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 .
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.
The factual inquiries 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, 4-9, 18-19, and 22-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220252269 A1 (hereinafter “WEILERT”) in view of US 1200501 A (hereinafter “JERVEY”).
PNG
media_image1.png
676
1864
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, WEILERT discloses a fire pit, comprising: an inner wall (110); a fuel grate positioned within the inner wall; a burn chamber defined by the inner wall and the fuel grate (100); an outer wall (120) surrounding and spaced apart from the inner wall.
WEILERT does not disclose a radiant opening extending through the outer wall and exposing a portion of the inner wall proximate the radiant opening such that the radiant opening facilitates lateral distribution of radiant heat through the radiant opening from the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening to an area outside the fire pit.
PNG
media_image2.png
953
1287
media_image2.png
Greyscale
JERVEY teaches a fire pit, comprising: a radiant opening (collectively openings 34) extending through the outer wall (7) and exposing a portion of the inner wall (8; see also Pg. 1, Lns. 46-51: “This wall portion 8 is convoluted to produce a plurality of vertically extending hollow radial fins 12, which surround a central cylindrical chamber 10, the interiors 11 of the fins communicating with the chamber.”) proximate the radiant opening such that the radiant opening facilitates lateral distribution of radiant heat through the radiant opening from the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening to an area outside the fire pit (see Pg. 2, Lns. 23-51: “If desired the outer wall portion 7 may be provided with a plurality of perforations or apertures 34 through which the heated air will be gradually radiated, and this wall may further be suitably ornamented or decorated so that the general appearance of the stove will be enhanced. From the foregoing it will be seen that the present invention provides a stove in which by reason of the convolutions of the wall portion, there is presented a greatly increased radiating surface and a greatly increased heating surface, and that the heat from the fire is brought into contact with the heating surface by reason of the fact that all products of combustion are deflected into the fins by the drum 29. The fact that air is free to circulate between the fins causes rapid radiation of heat from the fins and thus prevents burning of the wall portions. Obviously when the stove is in operation, cold air will enter through the openings 14 in the bottom member 6, travel upwardly between the fins 12 where it is raised to a relatively high temperature, and pass outwardly through the openings in the top member 5 and perforations 34 in the wall 7.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify WEILERT to further comprise a radiant opening extending through the outer wall and exposing a portion of the inner wall proximate the radiant opening such that the radiant opening facilitates lateral distribution of radiant heat through the radiant opening from the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening to an area outside the fire pit as taught and/or suggested by JERVEY, since such a modification would enhance the heating effect of said fire pit to the surrounding area (see again JERVEY, Pg. 2, Lns. 23-51: “If desired the outer wall portion 7 may be provided with a plurality of perforations or apertures 34 through which the heated air will be gradually radiated, and this wall may further be suitably ornamented or decorated so that the general appearance of the stove will be enhanced. From the foregoing it will be seen that the present invention provides a stove in which by reason of the convolutions of the wall portion, there is presented a greatly increased radiating surface and a greatly increased heating surface, and that the heat from the fire is brought into contact with the heating surface by reason of the fact that all products of combustion are deflected into the fins by the drum 29. The fact that air is free to circulate between the fins causes rapid radiation of heat from the fins and thus prevents burning of the wall portions. Obviously when the stove is in operation, cold air will enter through the openings 14 in the bottom member 6, travel upwardly between the fins 12 where it is raised to a relatively high temperature, and pass outwardly through the openings in the top member 5 and perforations 34 in the wall 7.”).
Regarding Claim 4, JERVEY further teaches wherein the portion of the inner wall (8) exposed by the radiant opening includes surface undulations (12) that increase a surface area of the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening (collectively openings 34).
Regarding Claims 5, WEILERT discloses wherein the fuel grate (100) is positioned axially between axially opposing ends of the outer wall (120).
WEILERT does not disclose wherein the fuel grate (100) is positioned axially between axially opposing ends of the radiant opening.
JERVEY teaches wherein the radiant opening (collectively openings 34) extends axially between the upper and lower end of outer wall (7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify WEILERT wherein the fuel grate is positioned axially between axially opposing ends of the radiant opening as taught and/or suggested by JERVEY, since such a modification would maximize the radiant opening in order to maximize the radiant heating effect thus resulting in said fuel grate being positioned axially between axially opposing ends of the radiant opening. In addition, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein the fuel grate is positioned axially between axially opposing ends of the radiant opening, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.). See also Rearrangement of Parts: MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C).
Regarding Claim 6, JERVEY further teaches wherein the fuel grate (19) is positioned axially below the radiant opening (collectively openings 34).
Regarding Claim 7, WEILERT in view of JERVEY further discloses wherein the inner wall (WEILERT, 110) and the outer wall (WEILERT, 120) are cylindrical and coaxially aligned such that the inner wall and the outer wall extend parallel to each other; wherein the fire pit further comprises an air passage defined between the inner wall and the outer wall (WEILERT, see the airflow arrows in Figure 5) above the radiant opening (as taught by JERVEY, collectively openings 34; modifying WEILERT to incorporate the radiant opening taught by JERVEY would result in WEILERT having an air passage defined between the inner wall and the outer wall above the radiant opening – i.e., WEILERT’s air passage 179 proximate inner ventilation holes 124); and wherein the fire pit further comprises an air chamber (WEILERT, see at least 176) defined by the outer wall and the fuel grate, the air chamber being positioned at least partially below the radiant opening (as taught by JERVEY, collectively openings 34; modifying WEILERT to incorporate the radiant opening taught by JERVEY would result in WEILERT’s air chamber being positioned at least partially below the radiant opening).
Regarding Claim 8, WEILERT in view of JERVEY further discloses wherein an axial height of the air passage (as discussed above with regard to Claim 7, WEILERT’s air passage 179 proximate inner ventilation holes 124) is less than or equal to an axial height of the radiant opening (as taught by JERVEY, collectively openings 34 which teach a radiant opening extending substantially the axial length of the outer wall).
Regarding Claim 9, WEILERT in view of JERVEY further discloses wherein the fire pit further includes a plurality of inlet holes (WEILERT, 122) extending through the outer wall (WEILERT, 120) and positioned below the radiant opening (as taught by JERVEY, collectively openings 34; modifying WEILERT to incorporate the radiant opening taught by JERVEY would result in WEILERT’s outer wall comprising a radiant opening defined collectively by a plurality of openings additional to WEILERT’s plurality of inlet holes) and the fuel grate (WEILERT, 100); wherein the plurality of inlet holes (WEILERT, 122) are equally distributed circumferentially about the outer wall (WEILERT, 120); and wherein the plurality of inlet holes (WEILERT, 122) are in fluid communication with the air chamber (WEILERT, see at least 176).
Regarding Claim 18, WEILERT discloses a fire pit, comprising: an inner wall (110) having an interior surface defining a burn chamber, the inner wall having a plurality of inner ventilation holes (124); a first outer wall portion (i.e., that part of outer wall 120 immediately proximate the plurality of inner ventilation holes 124) extending about, and radially spaced apart from, the inner wall to form a first air passage therebetween (see air gap 179 immediately proximate the plurality of inner ventilation holes 124), a fuel grate (100) cooperating with the inner wall to further define the burn chamber, the fuel grate having a plurality of ventilation holes (330) formed therein; and a second outer wall portion axially spaced apart from the first outer wall portion and having a plurality of outer ventilation holes (122), the outer ventilation holes being in fluid communication with the plurality of ventilation holes (330) in the fuel grate via a second air passage (see 176, 178), the second air passage being adapted to draw a second ambient air stream through the plurality of outer ventilation holes (122).
WEILERT does not disclose the first air passage being adapted to draw a first ambient air stream through an air intake; and a second outer wall portion axially spaced apart from the first outer wall portion by the air intake.
JERVEY teaches a fire pit comprising: the first air passage (i.e., the air passage(s) defined by outer wall 7 and inner wall 8) being adapted to draw a first ambient air stream through an air intake (collectively openings 34); and a second outer wall portion axially spaced apart from the first outer wall portion by the air intake (i.e., that portion of outer wall 7 below the air intake collectively defined by openings 34).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify WEILERT wherein the first air passage is adapted to draw a first ambient air stream through an air intake; and a second outer wall portion axially spaced apart from the first outer wall portion by the air intake as taught and/or suggested by JERVEY, since such a modification would enhance the heating effect of said fire pit to the surrounding area (see again JERVEY, Pg. 2, Lns. 23-51: “If desired the outer wall portion 7 may be provided with a plurality of perforations or apertures 34 through which the heated air will be gradually radiated, and this wall may further be suitably ornamented or decorated so that the general appearance of the stove will be enhanced. From the foregoing it will be seen that the present invention provides a stove in which by reason of the convolutions of the wall portion, there is presented a greatly increased radiating surface and a greatly increased heating surface, and that the heat from the fire is brought into contact with the heating surface by reason of the fact that all products of combustion are deflected into the fins by the drum 29. The fact that air is free to circulate between the fins causes rapid radiation of heat from the fins and thus prevents burning of the wall portions. Obviously when the stove is in operation, cold air will enter through the openings 14 in the bottom member 6, travel upwardly between the fins 12 where it is raised to a relatively high temperature, and pass outwardly through the openings in the top member 5 and perforations 34 in the wall 7.”).
Regarding Claim 19, WEILERT further discloses wherein the air intake comprises a radiant opening (collectively openings 34) having first and second ends spaced apart and exposing a portion of an exterior surface of the inner wall (8), the radiant opening sized to emit radiant heat from the inner wall (8) of the fire pit.
Regarding Claim 22, WEILERT further discloses wherein the fuel grate (100) is positioned axially between the first outer wall portion (i.e., a portion of outer wall 120 above fuel grate 100) and the second outer wall portion (i.e., a portion of outer wall 120 below fuel grate 100).
Regarding Claims 23-25 and 27-28, WEILERT in view of JERVEY discloses the claimed limitations as is evident from the discussion of the references above with regard to Claims 1, 4-9, 18-19, and 22. In the interest of brevity, the same or equivalent claim limitations and the obviousness rationale for combining the references, as already discussed above, will not be repeated here.
Regarding Claim 26, WEILERT in view of JERVEY does not explicitly disclose wherein the opening of the first air intake has an area within a range of about four square inches to 2500 square inches.
Nonetheless, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein the opening of the first air intake has an area within a range of about four square inches to 2500 square inches, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (i.e., in the present case, JARVEY teaches the opening of the first air intake defined collectively by openings 34 comprising a given area), discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20210018181 A1 (hereinafter “GIUNTOLI”).
Regarding Claim 2, WEILERT in view of JERVEY does not disclose further comprising: a screen positioned within the radiant opening and attached to the outer wall, the screen having a plurality of openings each of which is smaller in size than the radiant opening.
GIUNTOLI teaches a fire pit comprising: a screen (see para. [0026]: “In a preferred embodiment, the cut-outs 17 are covered with mesh screen.”) positioned within the radiant opening and attached to the outer wall (12), the screen having a plurality of openings each of which is smaller in size than the radiant opening (17).
PNG
media_image3.png
867
1414
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY to further comprise: a screen positioned within the radiant opening and attached to the outer wall, the screen having a plurality of openings each of which is smaller in size than the radiant opening as taught and/or suggested by GIUNTOLI, since such a modification would protect said air passage from the intrusion of foreign objects which could impede or block the airflow therewithin thus negatively impacting the operation of said fire pit; in addition, such a modification would prevent a user’s fingers touching the hotter inner wall thus helping to avoid a user being burned.
Claims 3 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY as applied to claims 1 and 19 above respectively, and further in view of IT 1057093 B (hereinafter “IT’093”).
Regarding Claim 3, WEILERT in view of JERVEY does not disclose wherein an exterior surface of the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening includes a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of the radiant heat from the inner wall to the area outside the fire pit.
PNG
media_image4.png
814
827
media_image4.png
Greyscale
IT’093 teaches a space heater (1) wherein an exterior surface of the portion of the inner wall (see Fig. 4; 7a, 7b) exposed by the radiant opening (19) includes a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of the radiant heat (23) from the inner wall (see Fig. 4; 7a, 7b) to the area outside the space heater (see the provided English translation: “The power fraction irradiated by the heating body 7 can be advantageously improved by applying a suitable coating to the emitting surface which increases its emission coefficient by irradiation.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein an exterior surface of the portion of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening includes a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of the radiant heat from the inner wall to the area outside the fire pit as taught and/or suggested by IT’093, since such a modification would increase the radiant heat energy provided to the area surround said fire pit thus providing a user with a greater amount of warmth.
Regarding Claim 20, WEILERT in view of JERVEY does not disclose wherein the portion of the exterior surface of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening comprises a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of radiant heat from the inner wall.
IT’093 teaches a space heater (1) wherein the portion of the exterior surface of the inner wall (see Fig. 4; 7a, 7b) exposed by the radiant opening (19) comprises a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of radiant heat from the inner wall (see the provided English translation: “The power fraction irradiated by the heating body 7 can be advantageously improved by applying a suitable coating to the emitting surface which increases its emission coefficient by irradiation.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein the portion of the exterior surface of the inner wall exposed by the radiant opening comprises a high emissivity coating adapted to promote emission of radiant heat from the inner wall as taught and/or suggested by IT’093, since such a modification would increase the radiant heat energy provided to the area surround said fire pit thus providing a user with a greater amount of warmth.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of US 20220090791 A1 (hereinafter “HWANG”).
Regarding Claim 21, WEILERT in view of JERVEY does not disclose wherein the first air passage and the second air passage are isolated from each other.
PNG
media_image5.png
864
882
media_image5.png
Greyscale
HWANG teaches a fire pit wherein the first air passage (Fig. 4, air passage 218; see also airflow arrow A1) and the second air passage (see the air passage through which airflow arrow A flows) are isolated from each other (see para. [0066]: “As shown in FIG. 4, the lower surface 217 is formed inwards to a predetermined area so as to prevent the outdoor air (A) introduced into the upper portion of the border vertical wall 155a from moving into the air moving space 218.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein the first air passage and the second air passage are isolated from each other as taught and/or suggested by HWANG, since both WEILERT and HWANG teach air passage arrangements for supplying primary and secondary air to a fire pit, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one air passage arrangement for the other to achieve the predictable result of supplying sufficient primary and secondary air to said fire pit. In addition, providing separate air inlets/supply for the primary and secondary air would provide a means to regulate and/or optimize each separately. Further yet, providing separate air inlets/supply for the primary and secondary air would ensure that blockage or restriction of one supply does not impede the other thus allowing at least partial operability of said fire pit even during periods of blockage or restriction of the primary or secondary air supply.
Claims 10-11, 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093.
Regarding Claims 10, 13-15 and 17, WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093 discloses the claimed limitations as is evident from the discussion of the references above with regard to Claims 1, 3-9, 18-19, and 22. In the interest of brevity, the same or equivalent claim limitations and the obviousness rationale for combining the references, as already discussed above, will not be repeated here.
Regarding Claim 11, WEILERT further discloses a bracing tray (175) positioned within the inner wall (110), below the fuel grate (100), and below the radiant opening (as taught by JERVEY, collectively openings 34).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of GIUNTOLI.
Regarding Claim 12, WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093 does not disclose a screen positioned within the radiant opening and attached to the first and second edges of the outer wall, the screen comprising a plurality of openings through which the radiant energy emitted from the inner wall is permitted to pass.
GIUNTOLI teaches a fire pit comprising: a screen (see para. [0026]: “In a preferred embodiment, the cut-outs 17 are covered with mesh screen.”) positioned within the radiant opening (17) and attached to the first and second edges of the outer wall (12), the screen comprising a plurality of openings through which the radiant energy emitted from the inner wall is permitted to pass.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY to further comprise: a screen positioned within the radiant opening and attached to the first and second edges of the outer wall, the screen comprising a plurality of openings through which the radiant energy emitted from the inner wall is permitted to pass as taught and/or suggested by GIUNTOLI, since such a modification would protect said air passage from the intrusion of foreign objects which could impede or block the airflow therewithin thus negatively impacting the operation of said fire pit; in addition, such a modification would prevent a user’s fingers touching the hotter inner wall thus helping to avoid a user being burned.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093 as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of HWANG.
Regarding Claim 16, WEILERT in view of JERVEY and IT’093 does not disclose wherein the plurality of inlet holes and the air chamber are isolated from the air passage and the radiant opening.
HWANG teaches a fire pit wherein a plurality of inlet holes and the air chamber (see Fig. 4; see the plurality of inlet holes and the air chamber through which airflow indicated by arrow A flows) are isolated from the air passage (see Fig. 4, air passage 218; see also airflow arrow A1; see also para. [0062]: “As shown in FIG. 4, the first air intake holes 211a induces the first air (A1) from the outside into the air moving space 218 formed between the outer panel 210 and the inner panel 220.”) and the radiant opening (211a).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify WEILERT in view of JERVEY wherein the plurality of inlet holes and the air chamber are isolated from the air passage and the radiant opening as taught and/or suggested by HWANG, since both WEILERT and HWANG teach air passage arrangements for supplying primary and secondary air to a fire pit, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one air passage arrangement for the other to achieve the predictable result of supplying sufficient primary and secondary air to said fire pit. In addition, providing separate air inlets/supply for the primary and secondary air would provide a means to regulate and/or optimize each separately. Further yet, providing separate air inlets/supply for the primary and secondary air would ensure that blockage or restriction of one supply does not impede the other thus allowing at least partial operability of said fire pit even during periods of blockage or restriction of the primary or secondary air supply.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE A PEREIRO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights