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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “spring loaded push-pin” of Claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-16 and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2-16 each recite “A perimeter breach warning device of claim [parent claim number]” but should read “The perimeter breach warning device of claim [parent claim number]” to properly align with the antecedent basis of the perimeter breach warning alarm originally introduced in parent claim 1.
Claims 18-19 each recite “A perimeter breach warning system of claim 17” but should read “The perimeter breach warning system of claim 17” to properly align with the antecedent basis of the perimeter breach warning system originally introduced in parent claim 17.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “comprising a spring loaded push-pin to hold the firing pin assembly in place.” The element “a spring loaded push-pin” is not described in the specification or shown in the drawings such that its structure, arrangement, and function are able to be understood. This conclusion is reached by weighing the following factual considerations: the breadth of the claims, the nature of the invention, the state of the prior art, the level of predictability in the art, the limited direction provided by the inventor, the existence of working examples, and the quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand are a variety of mechanical devices that can be assigned to “a spring loaded push-pin.” There is an insufficient amount of direction provided by the inventor regarding the structure and operation of the spring loaded push-pin within context of the warning device as claimed in claim 15 and parent claim 1. Considering all the evidence, as a whole, the examiner concludes that one of ordinary skill in the art would need to engage in undue experimentation to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure, see MPEP 2164 and In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731,737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1988).
For the purposes of examination, “a spring loaded push-pin” is interpreted to encompass any and all fixing means involving a spring or elastic action.
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 1, 3-5, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman (US 3119334 A) further in view of Masas (US 20110198383 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Beerman discloses (in at least figures 1-3, the description, and the claims) perimeter breach warning device (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 9-17, and col. 2 lines 9-21: detonator) comprising:
a main body forming a firing bore therethrough, wherein the firing bore comprises a first firing bore end, a second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator body 6 has cylindrical inner bore carrying striker or firing pin 1. Internal bore has one end proximal to sealing cap 4 at top of pin 1 and an initiator/detonator at an opposite end), and an internal firing bore protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple internal protrusions that guide the axial movement of firing pin 1 including at least ridges of bottom nipple 8 with shoulder 8a that engage with bottom portion of body 6. );
a holding protrusion at the first firing bore end (fig. 1 and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple holding protrusions including at least: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6 (See fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60), washers 13 and 14 arranged at the top of firing pin 1 (See col. 2 lines 22-29), end wall of body 6 (internal shoulders of 6 that form through holes for pin 1), and sealing cap 4 (See col. 2 lines 60-67));
a firing pin assembly within and extending out from the firing bore (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: striker or firing pin 1), the firing pin assembly comprising:
a shaft comprising a first shaft end and a second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: cylindrical body of firing pin 1 with ends 1a and 1b), wherein the shaft comprises:
a firing pin at the second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: firing pin tip extending from shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1), and
an external shaft protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1),
wherein, at the first shaft end, the shaft forms a trip pin bore perpendicular to its length (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a),
a spring about the shaft between the external shaft protrusion and the holding protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: spring 5),
a primer within the firing bore at the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: Detonator comprises initiator/detonator element contained in a plastic sealing cap 9 “which can be in the form of a primer or percussion cap or a delayed-action fuse 12 that can be detonated when the firing pin 1 is allowed to move downwardly under the
influence of the spring 5” );
a safety nozzle removably attached to the second firing bore end, the safety nozzle comprising a first safety nozzle end, a second safety nozzle end, an internal safety nozzle volume, and external safety nozzle walls, wherein (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Detonator comprises bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6 at one end and plastic sealing cap 9 containing the initiator/detonator element attached to the opposite end.):
the first safety nozzle end is open and removably connected to the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6. A ‘threaded engagement as disclosed is a removeable connection.),
the second safety nozzle end is closed (fig 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: bottom most end of sealing cap 9 is closed), and
a trip pin configured to be inserted into the trip pin bore of the shaft such that the spring of the firing pin assembly is compressed (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-30, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a. See also col. 1 lines 43-67. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed.),
wherein the spring is configured to decompress in response to removal of the trip pin, thereby causing the firing pin assembly to move within the firing bore towards the second firing bore end until the firing pin strikes the primer causing a primer explosion and the external shaft protrusion interfaces with the internal firing bore protrusion causing the firing pin assembly to stop moving towards the second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 43-67, col. 2 lines 30-35, and col. 3 lines 16-51: removal of safety pin 2 allows spring 5 to decompress urging firing pin 1 to strike initiator/detonator element in sealing cap 9. See also fig. 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1 will interface with opposing ridge of bottom nipple 8 stopping movement of pin 1. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed.).
Beerman does not explicitly disclose wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures.
Masas discloses an analogous art (fig. 4 and par.’s 51-54: spring-actuated explosive tool 10 with firing pin 58) comprising an external safety nozzle (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: muzzle 106) wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: exhaust bores 112 of muzzle 106).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Beerman’s external safety nozzle to include a plurality of apertures, as taught by Masas, thereby increasing the amount of control the user has over the explosive force of the detonator (Masas par. 26 and par. 57).
Regarding Claim 3: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman further discloses wherein the safety nozzle has an internal surface angled to form a frustoconical shape such that force from the primer explosion is directed into the safety nozzle and away from the main body (fig. 1: tapering of internal volume of sealing cap 9 as shown).
Regarding Claim 4: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman discloses the device further comprising: a vent adapter comprising a first vent adapter end, a second vent adapter end, and an internal vent adapter surface, wherein the second vent adapter end is attached to the first safety nozzle end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: element 7 in a connected with sealing cap 9), wherein the primer is within the vent adapter at the first vent adapter end (initiator/detonator element within internal volume of element 7 as shown in fig. 1).
Masas discloses a vent adapter comprising a first vent adapter end, a second vent adapter end, and an internal vent adapter surface (fig. 4 and par. 56-57: inner sleeve 94), further disclosing wherein the first vent adapter end is removably attached to the main body at the second firing bore end by a connection (fig. 4 and par. 56-57: “The inner sleeve 94 is coaxially mounted between the firing pin assembly guide 76 and the main body 22 with the internal annular flange 98 of the inner sleeve 94 cooperating with the external annular flange 82 of the firing pin assembly guide 76 to limit distal movement of the inner sleeve 94 (see FIG. 12, e.g.).” See also par. 64: the tool is easily assembled and disassembled for cleaning, i.e., the elements are removably attached) and the second vent adapter end is attached to the first safety nozzle end (fig. 4 and par. 56-57: “muzzle 106 having proximal threads 108 and distal threads 110 is coupled by its proximal threads 108 to the threaded distal end 102 of the inner sleeve 94.”), wherein the internal vent adapter surface is angled to form a frustoconical shape such that force from the primer explosion is directed into the safety nozzle and away from the main body (fig.’s 4-5: angled internal volume of conical inner sleeve 64. See also par. 56: “the internal annular flange 98 of the inner sleeve 94 cooperating with the external annular flange 82 of the firing pin assembly guide 76 to limit distal movement of the inner sleeve 94 (see FIG. 12, e.g.) […] a TEFLON ring 77 is located on the proximal side of the annular flange 82. The ring 77 reduces the shock when the firing pin guide is propelled backward and the flange 82 is moved toward the flange 98.”).
Neither Beerman nor Masas disclose wherein the first adapter end is attached to the main body explicitly by a threaded connection.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use a threaded connection in the device of Beerman and Masas as both Beerman and Masas have taught the use of threaded connections in detonator devices to thereby improving ease of assembly, disassembly, modularity, and adaptability (See Beerman fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6. See Masas fig. 4 and par. 56-57: “muzzle 106 having proximal threads 108 and distal threads 110 is coupled by its proximal threads 108 to the threaded distal end 102 of the inner sleeve 94.”)
The rationale to combine is the same as for claim 2.
Regarding Claim 5: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 4, and Masas discloses wherein the vent adapter comprises stainless steel (par. 30: tool is easily assembled and disassembled for cleaning and is preferably made entirely of stainless steel).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for stainless steel, as taught by Masas, to be used in the device of Beerman thereby allowing the device to withstand high stress loads without being costly to manufacture (Masas par. 5 and par. 30).
Regarding Claim 15: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Masas further comprising a spring loaded push-pin to hold the firing pin assembly in place when pulled out of the firing bore to facilitate insertion of the trip pin into the trip pin bore of the shaft of the firing pin assembly (fig. 4 and par. 55: “keyway 86 is arranged to allow longitudinal movement of the trigger key 26 relative to the firing pin assembly guide 76 and prevent longitudinal movement of the trigger (and thus the firing pin assembly) relative to the firing pin assembly guide when the trigger 88 is radially biased into the keyway 86 […] keyway 86 has a circular stop 90 which intersects the keyway 86 and receives the trigger 88 which is biased into the stop by a spring 92. Longitudinal distal movement of the main body 22 relative to the firing pin assembly guide 76 causes the trigger key 26 (which has a smooth distal edge) to ride over the radially biased trigger 88 and disengage the trigger 88 from the keyway 86 thereby allowing longitudinal movement of the firing pin assembly 48, 58 relative to the firing pin assembly guide 76.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for spring-loaded push pin, as taught by Masas, to be used in the device of Beerman to provide and easily resettable triggering mechanism thereby making the overall device easier to use (Masas par. 5 and par.’s 30-31).
Regarding Claim 16: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman discloses wherein the trip pin has a first trip pin end and a second trip pin end, wherein the second trip pin end forms the shape of a circle (fig. 1: circular loop formed from portion 2a of pin 2 as well as ring 3 inserted therein).
Claims 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman and Masas as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Looger (US 4164888 A).
Regarding Claim 2: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman discloses wherein the holding protrusion is slidably attached to and about the shaft of the firing pin assembly and attached to the first firing bore end (fig. 1 and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple holding protrusions including at least: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6 (See fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60), washers 13 and 14 arranged at the top of firing pin 1 (See col. 2 lines 22-29), end wall of body 6 (internal shoulders of 6 that form through holes for pin 1), and sealing cap 4 (See col. 2 lines 60-67). Note: At least the washers 13 and 14 are slidably attached to and about the cylindrical shaft portion of pin 1 and attached to the end wall of body 6)
Beerman and Masas do not explicitly disclose wherein the holding protrusion comprises a set screw slidably removably attached by a threaded connection.
Looger discloses an analogous art (fig. 3 and col. 1 line 59-col. 2 line 35: spring-loaded pull-pin initiator 12 for firing of explosive in trip-wire apparatus) wherein a holding protrusion comprises a set screw slidably attached to and about the shaft of the firing pin assembly and wherein the set screw is removably attached to the first firing bore end by a threaded connection (fig. 3 and col. 1 line 59-col. 2 line 35: Sleeve 38 with recess for sliding pull pin 40 has threaded connection with bore hole of initiator body 32 as shown in figure 3.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the set screw, as taught by Looger, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby improving the users ability to safely and accurately attach trip wires to the pins (Looger fig.’s 2-3 and col. 1 lines 26-28) and pre-aim the device to explode remotely (Looger col. 1 lines 26-28).
Claim 6 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman and Masas as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bushee (US 20140022076 A1).
Regarding Claim 6: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman further discloses the firing bore (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator body 6 has cylindrical inner bore carrying striker or firing pin 1.).
Neither Beerman nor Masas disclose wherein the main body forms a plurality of mounting bores perpendicular to the firing bore, wherein each of the plurality of mounting bores is configured to receive a fastener to fasten the main body to a solid support.
Bushee discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 1-4, fig. 6, and par.’s 18-19: compact multifunction perimeter security system with base unit 10) wherein the main body forms a mounting bore perpendicular to the firing bore (fig. 3 and par. 22: mounting bore 32. Note: in the instance of Bushee, the bore containing pull pin 14 is the ‘firing’ bore, i.e., the bore through which a pin is slidable arranged to trigger the alarm), wherein each of mounting bore is configured to receive a fastener to fasten the main body to a solid support (fig. 3 and par. 22: “mounting bore 32 is formed though the projecting front edge of the light pipe 30 to allow the base unit 12 to be secured in place via bore 32 with a tie wrap, rope, etc.” See also fig.’s 5-6 and par. 34).
Further, it has been held that duplication of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to for a plurality of the bores disclose by Bushee to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas to provide additional attachment points for the device to be installed in a variety of arrangements (See fig.’s 5-6 and par. 34: unit 10 installed in a variety of arrangements)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the mounting bores, as taught by Bushee, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby improving the users ability to install the device at elevated positions within an environment (Bushee fig.’s 3-4 and par. 22. See also Bushee fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 17: Beerman discloses (in at least figures 1-3, the description, and the claims) a perimeter breach warning system comprising (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 9-17, and col. 2 lines 9-21: detonator):
a perimeter breach warning device (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 9-17, and col. 2 lines 9-21: detonator), the perimeter breach warning device comprising:
a main body forming a firing bore therethrough, wherein the firing bore comprises a first firing bore end, a second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator body 6 has cylindrical inner bore carrying striker or firing pin 1. Internal bore has one end proximal to sealing cap 4 at top of pin 1 and an initiator/detonator at an opposite end), and an internal firing bore protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple internal protrusions that guide the axial movement of firing pin 1 including at least ridges of bottom nipple 8 with shoulder 8a that engage with bottom portion of body 6. ),
a holding protrusion at the first firing bore end (fig. 1 and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple holding protrusions including at least: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6 (See fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60), washers 13 and 14 arranged at the top of firing pin 1 (See col. 2 lines 22-29), end wall of body 6 (internal shoulders of 6 that form through holes for pin 1), and sealing cap 4 (See col. 2 lines 60-67)),
a firing pin assembly within and extending out from the firing bore (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: striker or firing pin 1), the firing pin assembly comprising:
a shaft comprising a first shaft end and a second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: cylindrical body of firing pin 1 with ends 1a and 1b), wherein the shaft comprises:
a firing pin at the second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: firing pin tip extending from shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1), and
an external shaft protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1),
wherein, at the first shaft end, the shaft forms a trip pin bore perpendicular to its length (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a),
a spring about the shaft between the external shaft protrusion and the holding protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: spring 5),
a primer within the firing bore at the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: Detonator comprises initiator/detonator element contained in a plastic sealing cap 9 “which can be in the form of a primer or percussion cap or a delayed-action fuse 12 that can be detonated when the firing pin 1 is allowed to move downwardly under the
influence of the spring 5”),
a safety nozzle removably attached to the second firing bore end, the safety nozzle comprising a first safety nozzle end, a second safety nozzle end, an internal safety nozzle volume, and external safety nozzle walls (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Detonator comprises bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6 at one end and plastic sealing cap 9 containing the initiator/detonator element attached to the opposite end.), wherein:
the first safety nozzle end is open and removably connected to the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6. A ‘threaded engagement as disclosed is a removeable connection.),
the second safety nozzle end is closed (fig 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: bottom most end of sealing cap 9 is closed), and
a trip pin configured to be inserted into the trip pin bore of the shaft such that the spring of the firing pin assembly is compressed (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-30, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a. See also col. 1 lines 43-67. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed. ),
wherein the spring is configured to decompress in response to removal of the trip pin, thereby causing the firing pin assembly to move within the firing bore towards the second firing bore end until the firing pin strikes the primer causing a primer explosion and the external shaft protrusion interfaces with the internal firing bore protrusion causing the firing pin assembly to stop moving towards the second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 43-67, col. 2 lines 30-35, and col. 3 lines 16-51: removal of safety pin 2 allows spring 5 to decompress urging firing pin 1 to strike initiator/detonator element in sealing cap 9. See also fig. 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1 will interface with opposing ridge of bottom nipple 8 stopping movement of pin 1. See also claim 1. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed.);
a support structure (col. 3 lines 15- 50: detonator can be armed with one end of a trip wire attached to outer portions 10a of retaining spring 10. It is understood that the opposite end of said trip wire is attached to a support structure.); and
a flexible line connected to the support structure and the trip pin of the perimeter breach warning device (col. 3 lines 15- 50: detonator can be armed with one end of a trip wire attached to outer portions 10a of retaining spring 10.) such that, the pulling of the flexible line will remove of the trip pin and cause the spring to decompress, causing the firing pin assembly to move within the firing bore towards the second end of the firing bore until the firing pin strikes the primer causing a primer explosion and the external protrusion of the shaft interfaces with the internal protrusion of the firing bore causing the firing pin assembly to stop moving towards the second end of the firing bore (fig. 1 and col. 3 lines 15- 50 and claims 1-2).
Beerman does not explicitly disclose a first support structure.
Bushee discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 1-4, fig. 6, and par.’s 18-19: compact multifunction perimeter security system with base unit 10) comprising a first support structure and a perimeter breach warning device attached to the first solid support structure (fig. 3 and par. 22: “mounting bore 32 is formed though the projecting front edge of the light pipe 30 to allow the base unit 12 to be secured in place via bore 32 with a tie wrap, rope, etc.” See also fig.’s 5-6 and par. 34: unit 10 attached to a variety of support structures).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the main body to be attached to a first support structure, as taught by Bushee, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby allowing the device to operate at elevated positions and be integrated within different environments (Bushee fig.’s 3-4 and par. 22. See also Bushee fig. 6 and par. 6).
Beerman does not explicitly disclose wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures.
Masas discloses an analogous art (fig. 4 and par.’s 51-54: spring-actuated explosive tool 10 with firing pin 58) comprising an external safety nozzle (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: muzzle 106) wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: exhaust bores 112 of muzzle 106).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Beerman’s external safety nozzle to include a plurality of apertures, as taught by Masas, thereby increasing the amount of control the user has over the explosive force of the detonator (Masas par. 26 and par. 57).
Regarding Claim 18: Beerman in view of Bushee and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning system of claim 17, and Bushee further discloses wherein the perimeter breach warning device is attached to the first solid support structure using mechanical fasteners (fig. 4, par.’s 4-6, par. 28, and par. 34: base unit can be mounted in a variety of means including mechanical fasters such as zip ties).
The rationale to combine is the same as for claim 17.
Regarding Claim 19: Beerman in view of Bushee and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning system of claim 17, and Bushee further discloses wherein the perimeter breach warning device is attached to the first solid support structure using a variety of fastening means (fig. 4, par.’s 4-6, par. 28, and par. 34: base unit can be mounted in a variety of means including mechanical fasters such as zip ties).
Bushee does not explicitly disclose the use of magnets.
However, embodiment of Bushee including fastening means to mount to any available surface is an obvious variant of the embodiment claimed in claim 19, wherein magnets are used as a fastening means (See also Bushee par. 5: base unit comprises an adhesive backing that “can be adhesively mounted on almost any surface, such as a clean flat glass, plastic, wood or metal surface”). The remaining limitations of claim 19 are unpatentable over Beerman in view of Bushee and Masas and the motivation to combine is the same as claim 17.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize magnets, instead of adhesive, to mount to metal surfaces as a matter of design choice without unexpected results.
Regarding Claim 20: Beerman discloses (in at least figures 1-3, the description, and the claims) a method of warning of perimeter breach warning system comprising (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 9-17, and col. 2 lines 9-21: detonator):
attaching a perimeter breach warning device (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 9-17, and col. 2 lines 9-21: detonator), the perimeter breach warning device comprising:
a main body forming a firing bore therethrough, wherein the firing bore comprises a first firing bore end, a second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator body 6 has cylindrical inner bore carrying striker or firing pin 1. Internal bore has one end proximal to sealing cap 4 at top of pin 1 and an initiator/detonator at an opposite end), and an internal firing bore protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple internal protrusions that guide the axial movement of firing pin 1 including at least ridges of bottom nipple 8 with shoulder 8a that engage with bottom portion of body 6. ),
a holding protrusion at the first firing bore end (fig. 1 and claim 1: Detonator includes multiple holding protrusions including at least: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6 (See fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60), washers 13 and 14 arranged at the top of firing pin 1 (See col. 2 lines 22-29), end wall of body 6 (internal shoulders of 6 that form through holes for pin 1), and sealing cap 4 (See col. 2 lines 60-67)),
a firing pin assembly within and extending out from the firing bore (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: striker or firing pin 1), the firing pin assembly comprising:
a shaft comprising a first shaft end and a second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: cylindrical body of firing pin 1 with ends 1a and 1b), wherein the shaft comprises:
a firing pin at the second shaft end (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 1: firing pin tip extending from shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1), and
an external shaft protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1),
wherein, at the first shaft end, the shaft forms a trip pin bore perpendicular to its length (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a),
a spring about the shaft between the external shaft protrusion and the holding protrusion (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 22-30, and claim 1: spring 5),
a primer within the firing bore at the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: Detonator comprises initiator/detonator element contained in a plastic sealing cap 9 “which can be in the form of a primer or percussion cap or a delayed-action fuse 12 that can be detonated when the firing pin 1 is allowed to move downwardly under the
influence of the spring 5”),
a safety nozzle removably attached to the second firing bore end, the safety nozzle comprising a first safety nozzle end, a second safety nozzle end, an internal safety nozzle volume, and external safety nozzle walls (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Detonator comprises bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6 at one end and plastic sealing cap 9 containing the initiator/detonator element attached to the opposite end.), wherein:
the first safety nozzle end is open and removably connected to the second firing bore end (fig. 1 and col. 2 lines 9-35: Bottom nipple 8 in threaded engagement with body 6. A ‘threaded engagement as disclosed is a removeable connection.),
the second safety nozzle end is closed (fig 1 and col. 2 lines 30-35: bottom most end of sealing cap 9 is closed), and
a trip pin configured to be inserted into the trip pin bore of the shaft such that the spring of the firing pin assembly is compressed (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-30, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a. See also col. 1 lines 43-67. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed. ),
wherein the spring is configured to decompress in response to removal of the trip pin, thereby causing the firing pin assembly to move within the firing bore towards the second firing bore end until the firing pin strikes the primer causing a primer explosion and the external shaft protrusion interfaces with the internal firing bore protrusion causing the firing pin assembly to stop moving towards the second firing bore end (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 43-67, col. 2 lines 30-35, and col. 3 lines 16-51: removal of safety pin 2 allows spring 5 to decompress urging firing pin 1 to strike initiator/detonator element in sealing cap 9. See also fig. 1: shoulder 1b of firing pin body 1 will interface with opposing ridge of bottom nipple 8 stopping movement of pin 1. See also claim 1. See also fig.’s 3-4 , col. 2 lines 9-60, and col. 3 lines 6-50: wire retaining spring 10 in groove 1c of rounded head portion 1a extending out from body 6. The configuration of the detonator allows both the safety pin 2 and retaining spring 10 to function as the trip pin as claimed.);
connecting the perimeter breach warning device to a solid support structure with a flexible line (col. 3 lines 15- 50: Detonator can be armed with one end of a trip wire attached to outer portions 10a of retaining spring 10. It is understood that the opposite end of said trip wire is attached to a support structure.); and
wherein, upon a perimeter breach, the flexible line will be pulled and will remove the trip pin and cause the spring to decompress (col. 3 lines 15- 50: Detonator can be armed with one end of a trip wire attached to outer portions 10a of retaining spring 10.), causing the firing pin assembly to move within the firing bore towards the second end of the firing bore until the firing pin strikes the primer causing a primer explosion and the external protrusion of the shaft interfaces with the internal protrusion of the firing bore causing the firing pin assembly to stop moving towards the second end of the firing bore (fig. 1 and col. 3 lines 15- 50 and claims 1-2).
Beerman does not explicitly disclose a first support structure.
Bushee discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 1-4, fig. 6, and par.’s 18-19: compact multifunction perimeter security system with base unit 10) comprising a first support structure and a perimeter breach warning device attached to the first solid support structure (fig. 3 and par. 22: “mounting bore 32 is formed though the projecting front edge of the light pipe 30 to allow the base unit 12 to be secured in place via bore 32 with a tie wrap, rope, etc.” See also fig.’s 5-6 and par. 34: unit 10 attached to a variety of support structures).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the main body to be attached to a first support structure, as taught by Bushee, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby allowing the device to operate at elevated positions and be integrated within different environments (Bushee fig.’s 3-4 and par. 22. See also Bushee fig. 6 and par. 6).
Beerman does not explicitly disclose wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures.
Masas discloses an analogous art (fig. 4 and par.’s 51-54: spring-actuated explosive tool 10 with firing pin 58) comprising an external safety nozzle (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: muzzle 106) wherein the external safety nozzle walls form a plurality of apertures (fig. 5 and par.’s 57-59: exhaust bores 112 of muzzle 106).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Beerman’s external safety nozzle to include a plurality of apertures, as taught by Masas, thereby increasing the amount of control the user has over the explosive force of the detonator (Masas par. 26 and par. 57).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman and Masas as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wilson (US 20190249970 A1).
Regarding Claim 7: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Masas discloses wherein the firing pin assembly comprises stainless steel (par. 30: tool is easily assembled and disassembled for cleaning and is preferably made entirely of stainless steel).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for stainless steel, as taught by Masas, to be used in the device of Beerman thereby allowing the device to withstand high stress loads without being costly to manufacture (Masas par. 5 and par. 30).
Neither Beerman nor Masas disclose wherein the main body comprises aluminum.
Wilson discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 2-4 and par.’s 21-22: high explosive firing mechanism 200) wherein the main body comprises aluminum (par. 21: “Housing 202 may comprise any suitable material capable of withstanding pressure forces resulting from combusting gases or forces from impact of primer 100 in housing 202. For example, housing 202, such as steel, aluminum, titanium, alloys of the aforementioned or other materials.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for aluminum, as taught by Wilson, to be used in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby allowing the device to withstand high pressures from combustion reactions and forces from the impact of a primer (Wilson par. 21).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman and Masas as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Halsnes (EP 1094293 A1)1.
Regarding Claim 8: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose a locking protrusion or locking bore.
Halsnes discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 1-3: safety pin 12 for combustion devices) wherein a trip pin further comprises a locking protrusion (fig.’s 2- 3: safety pin 12 with first end 1 and second end 4), wherein the main body forms a locking bore is configured to receive the locking protrusion of the trip pin when the trip pin is inserted in the shaft (fig. 3 and par. 15: end 4 locked by notches 6 and 7 in edge 5 of safety arm 11), and wherein when the locking protrusion of the trip pin is in the trip pin bore, the trip pin cannot be removed from the firing pin assembly (fig.’s 2-3 and par. 15: engagement of safety pin end 4 locks end 1 in the bore of safety arm as shown in fig. 3. See also par. 15: “In an alternative form of the safety mechanism, corresponding locking pins may be cast into the ignition head 3. When the pressure on the mid-section 10 is relieved, the safety pin 12 will be locked. Identical locking notches or locking pins can be situated on both sides of the ignition head. The first end 1 of the safety pin may then be inserted from whichever side the user chooses.” )
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the locking bore and locking protrusion, as taught by Halsnes, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby providing a safer deactivation and explosive mechanism while also allowing the device to have a smaller, simpler structure that is easy to manufacture (Halsnes par.’s 16-18).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beerman and Masas as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Quail (US 10895442 B1).
Regarding Claim 13: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman discloses wherein the shaft of the firing pin assembly forms a trip pin bore perpendicular to its length, wherein the trip pin bore is configured to receive the trip pin (fig. 1, col. 2 lines 9-21, and claim 2: safety pin 2 passing through rounded head portion 1a).
Neither Beerman nor Masas disclose a plurality of trip pin bores.
Quail discloses an analogous art (fig’s 1-4 and col. 3 lines 33-54: improvised explosive device 10) wherein the shaft of a firing pin assembly forms a plurality of trip pin bores perpendicular to its length, wherein each of the plurality of trip pin bores is configured to receive the trip pin (fig. 4: adjacent transverse apertures 58 in shaft 50 striker assembly for arming pin 60. See col. 5 lines 15-30: “arming pin 60 can be inserted through the transverse aperture 58 at the exterior of the device to retain the striker head in the armed position against the biasing force of the spring 56.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the striker assembly with a plurality of apertures and key ring, as taught by Quail, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby allowing the device to utilize different sized primer and ammunition (Quail col. 3 lines 33-59) with a simple design that is able to be armed by hand (Quail col. 2 lines 15-24: Device is used to train armed forces for combat environments.).
Regarding Claim 14: Beerman and Masas disclose the perimeter breach warning device of claim 1, and Beerman discloses wherein the firing pin assembly further comprises a key ring (fig. 1: ring 3)
Masas and Beerman do not disclose wherein the key ring is explicitly attached to the first shaft end.
Quail discloses an analogous art (fig’s 1-4 and col. 3 lines 33-54: improvised explosive device 10) wherein a firing pin assembly further comprises a key ring attached to the first shaft end (fig. 4: key ring attached to end of arming pin 60).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the striker assembly with a plurality of apertures and key ring, as taught by Quail, to be included in the device of Beerman and Masas thereby allowing the device to utilize different sized primer and ammunition (Quail col. 3 lines 33-59) with a simple design that is able to be armed by hand (Quail col. 2 lines 15-24: Device is used to train armed forces for combat environments.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Although the prior art teaches a perimeter breach warning device, the prior art taken either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of claims 9 and 11 including wherein the main body forms a plurality of storage bores parallel to the firing bore comprising storage bore openings at the second main body end, wherein each of the plurality of storage bores is configured to receive a fastener, and wherein the safety nozzle is configured to partially block the storage bore openings when attached to the main body (Claim 9 lines 4-8 and similarly claim 11 lines 5-7 and lines 16-19), and wherein one of the plurality of storage bores and one of the plurality of locking bores connect to form one continuous bore from the first main body end to the second main body end, (Claim 9 lines 13-15) including all the numerical and structural limitations recited together in combination with the totality of particular features/limitations recited therein, in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §102 or §103 would be proper.
Accordingly, claim 10 is objected to but potentially allowable due to its dependence upon claim 9, and claim 12 is objected to but potentially allowable due to its dependence upon claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes:
Di Phillipo (US 3830158 A) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-3,17, and 20.
McCandlish (US 3071104 A) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-4, 8, 17, and 20.
Sly (US 4064825 A) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-3,17, and 20.
Sabates (US 20050284649 A1) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-3,17, and 20.
Tagliareni (US 20160074685 A1) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-3,17, and 20.
Kunneke (US 4727669 A) discloses the perimeter breach warning device, system, and method according to certain limitations of claims 1-4, 8, and 20.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN MANCINI whose telephone number is (703)756-5796. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-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, KRISTINA DEHERRERA can be reached at (303)297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding