DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final rejection in response to amendments filed 1/7/26. Claims 1-4 and 7-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 7-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Previously indicated allowable subject matter has been withdrawn and has been rejected below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 8-13, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas US6164383 in view of Wilson et al. US10228069.
Regarding independent claim 1, Thomas teaches a fire extinguisher assembly for a vehicle, the assembly comprising:
a mounting cradle 120 comprising:
a base comprising a base plate 126, the base plate partially defining an internal volume;
a puncturing device 129 disposed in the internal volume; and
at least one discharge head 131 fluidly connected to the internal volume; and
a vessel 110 removably mounted to the mounting cradle and supported by the base plate,
wherein the vessel contains at least one fire suppression agent (col. 2, ll. 9-24).
Thomas is silent to the vessel comprising a metallic sheet stock including a weakened region defined by a locally thinned region of the metallic sheet stock.
Wilson teaches it was known to have a metallic sheet stock (col. 4, l. 11-35) including a weakened region defined by a locally thinned region of the metallic sheet stock (col. 3, l. 34-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to provide the fire extinguisher of Thomas with the metallic burst disk of Wilson, as Wilson teaches consistent burst pressure (col. 1, l. 60-62).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the vessel is formed from a metallic sheet stock (col. 2, ll. 9-24).
Regarding dependent claim 7 , Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas as modified further teaches wherein the vessel is mounted to the mounting cradle (col. 2, l 40-45) such that the weakened region overlaps with a hole in the base plate.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the puncturing device comprises:
a housing (see fig. 2);
an actuatable knife 129,191 disposed within the housing (as the pin is designed to be sharp and pierce the sealed outlet portion 111, it is considered a knife); and
an actuating means 140,190 for actuating the knife.
Regarding dependent claim 9, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the actuation means comprises a solenoid 190.
Regarding dependent claim 10, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the knife comprises: a plunger having a distal pointed tip 129’.
Regarding dependent claim 11, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the knife is actuatable between a stowed position in which the knife is contained within the housing, and a deployed state in which the pointed tip extends through the weakened region of the vessel (col. 3, ll. 13-28).
Regarding dependent claim 12, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein the housing comprises a plurality of shoulders engagable with the plunger (as shown in fig. 2).
Regarding dependent claim 13, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches further comprising: a detent 124a’ disposed around the plunger.
Regarding independent claim 16, Thomas teaches a method of operating a fire extinguisher of a vehicle, the method comprising: energizing a puncturing device such that a knife 129 translates from a stowed position within a housing of the puncturing device to a deployed position in which a pointed tip of the knife extends through a weakened region (col.1, ll. 30) of a fire extinguisher vessel (col. 2, ll. 9-65) ; and deenergizing the puncturing device such that the knife translates back to the stowed position (col. 2, ll. 9-65) and a fire suppression agent within the vessel 110 exits through a hole in the vessel and into an internal volume of a mounting cradle supporting the vessel, and subsequently, through a discharge head 131 fluidly connected to the mounting cradle.
Thomas is silent to the vessel comprising a metallic sheet stock including a weakened region defined by a locally thinned region of the metallic sheet stock.
Wilson teaches it was known to have a metallic sheet stock (col. 4, l. 11-35) including a weakened region defined by a locally thinned region of the metallic sheet stock (col. 3, l. 34-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to provide the fire extinguisher of Thomas with the metallic burst disk of Wilson, as Wilson teaches consistent burst pressure (col. 1, l. 60-62).
Regarding dependent claim 17-18, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas further teaches wherein energizing the puncturing device comprises inducing a current through a solenoid 190 of the puncturing device and wherein deenergizing the puncturing device comprises ceasing a flow of the current through the solenoid (col. 8, ll. 57-67).
Claim(s) 2-3, 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Wilson and further in view of Machado et al. US2010/0230122.
Regarding dependent claim 2-3 and 15 and 20, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas in view of Wilson is silent to further comprising: a plurality of support prongs (four) extending from the base plate, the plurality of support prongs configured to further support the vessel.
Machado teaches a fire extinguisher device 1 for use on an aircraft which teaches a vessel 3 mounted to a base plate 4. Machado further teaches a plurality of support prongs 43a, 41, 5 extending from the base plate.
It would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the fire extinguisher of Thomas in view of Wilson with the mounting of Machado, and additionally applying such an invention in an aircraft (Thomas only teaches a vehicle). Machado teaches that it was known to use prongs as iit improves convenience and safety during installation and removal [0086]. Further it would have been obvious to use the extinguisher of Thomas in an aircraft it is noted that the use of a known technique, to improve a similar device (in this case the use of the fire extinguisher of Thomas in an aircraft) was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, MPEP 2141 III C.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Wilson and Machado and further in view of Frasure et al. US2016/0008646.
Regarding dependent claim 4, Thomas in view of Wilson and Machado teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas in view of Machado is silent to a filter screen disposed within the at least one discharge head.
Frasure teaches it was known to have a filter screen within the discharge head [0023].
It would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the fire extinguisher of Thomas in view of Wilson and Machado with the filter screen of Frasure, as Frasure teaches removal of burst disc fragments [0023].
Claim(s) 14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Wilson and further in view of Frasure.
Regarding dependent claim 14 and 19, Thomas in view of Wilson teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Thomas is silent to the vessel is one of a hermetically sealed sphere and a hermetically sealed cylinder.
Frasure teaches it was known to have a vessel that is hermetically sealed [0031].
It would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the fire extinguisher of Thomas in view of Wilson with the hermetically sealed vessel of Frasure, as Frasure teaches providing a hermetic seal at the puncture part (seal) to help retain the portion that is punctured [0031].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG SANG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1418. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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.
/CRAIG KIM/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3741