isolated from the connected sprinkler system (Wilkins, Col. 4, Ln. 58-67).
In regards to claim 17, Jackson, as modified by Wilkins, discloses the system of claim 16. Wilkins further teaches while said newly isolating fluid is at a pressure below said original low pressure threshold (liquid that is interlocked by the system has pressure that is reduced below a threshold value, Col. 17, Ln. 1-26), said controller (CMU, Figs. 2-2A) alters said original high pressure threshold to a modified high pressure threshold below said supervisory pressure (pressure is limited to a maximum of 25 psi, and first sensor 20 detects any pressure over 16 psi to provide for a fault detection of the system pressure, various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the supervisory pressure through the CMU, Col. 10, Ln. 5-7, 29-33, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
With respect to claim 18, Jackson, as modified by Wilkins, discloses the system of claim 17. Jackson further discloses wherein said controller (52, Figs. 1-2):
opens said first valve (46, Figs. 1-1A) to allow fluid to flow from said riser (23, Figs. 1-1A) into said piping (16, Figs. 1-2) to increase pressure in said piping (16, control panel 52 controls solenoid valve 46 to be normally open in a normally operating condition, which increases the pressure in the piping 16 as water flows into the system, Figs. 1-2, Col. 6, Ln. 44-67); and
detects at a location remote from said dry pipe fire sprinkler system (11, control panel 52 receives signals from various components system 11 at a remote location, shown in Figs. 1-1A, Col. 4, Ln. 41-53), said supervisory switch (58, 60, Figs. 1-2) activating at a fluid pressure in said piping (16, Figs. 1-2) corresponding to said modified high pressure threshold (supervisory switches 58 and 60 monitor and operate as water supply traveling at an increased pressure through the piping 16, Col. 4, Ln. 41-67, Col. 6, Ln. 44-67).
Wilkins further teaches said supervisory switch activating at a fluid pressure in said piping corresponding to said modified high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold, and pressure condition in the system 100 is monitored by first sensor 20 that sends signals to the CMU which the user can compare to a modified high pressure threshold, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33, Col. 16, Ln. 1-44).
With respect to claim 19, Jackson, as modified by Wilkins, discloses the system of claim 18. Wilkins further teaches said modified high pressure threshold is a first amount below said original high pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold at a first amount, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
Regarding claim 20, Jackson, as modified by Wilkins, discloses the system of claim 19. Wilkins further teaches said controller (CMU, Figs. 2-2A) alters said original low pressure threshold to a modified low pressure threshold which is said first amount below said original low pressure threshold (various magnitudes for high pressure thresholds are referenced, but preferred methodologies can be altered to suit a desired effect, such as additional settings like modifying the original high pressure threshold to be below the original high pressure threshold at a first amount through the CMU, Col. 11, Ln. 18-33).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 19th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to applicant's argument that Wilkins, in view of Grant, does not disclose the valve and sensor arrangement or operation as claimed in independent claim 1, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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 O 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/ARTHUR O. HALL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3752
