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, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11092342 B2 (hereinafter “HARRINGTON”) in view of US 20210199301 A1 (hereinafter “POGGI”).
PNG
media_image1.png
749
1498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, HARRINGTON discloses a fire pit (see 100/500), the fire pit comprising: a wall section that at least partially defines a combustion chamber (102), the wall section comprising: an outer wall (see 118/510) defining an exterior boundary of an airflow vent (514) within the wall section; an inner wall (104) defining an interior boundary of the airflow vent; one or more intakes (552/554) configured to intake ambient air to the airflow vent; and one or more outputs (122) in the inner wall configured to output the ambient air from the airflow vent to the combustion chamber; an end wall (530) defining a closed end portion of the combustion chamber.
HARRINGTON does not disclose a fire pit configured to be convertible between a solid fuel burning mode and a fluid fuel burning mode, and a fluid fuel conversion kit configured to convert the fire pit between the solid fuel burning mode and the fluid fuel burning mode, the fluid fuel conversion kit comprising: a burner configured for removable supportive engagement with at least one of the wall section or the end wall, the burner configured to discharge a fluid fuel for combustion; and a fuel supply line configured to supply fluid fuel from a fluid fuel source to the burner, wherein, when in the fluid fuel burning mode, the fuel supply line does not pass through the airflow vent.
PNG
media_image2.png
849
2641
media_image2.png
Greyscale
POGGI teaches a fire pit (100) configured to be convertible between a solid fuel burning mode and a fluid fuel burning mode, and a fluid fuel conversion kit configured to convert the fire pit between the solid fuel burning mode and the fluid fuel burning mode, the fluid fuel conversion kit comprising: a burner (1400) configured for removable supportive engagement with at least one of the wall section or the end wall (104), the burner configured to discharge a fluid fuel for combustion; and a fuel supply line (see 1408, 1406, 1404, 1402) configured to supply fluid fuel from a fluid fuel source to the burner, wherein, when in the fluid fuel burning mode, the fuel supply line does not pass through an airflow vent (140A).
Regarding Claim 2, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the end wall (530) further comprises an end wall aperture (538) and POGGI teaches wherein the fuel supply line (see 1408, 1406, 1404, 1402) is configured to pass through the end wall aperture (500) when in the fluid fuel burning mode.
Regarding Claim 3, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the fire pit further comprises an ash catch (542) configured to reside on an opposite side of the end wall aperture (538) from the combustion chamber (102), the ash catch (542) configured to collect waste from spent solid fuel when in the solid fuel burning mode.
Regarding Claim 4, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the end wall aperture (538) is configured to be closeable with a removeable plate (542) when in the solid fuel burning mode.
Regarding Claim 6, POGGI further teaches wherein the fuel supply line comprises a hose (1408).
Regarding Claim 8, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the fire pit further comprises a perforated plate (106, 502) configured for supportive engagement with at least one of the wall section (104) or the end wall, the perforated plate configured to support solid fuel at a distance offset from the end wall (530), the perforated plate further comprising one or more perforations configured to allow waste from spent solid fuel to pass into the offset between the perforated plate and the end wall when in the solid fuel burning mode (see Col. 5, Lns. 3-6: “As best seen in FIG. 9, the fuel grate 502 is perforated to allow combustion air to flow therethrough, and as well as allowing ashes or spent fuel to fall through the fuel grate 502.”).
Regarding Claim 10, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the wall section further comprises an upper end portion (see 512) defining a closed end of the airflow vent (514) which is on a substantially opposite side of the wall section from the end wall (530).
Regarding Claim 12, POGGI further teaches wherein the burner (1400) is supported at a distance offset from an upper end portion (see at least Fig. 19; see also para. [0061]: “FIGS. 14 through 19 illustrate a generally triangular-shaped burner 1400 with a gas feed pipe 1402 that extends through the opening 500 in the floor plate 104, doubling as a center support for the burner.”) in the fluid fuel burning mode.
Regarding Claims 15-17 and 20, HARRINGTON in view of POGGI discloses the claimed method limitations as is evident from the discussion of the references above. 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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARRINGTON in view of POGGI as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 10557635 B1 (hereinafter “WANDERSCHEID”).
Regarding Claim 13, HARRINGTON in view of POGGI does not disclose wherein the burner is configured for removable supportive engagement with the end wall such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber in the fluid fuel burning mode.
PNG
media_image3.png
791
1122
media_image3.png
Greyscale
WANDERSCHEID teaches a fire pit wherein a burner (402) is configured for removable supportive engagement with an end wall (302) such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber (defined by end wall 302 and sidewall 304) in the fluid fuel burning mode.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify HARRINGTON in view of POGGI wherein the burner is configured for removable supportive engagement with the end wall such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber in the fluid fuel burning mode as taught and/or suggested by WANDERSCHEID, since such a modification would provide a secure and stable mounting location for a removable burner.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARRINGTON in view of POGGI as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20250224117 A1 (hereinafter “DUTILH”).
Regarding Claim 14, HARRINGTON in view of POGGI does not disclose wherein the burner is configured for removable supportive engagement with the inner wall such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber in the fluid fuel burning mode.
DUTILH teaches a fire pit wherein a burner (2) is configured for removable supportive engagement with the inner wall such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber in the fluid fuel burning mode (see para. [0100]: “FIG. 6-FIG. 11 depict how a first embodiment of a gas adapter 1 may be installed on a fire pit 6. The bent edges 14 of the plate 3 contact the fire pit walls 7.”).
PNG
media_image4.png
556
912
media_image4.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 HARRINGTON in view of POGGI wherein the burner is configured for removable supportive engagement with the inner wall such that the burner resides within the combustion chamber in the fluid fuel burning mode as taught and/or suggested by DUTILH, since such a modification would provide a secure and stable mounting location for a removable burner.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARRINGTON in view of POGGI as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 11774089 B1 (hereinafter “WEILERT”).
Regarding Claim 5, HARRINGTON further discloses wherein the inner wall (104) is continuous except for the one or more outputs (122).
HARRINGTON does not disclose said outer wall is continuous except for the one or more intakes.
WEILERT teaches a fire pit wherein an outer wall (120) is continuous except for the one or more intakes (122).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify HARRINGTON in view of POGGI wherein said outer wall is continuous except for the one or more intakes as taught and/or suggested by WEILERT, since both HARRINGTON and WEILERT teach similar fire pits comprising an outer wall, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one outer wall for the other to achieve the predictable result of forming said airflow vent.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HARRINGTON in view of POGGI as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20150285507 A1 (hereinafter “TROYER, JR.”).
Regarding Claim 7, HARRINGTON in view of POGGI does not disclose wherein the fire pit further comprises an accessory mounting apparatus for disposing an accessory relative to the combustion chamber when in the solid fuel burning mode and relative to the burner when in the fluid fuel burning mode.
TROYER, JR. teaches a fire pit (2) wherein the fire pit further comprises an accessory mounting apparatus (52) for disposing an accessory (50) relative to the combustion chamber when in the solid fuel burning mode and relative to the burner when in the fluid fuel burning mode (as taught by POGGI).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify HARRINGTON in view of POGGI wherein the fire pit further comprises an accessory mounting apparatus for disposing an accessory relative to the combustion chamber when in the solid fuel burning mode and relative to the burner when in the fluid fuel burning mode as taught and/or suggested by TROYER, JR., since such a modification would provide a means to support a cooking grill above the fire for heating or cooking items thereon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 11, 18 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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
