DETAILED ACTION
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 person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pahila 2011/0036598.
In regards to Independent Claim 1, Pahila teaches a ceiling only fire protection sprinkler system (100) for a storage area (400) comprising a storage height up to forty-three feet (storage height does not further limit the structure of the sprinkler system) and a ceiling height exceeding forty-five feet (30 feet or more, paragraph [0016], where the height of the ceiling of the storage area does not further limit the sprinkler system), the storage area having a configuration of rack storage or floor storage (type of storage in the storage area does not limit the structure of the sprinkler system), the rack storage being any one or a combination of single-row, double-row, or multiple row rack storage with aisle widths less than six feet and transverse flue spaces less than six inches (configuration of rack storage in a warehouse does not further limit the structure of the claimed sprinkler system), the floor storage being any one or a combination of solid-piled, palletized, or bin-box shelf (the type of floor storage does not further limit the structure of the sprinkler system), the ceiling-only fire protection sprinkler system comprising: a gridded piping network supplied by a source of fire protection fluid provided over the storage area (paragraph [0054]); and a plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (100, paragraph [0054]), each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers being pendent suppression mode specific application fire suppression sprinklers (pendent sprinkler 100 shown in figure 1), each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers including: a body (105) including: an inlet orifice (115) at an input end of the body (115 at upstream end of 105), an outer surface of the input end configured to connect to the gridded piping network (with threading 110); an outlet orifice at an output end of the body (outlet orifice 118); and an axial fluid flow passage (between 115 and 118) that extends between the outlet orifice and the inlet orifice (as shown in figure 2); a seal cap (120) that seals the outlet orifice (120 installed on 118 in figure 2); a first frame arm and a second frame arm (two frame arms 125) that extend from opposite sides of the output end of the body (as shown in figure 1) and meet a hub (130) positioned downstream of the outlet orifice (as shown in figure 1) and extend along a fluid flow axis (axis that would pass through center of outlet orifice 118 towards hub 130), the first frame arm and second frame arm forming a plane (shown in common plane in figure 1); a thermally responsive element (150) positioned between the hub and the seal cap (as shown in figure 1), the thermally responsive element being configured to hold the seal cap in the outlet orifice (paragraph [0036]), and release the seal cap when ambient temperature reaches a predetermined temperature (paragraph [0036]); and a deflector (140) mounted to the hub (as shown in figure 1), the deflector being centered on the fluid flow axis (as shown in figure 1), and having a plurality of slots (310, 320, 330) arrayed around a periphery of the deflector (as shown in figure 3), the deflector being configured to distribute the fire protection fluid to a coverage area of the storage area (paragraph [0035]), wherein the deflector of each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers is positioned at a height that is at least three feet greater than the storage height (height of the sprinkler above storage does not further limit the structure or function of the sprinkler) and at least one foot below the ceiling (paragraph [0051]), at least one of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers being activated in an event of a fire condition sensed by the thermally responsive element (paragraph [0036]), and the fire protection fluid being delivered from the gridded piping network and output by each of the at least one activated of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (paragraph [0036]) to a coverage area greater than 64 square feet and up to 100 square feet (100 square feet, paragraph [0012]) per each of the at least one activated of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (paragraph [0012]), wherein the deflector of each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers includes a plurality of first slots (first half of slots 320), a plurality of second slots (second half of slots 320), a plurality of third slots (slots 310), and a plurality of fourth slots (slots 330), each of the plurality of first slots and each of the plurality of second slots extends to a first reference circle on the deflector having a first diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of slots 320), each of the plurality of third slots extends to a second reference circle on the deflector having a second diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of 310), and each of the plurality fourth slots extends to a third reference circle on the deflector having a third diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of 330), the third diameter being greater than the second diameter (as shown in figure 3), and the second diameter being greater than the first diameter (as shown in figure 3). To satisfy an intended use limitation which is limiting, a prior art structure which is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In the instant case, limitations drawn to the storage area that the sprinkler system is for do not further limit the claimed sprinkler system.
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 1-10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahila 2019/0262645 in view of Pahila 2011/0036598 (Pahila ‘598).
In regards to Independent Claim 1, Pahila teaches a ceiling only fire protection sprinkler system (300) for a storage area (paragraph [0055]) comprising a storage height up to forty-three feet (storage height does not further limit the structure of the sprinkler system) and a ceiling height exceeding forty-five feet (40 feet or more, paragraph [0055], where the height of the ceiling of the storage area does not further limit the sprinkler system), the storage area having a configuration of rack storage or floor storage (type of storage in the storage area does not limit the structure of the sprinkler system), the rack storage being any one or a combination of single-row, double-row, or multiple row rack storage with aisle widths less than six feet and transverse flue spaces less than six inches (configuration of rack storage in a warehouse does not further limit the structure of the claimed sprinkler system), the floor storage being any one or a combination of solid-piled, palletized, or bin-box shelf (the type of floor storage does not further limit the structure of the sprinkler system), the ceiling-only fire protection sprinkler system comprising: a gridded piping network supplied by a source of fire protection fluid provided over the storage area (area of sprinklers each spaced 10 feet apart in a grid (paragraph [0076]); and a plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (300, paragraph [0076]), each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers being pendent suppression mode specific application fire suppression sprinklers (pendent sprinkler 300 shown in figure 3), each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers including: a body (305) including: an inlet orifice (310) at an input end of the body (310 at upstream end of 305), an outer surface of the input end configured to connect to the gridded piping network (with threading 325); an outlet orifice at an output end of the body (outlet orifice 315); and an axial fluid flow passage (320) that extends between the outlet orifice and the inlet orifice (as shown in figure 3); a seal cap (360) that seals the outlet orifice (360 installed on 315 in figure 5); a first frame arm and a second frame arm (two frame arms 330) that extend from opposite sides of the output end of the body (as shown in figure 3) and meet a hub (335) positioned downstream of the outlet orifice (as shown in figure 3) and extend along a fluid flow axis (axis that would pass through center of outlet orifice 315 towards hub 335), the first frame arm and second frame arm forming a plane (shown in common plane in figures 3-5); a thermally responsive element (385) positioned between the hub and the seal cap (as shown in figure 4), the thermally responsive element being configured to hold the seal cap in the outlet orifice (paragraph [0058]), and release the seal cap when ambient temperature reaches a predetermined temperature (paragraph [0058]); and a deflector (370) mounted to the hub (as shown in figure 3), the deflector being centered on the fluid flow axis (as shown in figures 3-5), and having a plurality of slots (sixteen slots shown in figure 6) arrayed around a periphery of the deflector (as shown in figure 6), the deflector being configured to distribute the fire protection fluid to a coverage area of the storage area (paragraph [0059]), wherein the deflector of each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers is positioned at a height that is at least three feet greater than the storage height (height of the sprinkler above storage does not further limit the structure or function of the sprinkler), at least one of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers being activated in an event of a fire condition sensed by the thermally responsive element (paragraph [0058]), and the fire protection fluid being delivered from the gridded piping network and output by each of the at least one activated of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (paragraph [0058]) to a coverage area greater than 64 square feet and up to 100 square feet (100 square feet, paragraph [0076]) per each of the at least one activated of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers (paragraph [0076]), wherein the deflector of each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers includes a plurality of first slots (first half of slots 395), a plurality of second slots (second half of slots 395), a plurality of third slots (slots 400), and a plurality of fourth slots (slots 405 and 410), each of the plurality of first slots and each of the plurality of second slots extends to a first reference circle on the deflector having a first diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of slots 395), each of the plurality of third slots extends to a second reference circle on the deflector having a second diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of 400), and each of the plurality fourth slots extends to a third reference circle on the deflector having a third diameter (dashed line reference circle at inner periphery of 405 and 410), the third diameter being greater than the second diameter (as shown in figure 6), and the second diameter being greater than the first diameter (as shown in figure 6). However, Pahila does not teach that the sprinkler extends at least one foot below the ceiling. Pahila ‘598 teaches positioning sprinklers 1 foot below a ceiling (paragraph [0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to install the sprinklers of Pahila one foot from the ceiling of a warehouse, as taught by Pahila ‘598, in order to adequately extinguish a fire in a warehouse (paragraph [0057]). Further, to satisfy an intended use limitation which is limiting, a prior art structure which is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In the instant case, limitations drawn to the storage area that the sprinkler system is for do not further limit the claimed sprinkler system.
Regarding Dependent Claim 2, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the ceiling height is up to and including forty-eight feet (40 feet, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 3, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the ceiling height is up to and including fifty-five feet (40 feet, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 4, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the storage height is up to and including forty-three feet (height of storage does not further limit the claimed sprinkler system), and the ceiling height is up to and including forty-eight feet (40 feet, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 5, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the storage height is up to and including forty-five feet (height of storage does not further limit the claimed sprinkler system), and the ceiling height is up to and including fifty feet (40 feet, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 6, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the storage height is up to and including fifty feet (height of storage does not further limit the claimed sprinkler system), and the ceiling height is up to and including fifty-five feet (40 feet, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 7, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the storage height is up to and including forty-eight feet (height of storage does not further limit the claimed sprinkler system).
Regarding Dependent Claim 8, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the aisle widths are four feet (aisle widths in a storage area do not further limit the structure or function of the sprinkler system, see explanation in rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding Dependent Claim 9, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the transverse flue spaces are less than four inches (transverse flue spacing does not further limit the structure or function of the sprinkler system).
Regarding Dependent Claim 10, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the transverse flue spaces are three inches (transverse flue spacing does not further limit the structure or function of the sprinkler system).
Regarding Dependent Claim 13, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches the storage area includes any one of Class I to IV and Group A cartooned unexpanded plastics commodities (paragraph [0074]).
Regarding Dependent Claim 14, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above, and Pahila further teaches each of the plurality of fire suppression sprinklers has a K-factor of 28 gpm/psi^1/2 (paragraph [0075]).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahila as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Magnone 2017/0113078.
Regarding Dependent Claims 11 and 12, Pahila teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. However, Pahila does not teach that pressure of the fluid output from the sprinklers is 35 psi. Magnone teaches operating sprinklers for a warehouse fire suppression system at a pressure of 35 psi (paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to operate the sprinklers of Pahila at the pressure taught by Magnone, in order to provide adequate fluid to effectively address a fire in a warehouse (paragraph [0050]).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Miller 9,457,213.
Regarding Dependent Claim 17, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. However, Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 does not teach a plurality of first tines defined by the first and third slots, a plurality of second tines defined by the third and second slots, or a plurality of third tines defined by the second and fourth slots. Miller teaches a deflector (100) with a plurality of first tines (first tine in figure 2 below) defined by the first and third slots (first and third slots in figure 2 below), a plurality of second tines (second tine in figure 2 below) defined by the third and second slots (third and second slots in figure 2 below), or a plurality of third tines (third tines in figure 2 below) defined by the second and fourth slots (second and fourth slots in figure 2 below). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to substitute the slot and tine orientation of the deflector of Pahila in view of Pahila ‘598 with the slot and tine orientation of Miller, because it does no more than yield predictable results of a spray pattern that is designed to extinguish a fire in a warehouse. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). MPEP 2143 I. B.
PNG
media_image1.png
656
697
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 of Miller
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended the limitations of claim 16 into claim 1 without including the limitations from intervening claim 15. Claim 1 does not comprise all of the limitations of claim 16 of the original claims, and has been rejected above.
Applicant argues that the references cited (Pahila ‘598, Pahila ‘645, Magnone, and Miller) do not include all of limitations of amended claim 1. The rejections of claim 1 above cite where Pahila ‘598 and Pahila ‘645 recite all of the claim limitations of amended claim 1.
Conclusion
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 STEVEN M SUTHERLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-1902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 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.
/STEVEN M SUTHERLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752