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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on November 26, 2025 and February 27, 2026. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed February 18, 2026 has been entered. The Applicant amended claims 12-15 and 19. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 12-20 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.
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)(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 12-13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Parish et al. (US PGPUB 2013/0281008 A1), hereinafter known as Parish.
Regarding claim 12, Parish discloses (Fig. 2, 8, and 11) A nozzle cap assembly (20’) comprising: a nozzle cap body (22’) comprising a base at a top end (22’) and a curved sidewall (sidewall of 22’) extending from the base to a bottom end; an enclosure (21’) defining an enclosure cavity and rotationally fixed relative to the top end of the nozzle cap body (22’); a flexible antenna (80; [0051]) coupled to the enclosure (21’); and a nut base (25’), the enclosure (21’) positioned between the nut base (25’) and the base (22’).
Regarding claim 13, Parish further discloses (Fig. 8) wherein the flexible antenna (80) is curved into a wrapped configuration.
Regarding claim 15, Parish further discloses (Fig. 8 and 11) wherein the flexible antenna (80) is curved around a center axis and coupled to the enclosure between the base (22’) and the nut base (25’).
Regarding claim 16, Parish further discloses (Fig. 11) wherein the nozzle cap body (22’) defines an alignment groove (groove for 23’) in the base at the top end, the alignment groove extending around a perimeter of the base (22’) to position and lock the enclosure (21’) on the nozzle cap body (23’).
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 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parish in view of Fleury Jr. et al. (US PGPUB 2013/0036796 A1), hereinafter known as Fleury.
Regarding claim 14, Parish further teaches (Fig. 8) wherein the flexible antenna comprises a first printed circuit board ([0032]) but does not specifically teach a first printed circuit board coupled in electrical communication with a second printed circuit board positioned within the enclosure cavity.
However, Fleury teaches (Fig. 10) a first printed circuit board (136’) coupled in electrical communication with a second printed circuit board (137’) positioned within the enclosure cavity.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the nozzle cap assembly of Parish with Fleury to include “wherein the flexible antenna comprises a first printed circuit board coupled in electrical communication with a second printed circuit board positioned within the enclosure cavity,” as taught by Fleury, for the purpose of reducing power usage (see also [0005]).
Regarding claim 17, Parish does not specifically teach further comprising a vibration sensor coupled to the nozzle cap body and configured to detect vibrations passing through a fire hydrant.
However, Fleury teaches (Fig. 5) further comprising a vibration sensor (150) coupled to the nozzle cap body and configured to detect vibrations passing through a fire hydrant
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the nozzle cap assembly of Parish with Fleury to include “wherein a vibration sensor is connected in electrical communication with the printed circuit board,” as taught by Fleury, for the purpose of detecting leaks (see also [0052]).
Regarding claim 18, Parish further teaches further comprising a printed circuit board positioned within the enclosure cavity ([0045]) but does not specifically teach wherein a vibration sensor is connected in electrical communication with the printed circuit board.
However, Fleury teaches (Fig. 5) further comprising a printed circuit board (135) positioned within the enclosure cavity, wherein a vibration sensor (150) is connected in electrical communication with the printed circuit board ([0064]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the nozzle cap assembly of Parish with Fleury to include “wherein a vibration sensor is connected in electrical communication with the printed circuit board,” as taught by Fleury, for the purpose of reducing power usage (see also [0005]).
Regarding claim 19, Parish further teaches (Fig. 2 and 11) wherein the enclosure (21) defines a center axis and the curved sidewall (sidewall of 22’) is coaxial with the center axis but does not specifically teach and the flexible antenna are coaxial with the center axis.
However, Fleury teaches (Fig. 10) wherein the enclosure (110’) defines a center axis (center axis of Fig. 10) and the curved sidewall (sidewall of 110’) and the antenna (120) are coaxial with the center axis.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the nozzle cap assembly of Parish with Fleury to include “the curved sidewall and the antenna are coaxial with the center axis,” as taught by Fleury, for the purpose of reducing interference (see also [0074]).
Regarding claim 20, Parish does not specifically teach further comprising a modem positioned inside the enclosure cavity and coupled in electrical communication with the modem, and an antenna structure comprising a printed circuit board.
However, Fleury teaches (Fig. 10) a modem (137’; [0121]) positioned inside the enclosure cavity and coupled in electrical communication with the modem ([0121]), and an antenna structure (120) comprising a printed circuit board (136’, 137’).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the nozzle cap assembly of Parish with Fleury to include “a modem positioned inside the enclosure cavity and coupled in electrical communication with the modem, and an antenna structure comprising a printed circuit board,” as taught by Fleury, for the purpose of enabling desired network access (see also [0121]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant. Added primarily for emphasis, the claim recitations “A nozzle cap assembly comprising: a nozzle cap body comprising a base at a top end and a curved nozzle cap body sidewall extending from the base to a bottom end; an enclosure comprising a curved enclosure sidewall defining an enclosure cavity and a curved and flexible antenna, the antenna bent into a wrapped configuration and coupled to the curved enclosure sidewall, the curved enclosure sidewall rotationally fixed relative to the top end of the nozzle cap body; and a nut base, the enclosure positioned between the nut base and the base” in claim 1 are not found in the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
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 YONCHAN J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3204. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Dameon Levi can be reached at (571) 272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/YONCHAN J KIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights