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 Status
Pending claims 1-13 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 9, 11, 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the additives" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the steps" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the step" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukio (JP3458315B2) in view of Kitagawa (US 20240287343).
Regarding claim 1, Yukio discloses a functional sprinkler (figs. 1-5)
a frame (8; see figs. 3 or 5);
a valve cap (11);
a glass bulb (13, fig. 3; or 10 in fig. 5);
a deflector (15, fig. 3; or 7, fig. 5); and
a color changing layer/discoloring tip 20/22 that can be placed at the bottom of the deflector (see attached translation; page 3, 8th paragraph).
Yukio is silent regarding the color changing layer being a layer of a hydrochromic paint applied to a top or underside of the deflector, wherein the layer of the hydrochromic paint changes a color of a portion in which the microleakage occurs.
Kitagawa discloses color change materials comprising a color changing colorant that changes color by water or water-containing liquid (Abstract). More specifically, paragraph 187 describes an indicator application where the color change material can be used to indicate contact failure or leakage accident. The color-changing material can be inks, toners or liquid paints (par. 128). As Yukio intends to place the color changing element at locations on the sprinkler, more specifically the bottom of the deflector, the combination of Yukio in view of Kitagawa would render obviousness in providing the color changing paint as water indicator at the deflector for showing leakage.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yukio to incorporate the teachings of Kitagawa to provide the color changing layer being a layer of a hydrochromic/color-changing paint applied to a top or underside of the deflector, wherein the layer of the hydrochromic paint changes a color of a portion in which the microleakage occurs. Doing so would provide a trouble indication in a leakage accident in advance, see the end of paragraph 187.
Regarding claim 3, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 1, but is silent regarding the hydrochromic paint comprises specifically:
3 to 10% by weight of a dye;
5 to 10% by weight of a pigment;
10 to 25% by weight of synthetic resins; and
a residual amount of solvents, based on 100% by weight thereof.
However, Kitagawa discloses in paragraph 6 that a condensation indicator is known to utilize 0.01 to 20 parts dye, up to 9 parts resin, 10 parts shielding powder or pigment. Kitagawa’s paragraphs 205-209 also disclose variations of this combination of a water indicator (par. 211), that includes 20 parts resin (par. 205), 59.5 parts solvent (par. 206-207) and 20 parts of the color-changeable colorant B that is mixture of dye and pigments (par. 198, 203). The disclosure of Kitagawa indicates various ranges of the claimed paint components that are significantly close to the claimed ranges.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to utilize 3 to 10% by weight of a dye; 5 to 10% by weight of a pigment;
10 to 25% by weight of synthetic resins; and a residual amount of solvents, based on 100% by weight thereof, 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 involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. See MPEP 2144.05.II. The Examiner notes that a particular parameter must be recognized as a result effective variable, in this case, that parameter is the different amounts of each components which achieves the recognized result of how the color is changed on the applied object and object material (visibility, and color development speed, as implied via examples 1-11 and comparative examples 1-4 disclosed in Kitagawa), therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art at the filing date of the invention would have found the claimed range through routine experimentation. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977). See also In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 4, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 1, wherein Kitagawa discloses the hydrochromic paint contains 30 to 50% by weight of solid content (par. 104: resin and powdered white porous substance can be in solid form, until melted down; par. 53: solvent is also solid under the melting point; par. 88: color development regulator can also be solid), based on 100% by weight thereof.
Regarding claim 5, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 1, wherein Kitagawa discloses the hydrochromic paint has a pH range between 4 to 7 (par. 94: “At least a portion of the specified microbody that retains or carries the color-changeable composition desirably exhibits basicity or neutrality (the pH range is preferably 6.0 to 12.0…”, pH value at 6 and 7 meets the requirement in the claimed range).
Regarding claim 7, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 3, wherein Kitagawa discloses the pigment is an inorganic pigment and is any one selected from titanium dioxide, silicon dioxide, calcium carbonate, calcium oxide (par. 6), calcium hydroxide, zeolite, activated carbon, bentonite, and aluminum silicate (underlined components are taught in Kitagawa’s paragraph 103).
Regarding claim 8, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 3, wherein Kitagawa discloses the synthetic resins are one or more materials selected from the group consisting of alkyd, acrylic polymer, polyester, phenol, melamine, urethane, silicone, and ester (underlined components are taught in Kitagawa’s paragraph 120).
Regarding claim 9, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 3, wherein Kitagawa discloses the additives are one or more materials selected from a curing accelerator, an adhesion promotor, a dispersant, and a mixture thereof (Kitagawa discloses in par. 137: “hydrophilic fixing agent, a hydrophilizing agent”, which are dispersant).
Regarding claim 10, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 3, wherein Kitagawa discloses the solvents are one or more materials selected from water, alcohol, ester, ketone, ether, and a mixture thereof (Kitagawa discloses the underlined components in par. 158).
Regarding claim 11, Yukio discloses a sprinkler with a frame (8; see figs. 3 or 5); a valve cap (11); a glass bulb (13, fig. 3; or 10 in fig. 5); a deflector (15, fig. 3; or 7, fig. 5); and a color changing layer/discoloring tip 20/22 that can be placed at the bottom of the deflector (see attached translation; page 3, 8th paragraph).
Yukio is silent regarding the method comprising the steps of:
coating a hydrochromic paint onto a top or underside of the deflector; and
if the microleakage occurs on a portion of the deflector where the hydrochromic paint is coated, detecting the microleakage through the change of the color of the hydrochromic paint coated onto the portion of the deflector where the microleakage occurs,
wherein the hydrochromic paint comprises a dye, a pigment, synthetic resins, additives, and solvents.
Kitagawa discloses color change materials comprising a color changing colorant that changes color by water or water-containing liquid (Abstract). More specifically, paragraph 187 describes an indicator application where the color change material can be used to indicate contact failure or leakage accident. The color-changing material can be inks, toners or liquid paints (par. 128). Kitagawa further discloses in paragraph 6 that a condensation indicator is known to utilize a dye (water soluble dye), pigment (shielding powder), and resin. Kitagawa’s paragraphs 205-209 also disclose variations of this combination of a water indicator (par. 211), that includes resin (par. 205), solvent (par. 206-207), the color-changeable colorant B that is mixture of dye and pigments (par. 198, 203) and additives (par. 137: “hydrophilic fixing agent, a hydrophilizing agent”; par. 127). Additionally, Kitagawa also discloses that the composition can be used as liquid paints or powder coating (par. 128) for indicating leakage (par. 187).
As Yukio intends to place the color changing element at locations on the sprinkler, more specifically the bottom of the deflector, the combination of Yukio in view of Kitagawa would render obviousness in providing the color changing paint as water indicator at the deflector for showing leakage.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yukio to incorporate the teachings of Kitagawa to provide the method comprising the steps of:
coating a hydrochromic paint onto a top or underside of the deflector; and
if the microleakage occurs on a portion of the deflector where the hydrochromic paint is coated, detecting the microleakage through the change of the color of the hydrochromic paint coated onto the portion of the deflector where the microleakage occurs, wherein the hydrochromic paint comprises a dye, a pigment, synthetic resins, additives, and solvents. Doing so would provide a trouble indication in a leakage accident in advance, see the end of paragraph 187.
Claims 2, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukio (JP3458315B2) in view of Kitagawa (US 20240287343), further in view of Matsubara (US 20190344310).
Regarding claim 2, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the layer of the hydrochromic paint but is silent regarding the paint formed a thickness in the range between 10 and 50 μm by using any one selected from wet coating, dry coating, and spray coating.
Matsubara discloses a method for forming a multilayer coated film by using various methods, including spray coating, such that the paint would have a paint thickness of usually 10-40 microns (par. 141).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yukio to incorporate the teachings of Matsubara to provide the paint formed a thickness in the range between 10 and 50 μm by using any one selected from wet coating, dry coating, and spray coating. Doing so would provide for the paint to be chip and scratch resistant and better hardness and adhesive strength (See paragraph 2).
Regarding claims 12-13, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the method according to claim 11, but is silent regarding the step of drying the hydrochromic paint through a heat treatment at a temperature between 120 and 180° C. for 10 to 30 minutes after the hydrochromic paint has been coated onto the top or underside of the deflector (claim 12); wherein the hydrochromic paint is coated a plurality of times (claim 13).
Matsubara discloses a method for forming a multilayer coated film by using various methods, including spray coating, such that the paint would have a paint thickness of usually 10-40 microns (par. 141). Matsubara also teaches the coatings are cured under heating conditions at 140C for 18minutes (par. 144) or 150-180C for 10-30 or 60 mins.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yukio to incorporate the teachings of Matsubara to provide the step of drying the hydrochromic paint through a heat treatment at a temperature between 120 and 180° C. for 10 to 30 minutes after the hydrochromic paint has been coated onto the top or underside of the deflector (claim 12); wherein the hydrochromic paint is coated a plurality of times (claim 13). Doing so would provide for the paint to be chip and scratch resistant and better hardness and adhesive strength (See paragraph 2).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukio (JP3458315B2) in view of Kitagawa (US 20240287343), further in view of Colon (US 4895567).
Regarding claim 6, Yukio, as modified above, discloses the functional sprinkler according to claim 3, wherein the dye is a pH indicator or redox indicator (par. 198: “blue leuco dye” is a redox indicator, having a colorless (leuco) form and a colored form in response to stimuli such as heat, light, pH changes). Yukio and Kitagawa is silent regarding the dye being any one selected from bromophenol blue (BPB), bromocresol green (BCG), indigo carmine (IC), and cresol red (CR).
Colon discloses a comparable wetness indicating composition that changes color in response to presence of moisture, wherein the dye can be bromophenol blue (BPB), bromocresol green (BCG), (col. 7, ln 12-23).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize bromophenol blue (BPB) or bromocresol green (BCG), since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
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