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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-10 and 20 in the reply filed on 11/12/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Office Action does not set forth a serious search burden amongst each group. This is not found persuasive because the standard for a 371 case is unity of invention, which has been shown as lacking.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ringer (US 2018/0043197) in view of Miller (US 7,845,424).
Regarding claim 1, Ringer discloses a riser manifold assembly comprising:
a control valve (12) defined by an inlet (12a) and an outlet (12b), being operable between an open position, permitting fluid flow between the inlet (12a) and the outlet (12b), and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow between the inlet (12a) and the outlet (12b) (Paragraph 7);
a first spool pipe (34) defined by an inlet (14a) and an outlet (the outlet of 34 into 30a), the inlet of the first spool pipe (34) being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet (12b) of the control valve (12) (Paragraph 26), the first spool pipe (34) having a flow port (36a) between the inlet and the outlet of the first spool pipe (Figure 4);
a flow control switch (28) having a vane (28a) inserted in the flow port (as depicted in Figure 4) of the first spool pipe (34) and the flow control switch (28) mechanically mounted to the first spool pipe (34) creating a fluid seal between the flow control switch (28) and the flow port (36a) (Paragraph 38);
a check valve (14) defined by an inlet and an outlet (the inlet of 14 from 34), the inlet of the check valve (14) fluidly sealed with the outlet of the first spool pipe (Figure 4, the elements are integral), but fails to disclose the check valve mechanically coupled with the outlet of the first spool pipe.
Ringer figure 6 embodiment discloses an alternative configuration wherein the check valve and first spool pipe are not integral, and features a check valve (114) mechanically coupled with a first spool pipe (131), by a mechanical coupling (117).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer with the disclosures of figure 6 embodiment, providing the check valve (14) mechanically coupled with the first spool pipe (34), as the configurations were known alternatives of arrangement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including connection between the spool pipe and check valve in a system where the connection structure is not a critical element.
Ringer further discloses the check valve (14) having a valve seat (30a) and a clapper (30b), the clapper (30b) being movable between an open position, allowing fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet, and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow from the outlet to the inlet, according to a pressure differential between the inlet and the outlet (Paragraph 34), the check valve (114) including:
a first pressure port (52a) located between the valve seat and the outlet of the check valve (Figure 4); and
a first auxiliary port (52b) located between the valve seat and the outlet of the check valve, but fails to disclose a second spool pipe having an inlet and an outlet, the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet of the check valve, the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe;
and a test and drain valve mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe.
The test and drain valve of Ringer is connected to the check valve. The disclosure puts forth that the positioning of the test and drain valve may be rearranged, as Ringer depicts various embodiments with the test and drain valve and pressure gauge in various locations relative to the check valve.
Miller discloses a sprinkler system including a check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), with a first pressure port and a first auxiliary port (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1) between a valve seat and outlet of a check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1);
a second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1) having an inlet and an outlet (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet of the check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1);
and a test and drain valve (18) mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer with the disclosures of Miller, providing a configuration including a second spool pipe having an inlet and an outlet (as depicted in Miller), the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet (Ringer, 14 b) of the check valve (Ringer, 14), the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe (as depicted in Miller);
and a test and drain valve (Ringer, 32) mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe (as depicted in Miller), as the configurations were known alternatives to arrangement of the test drain valve, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including provision for management of testing and flow in the system.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 2, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1, but is silent as to whether the first auxiliary port has a diameter greater than or equal to 1 inch.
There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing of the port diameter would result in a difference in function of the Ringer et al. device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the port of Ringer et al., would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being given the claimed diameter. Lastly, Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed size solves any stated problem, indicating that the port “can” have the claimed size. There appears to be no criticality placed on the size as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer to provide the first auxiliary port having a diameter greater than or equal to 1 inch as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 3, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1, but is silent as to whether a distance between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe is no longer than 7 inches.
There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing of the distance would result in a difference in function of the Ringer et al. device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the port of Ringer et al., would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being given the claimed distance. Lastly, Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed distance solves any stated problem, indicating that the distance “can” be greater than 7 inches, while also indicating that it can be less than 7 inches (Paragraph 43). There appears to be no criticality placed on the distance as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer to provide a distance between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe no longer than 7 inches as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 4, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1, but is silent as to whether a first end of the second auxiliary port is fastened or welded to the second spool pipe.
Ringer discloses a configuration wherein the test drain valve is connected to an auxiliary port (the threaded element extending from element 52b) fastened to the pipe (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer in view of Miller with the disclosures of Ringer, providing a first end of the second auxiliary port (The threaded portion extending from element 52b) fastened to the second spool pipe (as modified), as the configurations were known alternatives to arrangement of the test drain valve, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including securing of the test and drain valve in the system for function.
Regarding claim 5, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 4 comprising:
a second end of the second auxiliary port (the threaded portion extending from 52b) extending outward from the second spool pipe (as modified) and having threads, but fails to disclose the threads being internal.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer in view of Miller to include the threads internal, as opposed to internal, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 6, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1, but is silent as to whether the second auxiliary port has a diameter between 1 inch and 2.5 inches.
There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing of the port diameter would result in a difference in function of the Ringer et al. device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the port of Ringer et al., would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being given the claimed diameter. Lastly, Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed size solves any stated problem, indicating that the port “can” have the claimed size. There appears to be no criticality placed on the size as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer to provide the second auxiliary port having a diameter between 1 inch and 2.5 inches as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Regarding claim 7, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1 comprising:
the test and drain valve (32) including:
an adjustable pressure relief valve (45) (Paragraph 48) movable between an open position, allowing fluid flow into an environment (46), and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow into the environment, according to a pressure at the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe (Paragraph 49, Flow is allowed into port 46 dependent upon pressure), but fails to disclose a separate an adjustable test valve operable between an open position, allowing fluid flow into the environment, and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow into the environment; and a drain valve operable between an open position, allowing fluid flow into the environment, and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow into the environment.
Ringer discloses the test, drain and pressure relief valve as an integrated structure that performs the claims functions (Paragraphs 45-49). Ringer further discloses that the test, drain, and pressure relief valve may be separately attached to the system as individual components that perform the claimed function (Paragraph 62).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer in view of Miller to include a separate test, drain and pressure relief valve (Paragraph 62) performing the claimed functions (paragraphs 45-49), as the configurations were known alternatives of disposition, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including provision for testing, draining and pressure monitoring in a system where the structure of the test, drain and pressure monitoring components is not a critical element.
Regarding claim 8, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1 comprising:
a second pressure port (the central port of the clapper receiving a plug) located between the inlet of the check valve and the valve seat (Figure 4).
Regarding claim 9, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1 comprising:
the control valve being a butterfly valve (Paragraph 28).
Regarding claim 10, Ringer in view of Miller discloses the riser manifold assembly of claim 1 comprising:
the control valve, the first spool pipe, the check valve, and the second spool pipe being rotatably adjustable along a first longitudinal axis (The elements are screwed together, and are therefore rotatably adjustable).
Regarding claim 20, Ringer discloses a method of providing a riser manifold assembly, the method comprising:
providing a wet pipe riser manifold assembly (Paragraph 25), the riser manifold assembly comprising:
a control valve (12) defined by an inlet (12a) and an outlet (12b), being operable between an open position, permitting fluid flow between the inlet (12a) and the outlet (12b), and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow between the inlet (12a) and the outlet (12b) (Paragraph 7);
a first spool pipe (34) defined by an inlet (14a) and an outlet (the outlet of 34 into 30a), the inlet of the first spool pipe (34) being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet (12b) of the control valve (12) (Paragraph 26), the first spool pipe (34) having a flow port (36a) between the inlet and the outlet of the first spool pipe (Figure 4);
a flow control switch (28) having a vane (28a) inserted in the flow port (as depicted in Figure 4) of the first spool pipe (34) and the flow control switch (28) mechanically mounted to the first spool pipe (34) creating a fluid seal between the flow control switch (28) and the flow port (36a) (Paragraph 38);
a check valve (14) defined by an inlet and an outlet (the inlet of 14 from 34), the inlet of the check valve (14) fluidly sealed with the outlet of the first spool pipe (Figure 4, the elements are integral), but fails to disclose the check valve mechanically coupled with the outlet of the first spool pipe.
Ringer figure 6 embodiment discloses an alternative configuration wherein the check valve and first spool pipe are not integral, and features a check valve (114) mechanically coupled with a first spool pipe (131), by a mechanical coupling (117).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer with the disclosures of figure 6 embodiment, providing the check valve (14) mechanically coupled with the first spool pipe (34), as the configurations were known alternatives of arrangement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including connection between the spool pipe and check valve in a system where the connection structure is not a critical element.
Ringer further discloses the check valve (14) having a valve seat (30a) and a clapper (30b), the clapper (30b) being movable between an open position, allowing fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet, and a closed position, inhibiting fluid flow from the outlet to the inlet, according to a pressure differential between the inlet and the outlet (Paragraph 34), the check valve (114) including:
a first pressure port (52a) located between the valve seat and the outlet of the check valve (Figure 4); and
a first auxiliary port (52b) located between the valve seat and the outlet of the check valve, but fails to disclose a second spool pipe having an inlet and an outlet, the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet of the check valve, the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe;
and a test and drain valve mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe.
The test and drain valve of Ringer is connected to the check valve. The disclosure puts forth that the positioning of the test and drain valve may be rearranged, as Ringer depicts various embodiments with the test and drain valve and pressure gauge in various locations relative to the check valve.
Miller discloses a sprinkler system including a check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), with a first pressure port and a first auxiliary port (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1) between a valve seat and outlet of a check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1);
a second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1) having an inlet and an outlet (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet of the check valve (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1), the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1);
and a test and drain valve (18) mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe (Examiner’s Annotated Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ringer with the disclosures of Miller, providing a configuration including a second spool pipe having an inlet and an outlet (as depicted in Miller), the inlet of the second spool pipe being mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the outlet (Ringer, 14 b) of the check valve (Ringer, 14), the second spool pipe having a second auxiliary port located between the inlet and the outlet of the second spool pipe (as depicted in Miller);
and a test and drain valve (Ringer, 32) mechanically coupled and fluidly sealed with the second auxiliary port of the second spool pipe (as depicted in Miller), as the configurations were known alternatives to arrangement of the test drain valve, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including provision for management of testing and flow in the system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)270-1505. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9am-7pm.
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.
CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3752
/CHRISTOPHER R DANDRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights