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
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 1,2,4-8,11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (KR 20180031963 A), hereafter known as Choi, in view of Durham (US 1520702 A), hereafter known as Durham.
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a test plug for use with a sprinkler adapter or a fluid supply piping outlet (page 2, background art, plug can be used as test plug for water pipe, Choi), comprising:
a winged head to operate the test plug (not disclosed, fig 6b, Choi, head portion, which is the reduced diameter portion of 100 with hole 110, is used to operate the plug, but is not winged);
and a post member protruding from the winged head and configured to engage with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet (fig 6b, post member, which is the larger diameter portion of 100 together with post 600, extends from the head and engages with fluid supply outlet 2000, Choi).
Choi does not disclose the head to have wings. However, Durham teaches a threaded device with wings (fig 5, Durham). Durham describes a threaded device to be operated by hand, a field related to Choi and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Durham into Choi and modified head of Choi, which is the reduced diameter portion of 100 with hole 110, to have the wings of Durham on the outside. Providing wings on the outside of a device to be rotated by a user is well known in the art, and the wings of Durham allow the device to be rotated easily by hand, which is useful in situations where the user does not have wrench 3000 of Choi or the plug is in a location where using the wrench is difficult. After the modification, the wings of Durham would be perpendicular to the direction of the holes 110 of Choi, to still allow insertion of wrench 3000.
Regarding claim 2, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 1, wherein the winged head comprises a central portion having a base, a top, and a curved surface extending between the base and the top (fig 6b, Choi, the head, which has wings as modified by Durham, has a central portion with a base surface joined to the larder diameter portion off 1000, top surface past the hole 110, and a cylindrical curved surface extending between, Choi).
Regarding claim 4, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 2, wherein the post member is provided at the base of the central portion (fig 6b, Choi, post member is at the base of the central portion of the head, at the area of diameter increase).
Regarding claim 5, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 2, wherein the winged head further comprises one or more wings (fig 5 Durham, two wings are disclosed, both of which are added to central portion of the head of Choi).
Regarding claim 6, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 5, wherein the one or more wings are flat surfaces that enable a secure grip during installation or removal of the test plug (figs 5 and 6, Durham, the faces of the wings are flat and enable a secure grip).
Regarding claim 7, Durham in view of Choi discloses the test plug of claim 5, wherein the one or more wings are orthogonal to the post member (figs 5 and 6, Durham, the two wings are orthogonal to the post member 7, which is also the case in Choi in view of Durham).
Regarding claim 8, Durham in view of Choi discloses the test plug of claim 5, wherein each wing has a first edge proximal to the top of the central portion and a second edge proximal to the base of the central portion (fig 5, Durham, each wing has first edge on the left that is proximal to the top of the central portion, and second edge on the right proximal to the base of the central portion, when applied to Choi), but does not disclose wherein the first edge is longer than the second edge. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the wing to be whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Regarding claim 11, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 2, wherein the post member comprises a first portion engageable with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet (fig 6, Choi, post member has first portion 210 for engaging with supply pipe outlet 2000 in fig 7a) and a second portion such that the second portion is provided between the winged head and the first portion (fig 6b, post member has a second portion, which is the larger diameter portion of 100, which is between head and first portion 210).
Regarding claim 12, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 11, further comprising a spacer provided between the first portion and the second portion (fig 6b, spacer 620 is between first portion and second portion, Choi).
Regarding claim 13, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 11, wherein the first portion is provided adjacent to the second portion (fig 6b, first portion 210 is adjacent to the second portion).
Regarding claim 14, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 11, wherein the first portion has undercut threads formed thereon for engagement with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet (fig 6b, Choi, threads of 210 has undercut section 622-1, which are fir engagement with the fluid piping outlet 2000 in fig 7a).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 14, but does not disclose wherein a length of a portion of the test plug that remains outside the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet after the first portion is engaged with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet is greater than or equal to 5/8 inches (claim 15), or is less than or equal to 4 inches (claim 16). However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the size of Choi in view of Durham to fall within the claimed requirements, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 17, Choi in view of Durham discloses the test plug of claim 11, wherein the first portion incorporates a hollow space therein (figs 6a and 7a, Choi, first portion has a hollow space).
Regarding claim 18, Choi discloses a test plug for a sprinkler adapter or a fluid supply piping outlet (page 2, background art, plug can be used as test plug for water pipe, Choi), comprising:
an elongate body having one or more wings protruding therefrom (fig 6b, Choi, elongate body 100 is disclosed, but is not winged);
and a portion configured to engage with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet (fig 6b, portion 600, Choi),
wherein the one or more wings are operable to engage the test plug with the sprinkler adapter or the fluid supply piping outlet (not disclosed).
Choi does not disclose the elongate body having wings. However, Durham teaches a threaded device with wings (fig 5, Durham). Durham describes a threaded device to be operated by hand, a field related to Choi and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Durham into Choi and modified the elongate body of Choi to have the wings of Durham on the outside. Providing wings on the outside of a device to be rotated by a user is well known in the art, and the wings of Durham allow the device to be rotated easily by hand, which is useful in situations where the user does not have wrench 3000 of Choi or the plug is in a location where using the wrench is difficult. After the modification, the wings of Durham would be perpendicular to the direction of the holes 110 of Choi, to still allow insertion of wrench 3000.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over S3da’s article “Fire Sprinklers In Commercial Buildings and Their Types”, hereafter known as S3da, in view of Choi, in further view of Durham.
Regarding claim 19, S3da discloses a fire suppression system (title, S3da), comprising:
a sprinkler adapter (first figure, S3da);
a sprinkler assembly (first figure, S3da);
and a test plug (not disclosed), wherein the sprinkler adapter is engageable with the sprinkler assembly during non-hydraulic testing period of the fire suppression system (first figure, S3da, sprinkler assembly is engaged with the adapter, and hydraulic testing is not taking place); and with the test plug during hydraulic testing period of the fire suppression system (not disclosed)
the test plug comprising (not disclosed):
a winged head operable to engage the test plug with the sprinkler adapter (not disclosed);
and a post member protruding from the winged head and configured to engage with the sprinkler adapter (not disclosed)
S3da does not disclose a test plug, or details thereof. However, Choi teaches a test plug for water pipe outlets during testing (page 2, background art, plug can be used as test plug for water pipe, Choi) with a head (fig 6b, head portion, which is the reduced diameter portion of 100 with hole 110, is used to operate the plug, but is not winged) and post member protruding from the head and configured to engage with the sprinkler adapter (fig 6b, post member, which is the larger diameter portion of 100 together with post 600, extends from the head and engages with fluid supply outlet 2000, Choi). Choi describes a test plug for water pipe systems, a field related to S3da and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Choi into S3da and use the plug of Choi during system testing of the system of S3da. Testing plugs are very well known in the art and would allow the user to test the system without installing the sprinkler assembly.
S3da in view of Choi does not disclose the head of the plug to have wings. However, Durham teaches a threaded device with wings (fig 5, Durham). Durham describes a threaded device to be operated by hand, a field related to Choi and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Durham into Choi and modified head of Choi, which is the reduced diameter portion of 100 with hole 110, to have the wings of Durham on the outside. Providing wings on the outside of a device to be rotated by a user is well known in the art, and the wings of Durham allow the device to be rotated easily by hand, which is useful in situations where the user does not have wrench 3000 of Choi or the plug is in a location where using the wrench is difficult. After the modification, the wings of Durham would be perpendicular to the direction of the holes 110 of Choi, to still allow insertion of wrench 3000.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3,9,10 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.
Schulz (US 7607456 B1) discloses a winged threaded testing plug.
Bevacco (US 6250337 B1) discloses a winged threaded pipe plug.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAOTIAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-0444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. 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.
H.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights