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 .
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasmussen et al. (Pub # US 2020/0278269 A1), and further in view of Morello (Pub # US 2002/0033759 A1).
Consider claim 1, Rasmussen et al. teaches a method for wireless water leak detection, comprising the steps of: detecting a leak with a leak sensor (12, Fig. 1) (102, Fig. 4); initiating a local alarm at the leak sensor (104, Fig. 4); recording a first time [0005]; wirelessly transmitting a first alarm signal to a base station, the first alarm signal including data representative of the first time; transmitting a second alarm signal from the base station to at least one external device when manual input is not received by the leak sensor within a pre-set time threshold measured from the first time [0005].
Rasmussen et al. does not teach recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor.
In the same field of endeavor, Morello teaches recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor [0048] for the benefit of providing future verification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor as shown in Morello, in Rasmussen et al. method for the benefit of providing future verification.
Consider claim 2, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, wherein the step of initiating the local alarm comprises initiating an audible alarm at the leak sensor [0008].
Consider claim 3, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, wherein, if the manual input is not received by the leak sensor within the pre-set time threshold measured from the first time, then further wirelessly transmitting a shut-off signal from the base station to a valve controller [0005].
Consider claim 4, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a second time indicative of a time when the leak is no longer detected by the leak sensor [0027].
Consider claim 5, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a third time indicative of a time when the manual input has been received by the leak sensor [0027].
Consider claim 6, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a fourth time indicative of a time when an initial sensing mode of the leak sensor is reinitiated (Claim 6).
Consider claim 7, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of ceasing the local alarm when the manual input is received by the leak sensor (Claim 7).
Consider claim 8, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of wirelessly transmitting an acknowledgement signal from the base station to the leak sensor upon receipt of the first alarm signal (Claim 8).
Consider claim 9, Rasmussen et al. teaches similar invention.
Rasmussen et al. does not teach the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Morello teaches the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station [0048] for the benefit of providing future verification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station as shown in Morello, in Rasmussen et al. method for the benefit of providing future verification.
Consider claim 10, Rasmussen et al. teaches a method for wireless water leak detection, comprising the steps of: detecting a leak with a leak sensor (12, Fig. 1) (120, Fig, 4); initiating a local alarm at the leak sensor (104, Fig. 4); recording a first time ;wirelessly transmitting a first alarm signal to a base station, the first alarm signal including data representative of the first time; transmitting a second alarm signal from the base station to at least one external device and further wirelessly transmitting a shut-off signal from the base station to a valve controller when manual input is not received by the leak sensor within a pre-set time threshold measured from the first time [0005-0006].
Rasmussen et al. does not teach recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor.
In the same field of endeavor, Morello teaches recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor [0048] for the benefit of providing future verification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include recording identification information associated with a party making the manual input when the manual input is received by the leak sensor as shown in Morello, in Rasmussen et al. method for the benefit of providing future verification.
Consider claim 11, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, wherein the step of initiating the local alarm comprises initiating an audible alarm at the leak sensor (Claim 3).
Consider claim 12, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a second time indicative of a time when the leak is no longer detected by the leak sensor (Claim 4).
Consider claim 13, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a third time indicative of a time when the manual input has been received by the leak sensor (Claim 5).
Consider claim 14, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of recording a fourth time indicative of a time when an initial sensing mode of the leak sensor is reinitiated (Claim 6).
Consider claim 15, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of ceasing the local alarm when the manual input is received by the leak sensor (Claim 7).
Consider claim 16, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of wirelessly transmitting an acknowledgement signal from the base station to the leak sensor upon receipt of the first alarm signal (Claim 8).
Consider claim 9, Rasmussen et al. teaches similar invention.
Rasmussen et al. does not teach the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Morello teaches the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station [0048] for the benefit of providing future verification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the method for wireless water leak detection, further comprising the step of transmitting the identification information associated with the party to the base station as shown in Morello, in Rasmussen et al. method for the benefit of providing future verification.
Consider claim 18, Ramussen et al. teaches a system for wireless water leak detection, comprising: a leak sensor (12 or 14, Fig. 1) adapted for sensing a leak, the leak sensor comprising: a local alarm (42, Fig. 2) for local indication of a sensed leak; a timer (28, Fig. 2);a manual interface (32, Fig. 2); non-transitory computer readable memory (38, Fig. 3) for recording a first time, the first time being indicative of a time associated with the sensing of the leak [0005]; and a first wireless transceiver (26, Fig. 2) for wirelessly transmitting a first alarm signal, the first alarm signal including data representative of the first time [0005]; and a base station (16, Fig. 1) comprising: a second wireless transceiver (36, Fig. 3) adapted for receiving the first alarm signal [0005]; and a telecommunication interface (40, Fig. 3), wherein if manual input is not received by the manual interface of the leak sensor within a pre-set time threshold measured from the first time, the telecommunication interface transmits a second alarm signal to at least one external device [0005].
Rasmussen et al. does not teach wherein identification information associated with a party making the manual input is further recorded in the non-transitory computer readable memory when the manual input is received by the leak sensor.
In the same field of endeavor, Morello teaches wherein identification information associated with a party making the manual input is further recorded in the non-transitory computer readable memory when the manual input is received by the leak sensor [0048] for the benefit of providing future verification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein identification information associated with a party making the manual input is further recorded in the non-transitory computer readable memory when the manual input is received by the leak sensor as shown in Morello, in Rasmussen et al. device for the benefit of providing future verification.
Consider claim 19, Rasmussen et al. clearly show and disclose the system for wireless water leak detection, further comprising a valve controller, wherein if the manual input is not received by the manual interface of the leak sensor within the pre-set time threshold measured from the first time, the telecommunication interface further transmits a shut-off signal to the valve controller [0005 and 0021].
Consider claim 20, Ramussen et al. clearly show and disclose the system for wireless water leak detection, wherein the non-transitory computer readable memory further records a second time indicative of a time when the leak is no longer detected by the leak sensor, a third time indicative of a time when the manual input has been received by the leak sensor, and a fourth time indicative of a time when an initial sensing mode of the leak sensor is reinitiated [0027].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the Remark, Applicant argues that “[i]t is respectfully noted that the present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/941,298, filed on September 9, 2022, which was a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 16/876,903; i.e., Rasmussen '269. As such, the present application and Rasmussen '269 have the same effective filing date. Thus, Rasmussen '269 does not qualify as prior art under either 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) or 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2). Arguendo, even if one did not consider the effective filing dates, it is respectfully noted that the present application and Rasmussen '269 share a common inventor, thus should the Examiner be interpreting Rasmussen '269 as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2), it is clear that Rasmussen '269 would be excepted under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(A). Moreover, the present application and Rasmussen '269 have common ownership (i.e., both are assigned to The Detection Group, Inc.), thus Rasmussen '269 would also be excepted under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C). Thus, again, Rasmussen '269 does not qualify as prior art. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. For the primary reference Rasmussen ‘269. The effective filing date is October 31. 2018, and the publication date is September 3, 2020. In either cases, the date for the Rasmussen ‘269 reference is will qualify as prior art for the rejection.
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 JACK K WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/JACK K WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights