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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/9/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 19 depends for cancelled claim 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 13-15 are labeled cancelled. Claims 14 and 15 are also shown as not cancelled. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 6, 10, 18 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pipe (2017/0296852)
Regarding claim 1, Pipe. shows a sprinkler head (fig 1) comprising: a body (12) having a nozzle that discharges a fire-extinguishing liquid (18); a valve cap (38,36) that closes the nozzle (fig 1); a heat-sensitive actuator (34) that holds the valve cap in a state of closing the nozzle and that releases the closed state when decomposed and actuated; a disk-like deflector (68) that sprinkles the fire-extinguishing liquid discharged from the nozzle outward in a direction intersecting an axis of the nozzle; and a support (64) that supports the deflector, wherein a nozzle-side surface of the deflector has a recess extending from a portion around the support toward an outer edge of the deflector (the recess for the support, shown in fig 1) and recessed into the nozzle-side surface of the deflector (fig 1), and first slits (70) are provided on both sides of the recess in the width direction such that open ends thereof are adjacent to an outer edge of the recess (fig 3) and an entire outer circumferential edge of the recess is positioned on an inner side of a virtual outer circumference circle of the deflector (see marked up fig below), the virtual outer circumferential circle being defined by a maximum radial extent of the deflector (see marked up fig below, the examiner notes that the maximum radial extent of the deflector is defined by the outer edge of the tines adjacent to the recess. The outer edge of those tines defines the circle shown in the marked up figure below. The recess is within the circle )
PNG
media_image1.png
540
642
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, wherein the outer edge of the recess is formed linearly (fig 3).
Regarding claim 10, wherein the deflector has a plurality of linear slits (70) formed in the outer edge thereof, and the width of the slits has a tapered shape that widens toward open ends on an outer circumferential side of the deflector (fig 3).
Regarding claim 18, wherein the support is located in the recess and is aligned with an inner edge of the recess (fig 1).
Regarding claim 20, Pipe shows A sprinkler head comprising: a body (12) having a nozzle (18) that discharges a fire-extinguishing liquid; a valve cap (38, 36) that closes the nozzle; a heat-sensitive actuator (34) that holds the valve cap in a state of closing the nozzle and that releases the closed state when decomposed and actuated; a disk-like deflector (60) that has a plurality of plate pieces (68, 72) arranged in a circumferential direction and a plurality of second slits (spaced between the pieces) provided between the plate pieces (fig 3), and sprinkles the fire-extinguishing liquid discharged from the nozzle outward in a direction intersecting an axis of the nozzle (fig 1); and a support (62) that supports the deflector, wherein outer circumferential edges of the plurality of plate pieces define a virtual outer circumferential circle of the deflector (see above marked up figure), a nozzle-side surface of the deflector has a recess (the recess around 66) extending from a portion around the support radially outward toward the virtual outer circumferential circle of the deflector and recessed into the nozzle-side surface of the deflector (fig 2), and the deflector further has first slits (one eater side of the recess), each located on a respective one of both sides of the recess in the width direction and having an open end adjacent to an outer circumferential edge of the recess (see marked up figure above), an entire outer circumferential edge of the recess is positioned on an inner side of the virtual outer circumferential circle of the deflector (see marked up figure above).
Regarding claim 21, wherein each of the first slits decreases in width from a side adjacent to the center of the deflector toward the virtual outer circumferential circle of the deflector (fig 3).
Regarding claim 22, wherein each of the first slits has a first side located adjacent to the support and a second side facing the first side (fig 3), the first side is formed along a side wall of the recess adjacent thereto, and the second side is formed so as to approach the first side from a closed-end side toward an open-end side of the first slit (fig 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pipe (2017/0296852)
Regarding claims 8 and 23, Pipe shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 1 and 20, but fails to disclose wherein a width of the recess is set to 1.2 to 1.5 times a diameter of the support.
The examiner notes that the diameter of the support is a results effective variable, the larger the diameter the stringer the support and vice versa.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to make the diameter of the support so that the recess is set to 1.2 to 1.5 times a diameter of the support as since it has been held the discovering an optimum vale of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1908).
Additionally, Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to make the diameter of the support so that the recess is set to 1.2 to 1.5 times a diameter of the support in order to have the support be strong enough to hold the deflector under full water pressure, or as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pipe (2017/0296852) in view of Kowia (WO2020/008707) using USPN 11,511,144 for reference.
Regarding claim 2, Pipe shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein each of the first slits decreases in width from a side adjacent to the center of the deflector toward the outer edge.
However, Kowi teaches a sprinkler deflector that includes first slits that decreases in width from a side adjacent to the center of the deflector toward the outer edge (fig 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to have first the slits that decreases in width from a side adjacent to the center of the deflector toward the outer edge, in order to deflect the water in a specific pattern.
Regarding claim 3, in the above combination, each of the first slits has a first side located adjacent to the support (fig 7, Kowi) and a second side facing the first side, the first side is formed along a side wall of the recess adjacent thereto (fig 7), and the second side is formed so as to approach the first side from a closed-end side toward an open-end side of the first slit (fig 7).
Claim(s) 9 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pipe (2017/0296852) in view of Kikuchi et al. (2021/0197002)
Regarding claims 9 and 24, Pipe shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 1 and 20, but fails to disclose wherein a corner between the outer edge of the recess and the first slit is cut at an angle.
Kikuchi et al. teaches a deflector where a corner between the outer edge of the recess and the first slit is cut at an angle (46B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to cut off the corner between the recess and the first slit, in order to expand the flow path as taught by Kikuchi et al.[0051].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 11, 12-17 and 19 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 amendment to claim 1 renders the above claims objected to.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See the above modified rejections for how the examiner interprets the Pipe reference.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 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, 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.
/JASON J BOECKMANN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 3/6/2026