Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/414,580

ATTIC VENT FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 17, 2024
Examiner
BALLMAN, CHRISTOPHER D
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Unknown
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
359 granted / 468 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
496
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.9%
+6.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 468 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Final Rejection 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 . Response to Amendment The amendment filed 23 March 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5, and 10-14 are pending in the application. Claims 4 and 6-9 remains canceled from consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-3, 5, and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Casey (U.S. Patent Publication 2013/0165037) in view of Elliott (U.S. Patent 6,155,324), in further view of Stevenson (U.S. Patent 11,460,204). Regarding claim 1, Casey discloses a fire prevention system for use with a ventilated space in a residential or non-residential structure, the system comprising: one or more cover devices 100 coupled with one or more corresponding vents (within 110) associated with the ventilated space, wherein each of the one or more cover devices comprises: a cover 400 that transitions between an undeployed state (Paragraph 78) and a deployed state (Paragraph 80), wherein the cover device permits airflow through the corresponding vent when the cover is in the undeployed state, and wherein the cover obstructs airflow through the corresponding vent when the cover is in the deployed state, and a release mechanism 500/600/700/800 that transitions the cover from the undeployed state to the deployed state (FIG. 1, 4-8; Paragraph 76-81, 111-113). Casey is silent regarding wherein the one or more corresponding vents include a wall louver vent or a gable vent, and wherein the one or more cover devices includes a drop-down cover, and wherein the drop-down cover comprises an accordion style cover, a latch, and a plurality of linkages. However, Elliott teaches a fire prevention system (Col. 7 ln 11-30) for use with a ventilated space in a residential or non-residential structure, the system comprising: a release mechanism 58 that transitions the cover 54 from the undeployed state to the deployed state, wherein the one or more cover devices includes a drop-down cover (FIG. 2), and wherein the drop-down cover comprises an accordion style cover 54, a latch 106, and a plurality of linkages (outer edges of 54 where the slats connect), wherein the release mechanism comprises: a motor (Col. 4 ln 33-34) mounted on a platform; a motor arm (connecting the motor to the chain) coupled with the motor and a pin (Col. 4 ln 39-41), wherein the motor arm is configured to slide the pin through a guide (Col. 4 ln 39-41); and a power source (motors require a power source to operate) coupled with the motor (FIG. 2-8; Col. 3 ln 36-Col. 4 ln 59). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention being made, to modify Casey by replacing the release mechanism with a motor and power source and the slatted cover with the release mechanism and accordion style cover with a latch and plurality of linkages, as taught by Elliott, for the purpose of providing a suitable equivalent closing means along with the components necessary for the cover to operate in its intended manner. Furthermore, Stevenson teaches the one or more corresponding openable and closeable vents (at 100) include a wall louver vent or a gable vent (FIG. 5) (FIG. 5, 7A, 8A, 9A, 10A; Col. 9 ln 28-32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention being made, to modify Casey by placing the system as a gable vent, as taught by Stevenson, for the purpose of placing the system in a location known to benefit from the presence of a fire prevention system. Regarding claim 2, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey further discloses each of the one or more cover devices further comprises a receiver 780 coupled with the release mechanism, wherein the receiver transmits and receives wireless signals according to a wireless communication protocol (FIG. 8; Paragraph 111-115). Regarding claim 3, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 2. Casey further discloses each receiver of the one or more cover devices transmits and receives wireless signals on a same frequency (Paragraph 115). Regarding claim 5, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey/Stevenson further teaches the ventilated space is an attic space or a crawl space (Stevenson FIG. 5; Col. 9 ln 28-32). Regarding claim 10, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey/Elliott further teaches the release mechanism 58 comprises a spring-loaded release mechanism 164 (Elliott FIG. 8; Col. 6 ln 49-57). Regarding claim 11, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey/Elliott further teaches the release mechanism comprises: a motor (Col. 4 ln 33-34) mounted on a platform; a motor arm (connecting the motor to the chain) coupled with the motor and a pin (Elliott Col. 4 ln 39-41), wherein the motor arm is configured to slide the pin through a guide (Elliott Col. 4 ln 39-41); and a power source (motors require a power source to operate) coupled with the motor (Elliott FIG. 2-8; Col. 3 ln 36-Col. 4 ln 59). Regarding claim 12, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 11. Casey further discloses the release mechanism further comprises a receiver 780 that transmits and receives wireless signals according to a wireless communication protocol (FIG. 8; Paragraph 111-115). Regarding claim 13, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey/Elliott further teaches the release mechanism comprises a motorized release (Elliott Col. 7 ln 11-48). Regarding claim 14, Casey, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above from claim 1. Casey/Elliott further teaches the accordion style cover comprises a plurality of segments (See FIG. 2) which are folded into a stack (See FIG. 3, each segment is stacked on top of each other around the barrel 52) when the accordion style cover is in the undeployed state (FIG. 2, 3). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 23 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Elliott does not teach an accordion style cover. The curtain 54 is of an accordion style cover design. The individual segments allow for the curtain to fold up on itself. The use of the barrel 52 to wind up the cover does not negate the fact that the cover itself is still of an accordion style. The manner with which the curtain is drawn up does not prevent the curtain from still being of the style of an accordion. An accordion style cover consists of flexible material (the segmented portion allow for flexibility) that folds into pleats, or segments, which are capable of covering the opening or collapsing neatly to the top of the opening. As the curtain of Elliott meets the definition of accordion style cover, the limitations are thus met. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant further argues that the latch is not a part of the cover, but a part of the brake system. The brake system is a part of the cover as it is the part of the cover responsible for opening and closing. Accordingly, as the prior art anticipates or teaches all of the limitations of the claims, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00-3:00. 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, Craig M Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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 D BALLMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3753 /MICHAEL R REID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 23, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595864
APPARATUS FOR NOISE REDUCTION IN VALVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584563
SANITARY VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578022
A PNEUMATIC VALVE WITH FLEXI-SEALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565935
BALL VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565736
STATIC MIXER FOR ELECTRICAL SUBMERSIBLE PUMP (ESP) HIGH GAS/OIL RATIO (GOR) COMPLETIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+20.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 468 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month