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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1 and 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive as the applied prior art does not teach a channel within the housing that directly connects the aerosol generator and the detection chamber. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Rodriguez (US 20200250963).
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 8 that installing a direct internal channel would render Lang’s variable airflow generator superfluous.
Examiner’s position is that the variable airflow generator is interpreted as being an element of the claimed ‘aerosol generation system’ that serves the purpose of generating particles and moving them to the scattering chamber in a controlled manner (see paragraph 0022). This use would not be changed by a channel that directly connects the aerosol generation and the scattering chamber.
Applicant argues on page 8 that a direct internal channel based on the combination of Lang, Penny78 and Penny88 is impermissible hindsight.
Examiner’s position is that the external channel of Penny78 is no longer used, rather the Rodriguez reference is cited to teach a direct internal channel (Figure 1, nozzle 275).
Applicant argues on pages 8-9 that Lang’s particle generator opens away from the scattering chamber and is inconsistent with a direct channel.
Examiner’s position is that Lang does not, in either Figure 3 or the specification, explicitly teach the direction of the particle generator 302. MPEP 2144.01 recites "[I]n considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom." In this case, the ‘particle generation system’ of Lang is interpreted to comprise elements that generate particles (Figure 3, element 302) and move them to the scattering chamber (by element 316), and it is this combination of elements that is interpreted to read on the claimed “aerosol generator” of the instant invention. As such the precise orientation of the particle generator is irrelevant, and applying the teachings of Rodriguez (namely the existence of a nozzle directly between the particle generator 250 and the scattering chamber 240, see Figure 1) would be an obvious improvement to the vague positioning of Lang.
Examiner acknowledges that Lang has no teaching of “direct” or “shortest route” or equivalent and relies on the teachings of Rodriguez for this concept. Rodriguez Figure 1 shows a nozzle between the particle generation system (element 250, see paragraph 20) and the scattering chamber 240, which is interpreted as a direct channel that is within the housing 210.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 8 and claim 9, line 9 recite “a channel connecting disposed within the housing and connecting the aerosol generator”, which appears to have an extra word. For purposes of examination, examiner disregards the first “connecting”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5, 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang et al (United States Patent Application Publication 20210248901) in view of Rodriguez (United States Patent Application Publication 20200250963) in view of Penny (United States Patent Application Publication 20200035088) the combination of which is hereafter referred to as “LRP”.
As to claim 1, Lang teaches a smoke detector unit (paragraph 0027 “The fire sensing device 200 can be, but is not limited to, a fire and/or smoke detector of a fire control system.”) comprising:
a detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0022 “optical scatter chamber 104”);
a detector element configured to detect a presence of an aerosol within the detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0022 “a transmitter light-emitting diode (LED) 105 and a receiver photodiode 106 to measure the aerosol density level”);
a housing (Figure 3, the large circles that indicate the body of the smoke detector, Figure 2 is an isometric view of this);
a reservoir for storing a fluid (Figure 3, paragraph 0036 “a reservoir to contain a liquid and/or wax used to create particles”);
an aerosol generator disposed within the housing (Figure 3, paragraph 0035 “The adjustable particle generator 302 of the fire sensing device 300 can generate particles which can be mixed into a controlled aerosol density level by the variable airflow generator 316.”);
a channel [connecting] disposed within the housing and connecting the aerosol generator to the detection chamber, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to generate the aerosol using the fluid such that the generated aerosol is released into the detection chamber via the channel (Figure 3, paragraph 0047 “The variable airflow generator 316 can control the airflow through the fire sensing device 300, including the optical scatter chamber 304. For example, the variable airflow generator 316 can move gases and/or aerosol from a first end of the fire sensing device 300 to a second end of the fire sensing device 300.” indicating there must exist a channel between elements 302, 316 and chamber 304 in order to guide the particles to the chamber); and
a flow controller (paragraph 0022 “the microcontroller 122 can send a command to the adjustable particle generator 102 to generate particles” and 0036 “The heat source 308 can heat the liquid and/or wax to a particular temperature and/or heat the liquid and/or wax for a particular period of time to generate an aerosol density level sufficient to trigger a fire response”).
While Lang teaches the particles are generated and moved to the scattering chamber (paragraph 0047), Lang does not explicitly teach a channel that directly connects the aerosol generator and the detection chamber, or that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel. However, it is known in the art as taught by Rodriguez. Rodriguez teaches a smoke detector (Abstract “a smoke detector having a controller configured for executing an operational test, the operational test including: activating an electronic vaporizer to produce vaporized particulate within the smoke detector”) including a channel (Figure 1, paragraph 0020 “nozzle 275”) that directly connects the aerosol generator (Figure 1, paragraph 0020 “The smoke detector 200 may include a liquid cartridge 250 and a vaporizer/atomizer 260”) and the detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0019 “optical chamber 240”), and that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel (Figure 2, paragraph 0020 “The smoke detector 200 may include a liquid cartridge 250 and a vaporizer/atomizer 260 for vaporizing liquid within the cartridge 250. A resulting vaporized flow 270 may flow into the chamber 240 through a nozzle 275”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have a channel that directly connects the aerosol generator and the detection chamber, and that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel, in order to minimize how much of the aerosol condenses and sticks to the channel.
Lang as modified by Rodriguez above does not teach a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller. However, it is known in the art as taught by Penny. Penny teaches a smoke detector testing system (Abstract “A smoke detector test apparatus”) with a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator (paragraph 0086 “the smoke detector 1 or the control panel automatically instigates a test of the detector”, and paragraph 0087 “The smoke detector test apparatus 4 then generates an aerosol from the aerosol generator 8. The first step is the activation of the valve unit 9 to move it to its open position”), wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller (paragraph 0089 “The operation of the valve unit 9 can be spaced in time from the operation of the aerosol generator 8”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller, in order to be able to store the test fluid in the reservoir for a very long period of time without it experiencing evaporation.
As to claim 2, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Lang teaches a controller (Figure 1, paragraph 0021 “microcontroller 122”) configured to: determine, based on readings from the detector element, how long the detector element is able to detect the generated aerosol in the detection chamber; and generate, based on how long the detector element is able to detect the generated aerosol in the detection chamber, an output indicating whether the smoke detector unit has passed a safety test (paragraph 0021 “processor 126 can execute the executable instructions stored in memory 124 to generate an aerosol density level, measure a rate at which the aerosol density level decreases after the aerosol density level has been generated, compare the measured rate at which the aerosol density level decreases with a baseline rate, and determine whether the fire sensing device 100 requires maintenance based on the comparison of the measured rate and the baseline rate.”, see Figure 5, where the lines 558-1 & 558-2 are fail/pass results based on sensor output over time, one of the thresholds being ‘does the signal drop off too fast’ as shown by line 558-4).
As to claim 3, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Penny teaches the aerosol generator is configured to activate up to 60 seconds after the flow controller (paragraph 0079 teaches “The valve metering chamber 41 remains filled after the valve has been closed until the aerosol generator 8 is operated.” and paragraph 0009 teaches “the test fluid can be stored in the reservoir for a very long period of time” which is an open-ended range which obviously includes the claimed 60 second period. As the applicant fails to teach the criticality of a 60 second delay, and as the time that the valve is opened is shown to be a result-effective variable (the horizontal axis of Figure 5 is increasing time and the sensor signal obviously depends on time), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have any desired delay including the claimed 60 seconds, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges (amounts, proportions, etc) involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
As to claim 4, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Lang teaches the reservoir comprises a receptacle arranged to hold the fluid (paragraph 0036 “a reservoir to contain a liquid”).
As to claim 5, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Lang teaches the housing encloses the detection chamber and the detector element (Figure 1, the large circles (the housing, also shown isometrically in Figure 2) surround the elements of the smoke detector, including the optical scatter chamber 304, light source 305 and photodiode 306, see paragraph 0034).
As to claim 7, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Lang teaches the housing comprises a first housing enclosing the detection chamber and the detector element (the large outer circle encloses elements 304, 305 & 306), and a second housing enclosing the aerosol generator (Figure 2 teaches a large housing (the large outer circle) containing a multitude of smaller cylindrical & rectangular receptacles (i.e. housings) that contain the various elements of the smoke detector, e.g. variable airflow generator 216);
While Lang as modified by Rodriguez and Penny above does not explicitly teach the claimed housings and openings between them, Lang Figure 1 teaches flow between the particle generator 102 and the detection chamber 104 and Lang Figures 2 & 3 teach a multitude of smaller cylindrical & rectangular receptacles (i.e. housings) that contain the various elements of the smoke detector, e.g. variable airflow generator 216. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have the claimed arrangement of housings and openings, in order to securely fasten the particle generator in the smoke detector at a desired position, and to allow for the generated aerosol to directly flow to the scattering chamber, in order to better control the aerosol conditions during a test.
As to claim 8, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Lang teaches a power supply, wherein the aerosol generator is electrically connected to the power supply (paragraph 0061 recites “At time 552-2, the variable airflow generator and the adjustable particle generator can be powered on (e.g., turned on)” indicating there must be a connected power supply).
As to claim 9, Lang teaches a system comprising:
a smoke detector unit (paragraph 0027 “The fire sensing device 200 can be, but is not limited to, a fire and/or smoke detector of a fire control system.”) comprising:
a detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0022 “optical scatter chamber 104”);
a detector element configured to detect a presence of an aerosol within the detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0022 “a transmitter light-emitting diode (LED) 105 and a receiver photodiode 106 to measure the aerosol density level”);
a housing (Figure 3, the large circles that indicate the body of the smoke detector, Figure 2 is an isometric view of this);
a reservoir for storing a fluid (Figure 3, paragraph 0036 “a reservoir to contain a liquid and/or wax used to create particles”);
an aerosol generator disposed within the housing (Figure 3, paragraph 0035 “The adjustable particle generator 302 of the fire sensing device 300 can generate particles which can be mixed into a controlled aerosol density level by the variable airflow generator 316.”);
a channel [connecting] disposed within the housing and connecting the aerosol generator to the detection chamber, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to generate the aerosol using the fluid such that the generated aerosol is released into the detection chamber via the channel (Figure 3, paragraph 0047 “The variable airflow generator 316 can control the airflow through the fire sensing device 300, including the optical scatter chamber 304. For example, the variable airflow generator 316 can move gases and/or aerosol from a first end of the fire sensing device 300 to a second end of the fire sensing device 300.” indicating there must exist a channel between elements 302, 316 and chamber 304 in order to guide the particles to the chamber); and
a flow controller (paragraph 0022 “the microcontroller 122 can send a command to the adjustable particle generator 102 to generate particles” and 0036 “The heat source 308 can heat the liquid and/or wax to a particular temperature and/or heat the liquid and/or wax for a particular period of time to generate an aerosol density level sufficient to trigger a fire response”); and
a controller (Figure 1, paragraph 0021 “microcontroller 122”) configured to:
determine, based on readings from the detector element, how long the detector element is able to detect the generated aerosol in the detection chamber; and generate, based on how long the detector element is able to detect the generated aerosol in the detection chamber, an output indicating whether the smoke detector unit has passed a safety test (paragraph 0021 “processor 126 can execute the executable instructions stored in memory 124 to generate an aerosol density level, measure a rate at which the aerosol density level decreases after the aerosol density level has been generated, compare the measured rate at which the aerosol density level decreases with a baseline rate, and determine whether the fire sensing device 100 requires maintenance based on the comparison of the measured rate and the baseline rate.”, see Figure 5, where the lines 558-1 & 558-2 are fail/pass results based on sensor output over time, one of the thresholds being ‘does the signal drop off too fast’ as shown by line 558-4).
While Lang teaches the particles are generated and moved to the scattering chamber (paragraph 0047), Lang does not explicitly teach a channel that directly connects the aerosol generator and the detection chamber, or that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel. However, it is known in the art as taught by Rodriguez. Rodriguez teaches a smoke detector (Abstract “a smoke detector having a controller configured for executing an operational test, the operational test including: activating an electronic vaporizer to produce vaporized particulate within the smoke detector”) including a channel (Figure 1, paragraph 0020 “nozzle 275”) that directly connects the aerosol generator (Figure 1, paragraph 0020 “The smoke detector 200 may include a liquid cartridge 250 and a vaporizer/atomizer 260”) and the detection chamber (Figure 1, paragraph 0019 “optical chamber 240”), and that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel (Figure 2, paragraph 0020 “The smoke detector 200 may include a liquid cartridge 250 and a vaporizer/atomizer 260 for vaporizing liquid within the cartridge 250. A resulting vaporized flow 270 may flow into the chamber 240 through a nozzle 275”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have a channel that directly connects the aerosol generator and the detection chamber, and that the generated aerosol is released directly into the detection chamber via the channel, in order to minimize how much of the aerosol condenses and sticks to the channel.
Lang as modified by Rodriguez above does not teach a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller. However, it is known in the art as taught by Penny. Penny teaches a smoke detector testing system (Abstract “A smoke detector test apparatus”) with a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator (paragraph 0086 “the smoke detector 1 or the control panel automatically instigates a test of the detector”, and paragraph 0087 “The smoke detector test apparatus 4 then generates an aerosol from the aerosol generator 8. The first step is the activation of the valve unit 9 to move it to its open position”), wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller (paragraph 0089 “The operation of the valve unit 9 can be spaced in time from the operation of the aerosol generator 8”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have a flow controller configured to control flow of the fluid from the reservoir to the aerosol generator, wherein the aerosol generator is configured to activate at a predetermined time after the flow controller, in order to be able to store the test fluid in the reservoir for a very long period of time without it experiencing evaporation.
As to claim 10, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Lang teaches a control panel connected to the smoke detector unit, wherein the control panel comprises the controller (Figure 4, paragraph 0050 “The monitoring device 401 can be a control panel, a fire detection control system, and/or a cloud computing device of a fire alarm system. The monitoring device 401 can be configured to send commands to and/or receive test results from a fire sensing device 400”).
As to claim 11, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Penny teaches the aerosol generator is configured to activate up to 60 seconds after the flow controller (paragraph 0079 teaches “The valve metering chamber 41 remains filled after the valve has been closed until the aerosol generator 8 is operated.” and paragraph 0009 teaches “the test fluid can be stored in the reservoir for a very long period of time” which is an open-ended range which obviously includes the claimed 60 second period. As the applicant fails to teach the criticality of a 60 second delay, and as the time that the valve is opened is shown to be a result-effective variable (the horizontal axis of Figure 5 is increasing time and the sensor signal obviously depends on time), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have any desired delay including the claimed 60 seconds, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges (amounts, proportions, etc) involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
As to claim 12, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Lang teaches the reservoir comprises a receptacle arranged to hold the fluid (paragraph 0036 “a reservoir to contain a liquid”).
As to claim 13, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Lang teaches the housing encloses the detection chamber and the detector element (Figure 1, the large circles (the housing, also shown isometrically in Figure 2) surround the elements of the smoke detector, including the optical scatter chamber 304, light source 305 and photodiode 306, see paragraph 0034).
As to claim 14, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Lang teaches the housing comprises a first housing enclosing the detection chamber and the detector element (the large outer circle encloses elements 304, 305 & 306), and a second housing enclosing the aerosol generator (Figure 2 teaches a large housing (the large outer circle) containing a multitude of smaller cylindrical & rectangular receptacles (i.e. housings) that contain the various elements of the smoke detector, e.g. variable airflow generator 216);
While Lang as modified by Rodriguez and Penny above does not explicitly teach the claimed housings and openings between them, Lang Figure 1 teaches flow between the particle generator 102 and the detection chamber 104 and Lang Figures 2 & 3 teach a multitude of smaller cylindrical & rectangular receptacles (i.e. housings) that contain the various elements of the smoke detector, e.g. variable airflow generator 216. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have the claimed arrangement of housings and openings, in order to securely fasten the particle generator in the smoke detector at a desired position, and to allow for the generated aerosol to directly flow to the scattering chamber, in order to better control the aerosol conditions during a test.
As to claim 15, LRP teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 9, in addition Lang teaches a power supply, wherein the aerosol generator is electrically connected to the power supply (paragraph 0061 recites “At time 552-2, the variable airflow generator and the adjustable particle generator can be powered on (e.g., turned on)” indicating there must be a connected power supply).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARREAS UNDERWOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0600-1400 EST.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 2705789. 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.
/J.C.U/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights