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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 10/30/2025 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that the amended method of claim 15 cannot be performed using a materially different product. This is not found persuasive because the sprinklers of Group I don’t have to be in-ground sprinklers, and can be sprinklers above ground. A rejoinder would only be permissible with an allowance of a generic claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-19 are pending. Claims 1-14 are examined. Claims 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 4, the recitation “in response to a command received over the wired connection” (ll. 2-3) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear “a command received over the wired connection” means that the transmitter has a wired connection to the controller since claim 2 only has power going to the transmitter through a wired connection. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unascertainable.
Regarding Claim 9, the recitation “based on a strength of the received wireless broadcast” (ll. 2-3) renders the claim indefinite because “a strength” is a relative term relating to the magnitude of the wireless signal, and it is unclear what magnitude or “strength” of the wireless signal is claimed such that no other patents infringe on the claim. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unascertainable. See MPEP 2173.05(b).
Regarding Claim 12, the recitation “the memories each include a group identification code that uniquely identifies the group” (l. 2) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the memories are part of the memory in the computing device or if the memories are the same as “memory” of each sprinkler as recited in claim 11. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unascertainable.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinefelter 10654062 in view of Heaney 2023/0148498.
Regarding Claim 1, Klinefelter teaches a sprinkler 100 comprising (Figs. 1 & 4):
a base 106 having an interior cavity (seen in Fig.1);
a fluid flow path 114 extending through the interior cavity (seen in Fig. 1);
a valve 160 including a valve body 160 and a valve element (inherent that valve 160 has a valve element that allows the valve to be moved to an open position, closed position, or intermediary position, see Col. 11, ll. 20-35), the valve element is configured to move relative to the valve body 160 to various positions (open position, closed position, or intermediary position) to control a water flow through the fluid flow path 114 (adjust the flow rate of the water through the fluid flow path) (Col. 11, ll. 20-59; Fig. 1);
a nozzle head 102 supported by the base 106 and comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C (Figs. 1 & 3) configured to discharge water received through the fluid flow path 112 (Col. 6, l. 16-47; Figs. 1 & 3);
a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126 (Col. 6, l. 48-56; Fig. 1).
Klinefelter does not teach memory containing a sprinkler identification code that uniquely identifies the sprinkler; and a transmitter contained in the interior cavity and configured to wirelessly broadcast the sprinkler identification code.
Heaney teaches a similar sprinkler system 10 (Fig. 1) and
memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 ([0052, 0054; 0116]; Figs. 1 & 24-25)
and
a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416, seen in Figs. 24-25) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414 ([0040-41; 0116]; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the sprinkler 100 of Klinefelter to include memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416, seen in Figs. 24-25) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414, as taught by Heaney, in order to automatically relate an associated pattern saved in memory, to a known location and a known base (specific sprinkler), thereby alleviating the burden of manually associating pre-programmed patters with the identified bases (identified sprinklers) (Heaney [0116], ll. 12-18).
Regarding Claim 5 Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klinefelter further teaches
wired or wireless communication links are formed in accordance with standard communication protocols (Col. 16, ll. 10-14).
Klinefelter in view of Heaney, as discussed so far, does not teach the transmitter comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter and is configured to wirelessly broadcast the identification code in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol.
Heaney further teaches
the transmitter 416 comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter (Bluetooth Lowe Energy (BLE) interface) and is configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the identification code 414 in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol (inherent) ([0040-41; 0116]; Figs. 1 & 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the transmitter 416 of Klinefelter in view of Heaney with Heaney’s transmitter 416 that comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter (Bluetooth Lowe Energy (BLE) interface) and is configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the identification code 414 in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol (inherent), for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 6, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klinefelter further teaches
a sprinkler controller 164 contained within the interior cavity (seen in Fig.1) and comprising a processor 276 (one or more processors), the controller 164 configured to generate control signals (control signals to motor 162) that adjust the position of the valve element (position of the valve 160) in response to execution of an irrigation program stored in the memory 166 using the processor 276 (Col. 11, ll. 36-39 and Col. 12, ll. 20-48).
Regarding Claim 7, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klinefelter further teaches
control signals (control signals) are received over a wired connection from a remote irrigation controller (remote system, such as a system controller 274, controller 274 seen in Fig. 10) (Col. 13, ll. 29-39); and
the position of the valve element is adjusted (setting the positions of the one or more valves 160) in response to the control signals (control signals) (Col. 13, ll. 29-39).
Regarding Claim 8, Klinefelter teaches a sprinkler system 100 comprising (Figs. 1, 4, and 10-11):
a group of sprinklers (plurality of the rotary sprinklers 100, seen in Fig. 10), each sprinkler 100 comprising:
a base 106 having an interior cavity (seen in Fig.1);
a fluid flow path 114 extending through the interior cavity (seen in Fig. 1);
a valve 160 including a valve body 160 and a valve element (inherent that valve 160 has a valve element that allows the valve to be moved to an open position, closed position, or intermediary position, see Col. 11, ll. 20-35), the valve element is configured to move relative to the valve body 160 to various positions (open position, closed position, or intermediary position) to control a water flow through the fluid flow path 114 (adjust the flow rate of the water through the fluid flow path) (Col. 11, ll. 20-59; Fig. 1);
a nozzle head 102 supported by the base 106 and comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C (Figs. 1 & 3) configured to discharge water received through the fluid flow path 112 (Col. 6, l. 16-47; Figs. 1 & 3);
a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126 (Col. 6, l. 48-56; Fig. 1);
an irrigation controller 164 having a wired connection (powered through wired connection) to the group 100 (group of sprinklers 100) through which electrical power is supplied to the sprinklers 100 (Col. 17, ll. 18-28); and
a computing device 308 (seen in Fig. 12) including a display (inherent – mobile phone or laptop has a display, seen in Fig. 12), the computing device configured 308 to: receive a wireless communication from a selected sprinkler 100 (Col. 19, ll. 16-33).
Klinefelter does not teach memory containing a sprinkler identification code that is unique to the sprinkler; and a transmitter contained in the interior cavity; and a computing device including a display, the computing device configured to: receive a wireless broadcast of the sprinkler identification code of a nearby one of the sprinklers; identify the nearby sprinkler based on the received sprinkler identification code; and display an identification of the nearby sprinkler on the display.
Heaney teaches
memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 ([0052, 0054; 0116]; Figs. 1 & 24-25)
and
a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416, seen in Figs. 24-25) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414 ([0040-41; 0116]; Fig. 1);
and a computing device 20 (smart device 20 – phone/tablet device, seen in Fig. 1) including a display (GUI), the computing device 20 configured to ([0040-41]; Fig. 1):
receive a wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416) of the sprinkler identification code 414 of a nearby sprinkler 10; identify the sprinkler 10 based on the received sprinkler identification code 414;
and display (inherent that the smart device 20 having a GUI displays the unique identifier of sprinkler 10) an identification (unique identifier) of the sprinkler 10 on the display (GUI) ([0040-41, 0116, 0119]; Figs. 1 & 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide each sprinkler 100 of Klinefelter to include memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416, seen in Figs. 24-25) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414, and modify computing device 308 of Klinefelter to be configured to receive a wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416) of the sprinkler identification code 414 of each sprinkler 100; identify each sprinkler 100 based on the received sprinkler identification code 414; and display an identification (unique identifier) of each sprinkler 100 on the display (GUI), as taught by Heaney, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Klinefelter in view of Heaney, as discussed so far, does not teach the computing device configured to: receive a wireless broadcast of the sprinkler identification code of a nearby one of the sprinklers; identify the nearby sprinkler based on the received sprinkler identification code; and display an identification of the nearby sprinkler on the display.
However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney, teaches a sprinkler system 100 comprising a group of sprinklers 100, each sprinkler 100 comprising a base 106, valve 160, nozzle head 102 comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C, a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126, an irrigation controller 164 having a wired connection (powered through wired connection) to the group 100 (group of sprinklers 100) through which electrical power is supplied to the sprinklers 100, and Heaney’s memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414. Klinefelter in view of Heaney’s sprinkler system 100 further comprises computing device 308 that includes a display (GUI), and is configured to receive a wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416) of the sprinkler identification code 414 of a sprinkler 10; identify the sprinkler 10 based on the received sprinkler identification code 414; and display (inherent that the smart device 20 having a GUI displays the unique identifier of sprinkler 10) an identification (unique identifier) of the sprinkler 10 on the display (GUI). Therefore, Klinefelter in view of Heaney’s computing device 308 is capable of receiving a wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416) of Heaney’s sprinkler identification code 414 of a nearby one (sprinkler 100) of the sprinklers 100; identify the nearby sprinkler (one sprinkler 100) based on Heaney’s received sprinkler identification code 414; and display Heaney’s identification (unique identifier) of the nearby sprinkler (one sprinkler 100) on Klinefelter’s display, because it has been held that “if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered an obvious extension of prior art teachings”. See MPEP 2114 (II).
Regarding Claim 9, as best understood, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8, and Klinefelter further teaches
the computing device 308 (seen in Fig. 12) receives a wireless communication with a selected sprinkler 100 (Col. 19, ll. 16-33).
Klinefelter in view of Heaney, as discussed so far, does not teach the computing device is configured to identify the nearby sprinkler based on a strength of the received wireless broadcast.
However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches Heaney further teaches a sprinkler system 100 comprising a group of sprinklers 100, each sprinkler 100 comprising a base 106, valve 160, nozzle head 102 comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C, a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126, an irrigation controller 164 having a wired connection (powered through wired connection) to the group 100 (group of sprinklers 100) through which electrical power is supplied to the sprinklers 100, and Heaney’s memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414. Klinefelter in view of Heaney’s sprinkler system 100 further comprises computing device 308 that receives a wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416) of Heaney’s sprinkler identification code 414 of each of the group of sprinklers 100,identifies each sprinkler 100 based on Heaney’s received sprinkler identification code 414; and display Heaney’s identification (unique identifier) of each sprinkler 100. Therefore, Klinefelter in view of Heaney’s computing device 308 is capable of identifying the nearby sprinkler (one sprinkler 100 from the group of sprinklers 100) based on a strength of the received wireless broadcast (wirelessly via transmitter 416), because it has been held that “if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered an obvious extension of prior art teachings”. See MPEP 2114 (II).
Regarding Claim 10, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8, and Klinefelter further teaches
wired or wireless communication links are formed in accordance with standard communication protocols (Col. 16, ll. 10-14).
Klinefelter in view of Heaney, as discussed so far, does not teach each transmitter comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter and is configured to wirelessly broadcast the identification code in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol.
Heaney further teaches
transmitter 416 comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter (Bluetooth Lowe Energy (BLE) interface) and is configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the identification code 414 in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol (inherent) ([0040-41; 0116]; Figs. 1 & 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify each transmitter 416 of each sprinkler 100 of Klinefelter in view of Heaney with Heaney’s transmitter 416 that comprises a Bluetooth® transmitter (Bluetooth Lowe Energy (BLE) interface) and is configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the identification code 414 in accordance with a Bluetooth® communication protocol (inherent), for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinefelter in view of Heaney, and further in view of Nelson 2012/0018532.
Regarding Claim 2, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klinefelter further teaches
the valve 160 is configured to receive electrical power through a wired connection (wired) (Col. 17, ll. 1-17).
Klinefelter in view of Heaney does not teach transmitter is configured to receive electrical power through a wired connection.
Nelson teaches
transmitter 146 is configured to receive electrical power (provide electrical power … from battery 140) through a wired connection (wired connection are 2 lines extending from Bat1 140, seen as dotted lines, in Fig. 3) ([0052-53]; Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the transmitter 416 of Klinefelter in view of Heaney to receive electrical power (from battery 140) through a wired connection, as taught by Nelson, in order to provide power to the sprinkler electronics package (Nelson [0053]).
Regarding Claim 3 , Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 2. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson, as discussed so far, does not teach the transmitter is configured to broadcast the sprinkler identification code in response to receiving power over the wired connection.
However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson teaches a sprinkler system 100 comprising a group of sprinklers 100, each sprinkler 100 comprising a base 106, valve 160, nozzle head 102 comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C, a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126, an irrigation controller 164 having a wired connection (powered through wired connection) to the group 100 (group of sprinklers 100) through which electrical power is supplied to the sprinklers 100, Heaney’s memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414. The transmitter 416 receives electrical power (provide electrical power … from battery 140) through a wired connection, as taught by Nelson. Therefore, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson’s transmitter 416 broadcasts (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414 in response to receiving power (provide electrical power … from battery 140) over the wired connection, as claimed.
Regarding Claim 4, as best understood, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 2. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson, as discussed so far, does not teach the transmitter is configured to broadcast the sprinkler identification code in response to a command received over the wired connection.
However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson teaches a sprinkler system 100 comprising a group of sprinklers 100, each sprinkler 100 comprising a base 106, valve 160, nozzle head 102 comprising at least one nozzle 104A-C, a motorized rotator 128 configured to rotate the nozzle head 102 about an axis 126, an irrigation controller 164 having a wired connection (powered through wired connection) to the group 100 (group of sprinklers 100) through which electrical power is supplied to the sprinklers 100, Heaney’s memory 32 containing (identifier … saved in memory) a sprinkler identification code 414 that uniquely identifies (unique identifier) the sprinkler 10 and a transmitter 416 contained in the interior cavity (sprinkler housing 410 incorporates transmitter 416) and configured to wirelessly broadcast (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414. The transmitter 416 receives command that delivers electrical power (provide electrical power … from battery 140) through a wired connection, as taught by Nelson. Therefore, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Nelson’s transmitter 416 broadcasts (wirelessly) the sprinkler identification code 414 in response to a command received (command to provide electrical power) over the wired connection, as claimed.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinefelter in view of Heaney, and further in view of Ramsey 2024/0176467.
Regarding Claim 11, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney, does not teach the computing device is configured to display a list of the sprinklers on the display.
Ramsey teaches
the computing device 118, 120a-b ([0097-98; Fig. 1A) is configured to display (on user interface 1000, seen in annotated Fig. 10A, below) a list of the sprinklers [a] on the display 1000 ([0097-98; 0197-205]; Figs. 1A and annotated Fig. 10A, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
549
821
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: Annotated Fig. 10A of Ramsey (U.S. 2024/0176467)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the computing device 308 of Klinefelter in view of Heaney and include computing device 118, 120a-b’s display 1000 that displays a list of the sprinklers [a] on the display 1000, as taught by Ramsey, in order to allow “a user to select one or more irrigation stations, control the selected irrigation stations, and/or to sort the irrigation stations based on their operational parameters (Ramsey [0201]).
Regarding Claim 12, as best understood, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey, as discussed so far, does not teach the memories each include a group identification code that uniquely identifies the group; and the computing device is configured to display the list of the sprinklers on the display based on the group identification codes.
Ramsey further teaches
the memories 204 each include (inherently) a group identification code (icon 735 with number zero (0) indicate the current station icon group) that uniquely identifies the group ([0127]. Ramsey teaches that the computing device has memory 204 that stores all the data. Therefore, inherently, memory will include the group identification code, seen in Fig. 7M, which is displayed and identifies each group of sprinklers selected);
and the computing device 118, 120a-b ([0097-98; Fig. 1A) is configured to display (on user interface 730) the list of the sprinklers 732 on the display based on the group identification codes (icon 735 with number zero (0) indicate the current station icon group) ([0172]; Figs. 7M-7L).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey and have the memories 204 each include (inherently) a group identification code (icon 735 with number zero (0) indicate the current station icon group) that uniquely identifies the group, and have the computing device 118, 120a-b ([0097-98; Fig. 1A) display (on user interface 730) the list of the sprinklers 732 on the display based on the group identification codes (icon 735 with number zero (0) indicate the current station icon group), as taught by Ramsey, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding Claim 13, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey, as discussed so far, does not teach the list includes the identification.
Ramsey further teaches
the list [a] includes the identification (identifications of each station seen in annotated Fig. 10A, below)
PNG
media_image1.png
549
821
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: Annotated Fig. 10A of Ramsey (U.S. 2024/0176467)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the list of the sprinklers [a] of Klinefelter in view of Heaney and Ramsey to include the identification (identifications of each station seen in Fig. 10A), as taught by Ramsey, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding Claim 14, Klinefelter in view of Heaney teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8. However, Klinefelter in view of Heaney, as discussed so far, does not teach the computing device is configured to associate the nearby sprinkler to one of a plurality of sub-groups of the sprinklers in response to a user input.
Ramsey teaches
the computing device 118, 120a-b ([0097-98; Fig. 1A) is configured to associate the nearby sprinkler 732 to one of a plurality of sub-groups (current station icon group, and second station icon groups) of the sprinklers 732 in response to a user input (the user is using … to select) ([0172]; Figs. 7M-7L).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the computing device 308 of Klinefelter in view of Heaney and include computing device 118, 120a-b’s that is configured to associate the nearby sprinkler 732 to one of a plurality of sub-groups (current station icon group, and second station icon groups) of the sprinklers 732 in response to a user input (the user is using … to select) as taught by Ramsey, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 11 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACEK LISOWSKI whose telephone number is (408) 918-7635. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 10 am - 6 pm PST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. 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.
/JACEK LISOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741