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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/2/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 13-15, 19 are canceled.
Pending claims 4, 10-12, 16-18, 20-32 are addressed below.
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 22, 30, 31 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 31 line 10 recites the limitation "the firehose". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 22 and 30 recite “the pressurized fluid source includes a firehose…”. As dependent of respective claims 12 and 28, which already recited “at least one fluid input port to couple to a pressurized fluid source,…coupling a second end of the elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit to a firehose”, “a firehose” in claims 22 and 30 appear to be double inclusion of the same element. It is unclear if claims 22 and 30 are intended to define additional firehose or the same structure in claims 12 and 28.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 10-12, 16-18, 20, 21, 23-29 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The most relevant prior arts include Tabor (US 20230311136), Wells (US 5653392), Hisch (US 20180037198), and Siemann (US 1539331), and Shevers (US D321574), Bainton (US 9974990). Regarding independent claim 12, the combination of the prior arts teaches various features of the claimed invention, as presented in the office action mailed 8/21/2025 but fail to teach or suggest, in combination with the existing limitations, “removably attaching a first end of a threaded tubular coupling with the threads of the pipe of the at least one fluid input port; removably threading a first end of an elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit with a second end of the threaded tubular coupling; removably coupling a second end of the elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit to a firehose, wherein the extension pipe is of sufficient length to protect the firehose from the heat of an electric vehicle ("EV") fire”.
Claims 4, 10-11, 16-18, 20-27, depending from claim 12, are therefore also allowed.
Regarding independent claim 28, the combination of the prior arts teaches various features of the claimed invention, as presented in the office action mailed 8/21/2025 but fail to teach or suggest, in combination with the existing limitations, “removably coupling a first end of an elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit with the coupling associated with the at least one fluid input port; removably coupling a second end of the elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit to a firehose, wherein the elongate crush-resistant pipe or conduit is of sufficient length to protect the firehose from the heat of an electric vehicle ("EV") fire”.
Claims 29 depending from claim 28, are therefore also allowed.
Claim 32 is 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.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUONGMINH NGUYEN PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0158. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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.
/TUONGMINH N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights