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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the vents of claim 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the specification fails to provide proper antecedent basis for “a temperature at which the detector detects the fire condition is greater than a temperature at which the trigger operates” of claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 12-14, 16, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664).
Regarding claim 1, Tanklevski et al. shows a fire sprinkler (fig 1) comprising: a body (1) comprising an inlet, an outlet (fig 1), and a passageway between the inlet and the outlet (fig 1);a deflector (9, 9 is being considered a deflector because it is capable of deflecting a fluid) coupled with the body (fig 1); a seal (2) coupled with the outlet to seal the outlet; a trigger (3) coupled with the seal such that operation of the trigger releases the seal from the outlet; and a detector (7) coupled with the deflector, the detector to cause the operation of the trigger responsive to detection of a fire condition (via activation unit 6).
Regarding claim 2, the trigger comprises a heat sensitive link (3) to displace the seal responsive to heat from at least one of the detector and the fire condition.
Regarding claim 3, the detector is mounted on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 4, an activator (6) to provide at least one of heat and electrical current from the detector to the trigger to activate the trigger.
Regarding claim 5, the body includes a deflector (fig 1); and the detector is positioned on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, the trigger includes a glass bulb (3) or a fusible link.
Regarding claim 9, the fire sprinkler is arranged as an upright sprinkler (the sprinkler of fig 1 can be mounted upright).
Regarding claim 10, the detector is to output a signal indicative of the fire condition to a fire control panel [0039].
Regarding claim 12, Tanklevski et al. shows a sprinkler system (fig 1), comprising: a plurality of sprinklers, each sprinkler of the plurality of sprinklers [0032] comprising: a body (1) comprising an inlet, an outlet, a passageway between the inlet and the outlet (fig 1), and a deflector (9 is being considered a deflector because it is capable of deflecting a fluid); a seal (2) coupled with the outlet; a trigger (3) coupled with the seal such that operation of the trigger displaces the seal from the outlet; and a detector (7) coupled with the deflector (fig 1), the detector to cause the operation of the trigger responsive to detection of a fire condition.
Regarding claim 13, the detector comprises a resistor (4) to be heated to deliver heat to the trigger to cause operation of the trigger.
Regarding claim 14, the body includes a deflector (fig 1), and the detector is positioned on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 16, the detector is to transmit a fire detection signal to a control panel (6) based on detection of the fire condition.
Regarding claim 18, the plurality of sprinklers are upright sprinklers (the sprinkler of fig 1 can be mounted upright).
Regarding claim 19, an activator (6) to provide at least one of heat and electrical current from the detector to the trigger to activate the trigger.
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.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664)
Regarding claim 11, Tanklevski et al shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1 above, but fasil to disclose a temperature at which the detector detects the fire condition is greater than a temperature at which the trigger operates.
The examiner notes that there are three possible scenarios:
1, the detector and the trigger operate at the same temperature.
2, the trigger operates at a higher temperature than the detector
3, the detector operates at a higher temperature than the trigger.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to have a temperature at which the detector detects the fire condition is greater than a temperature at which the trigger operates, in order to have the trigger detect the fire first leading to a faster opening of the seal.
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664) in view of SUNG (KR 101983001 B1)
Regarding claim 1, Tanklevski et al. shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 1 and 12 above, but fails to disclose the detector includes a fixed temperature detector having a bimetallic element.
SUNG teaches a fire sprinkler that includes a bimetallic element sensor as a temperature detector (paragraph 15)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the detector of SUNG in the fire sprinkler of Tanklevski et al. in order to accurately detect a fire.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664) in view of ZHANG (CN 209060425 U)
Regarding claims 21, Tanklevski et al. shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1 above, including and a resistor (4) to coupled with the sensor, the resistor to be heated to deliver heat to the trigger to cause operation of the trigger, but fails to disclose the detector comprises a housing having one or more vents, a sensor in the housing,
ZHANG teaches a fire sprinkler that includes a detector (2) comprises a housing having one or more vents (7), a sensor in the housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the detector of ZHANG including the vents, in the fire sprinkler of Tanklevski et al. in order to accurately detect a fire.
In the alternative, the following claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-16, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664) in view of Oag (8,814,064)
Regarding claim 1, Tanklevski et al. shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, including a deflector (the flat surface below element 3), but fails to disclose that the detector is coupled with the deflector.
Oag teaches a nozzle having a deflector (107), the deflector includes sensors (112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to locate the sensors on the deflector rather than the bracket 9, of Tanklevski et al in order to make the sprinkler more compact.
Regarding claim 2, the trigger comprises a heat sensitive link (3) to displace the seal responsive to heat from at least one of the detector and the fire condition.
Regarding claim 3, the detector is mounted on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 4, an activator (6) to provide at least one of heat and electrical current from the detector to the trigger to activate the trigger.
Regarding claim 5, the body includes a deflector (fig 1); and the detector is positioned on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 7, the trigger includes a glass bulb (3) or a fusible link.
Regarding claim 8, the detector is inside the deflector (Oag) coupled with the body, the deflector to output fluid released from the internal passageway responsive to displacement of the seal from the outlet (fig 1).
Regarding claim 9, the fire sprinkler is arranged as an upright sprinkler (the sprinkler of fig 1 can be mounted upright).
Regarding claim 10, the detector is to output a signal indicative of the fire condition to a fire control panel [0039].
Regarding claim 11, Tanklevski et al shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1 above, but fasil to disclose a temperature at which the detector detects the fire condition is greater than a temperature at which the trigger operates.
The examiner notes that there are three possible scenarios:
1, the detector and the trigger operate at the same temperature.
2, the trigger operates at a higher temperature than the detector
3, the detector operates at a higher temperature than the trigger.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to have a temperature at which the detector detects the fire condition is greater than a temperature at which the trigger operates, in order to have the trigger detect the fire first leading to a faster opening of the seal.
Regarding claim 12, Tanklevski et al. shows a sprinkler system (fig 1), comprising: a plurality of sprinklers, each sprinkler of the plurality of sprinklers [0032] comprising: a body (1) comprising an inlet, an outlet, a passageway between the inlet and the outlet (fig 1), and a deflector (9 is being considered a deflector because it is capable of deflecting a fluid); a seal (2) coupled with the outlet; a trigger (3) coupled with the seal such that operation of the trigger displaces the seal from the outlet; and a detector (7) coupled with the deflector (fig 1), the detector to cause the operation of the trigger responsive to detection of a fire condition.
Regarding claim 13, the detector comprises a resistor (4) to be heated to deliver heat to the trigger to cause operation of the trigger.
Regarding claim 14, the body includes a deflector (fig 1), and the detector is positioned on the deflector (fig 1).
Regarding claim 15, a pair of arms (fig 1, they have to be arms or the fluid would not be able to exit) extending from the body to a junction; and the deflector is coupled with the junction (fig 1), the detector in the deflector (as taught by Oag).
Regarding claim 16, the detector is to transmit a fire detection signal to a control panel (6) based on detection of the fire condition.
Regarding claim 18, the plurality of sprinklers are upright sprinklers (the sprinkler of fig 1 can be mounted upright).
Regarding claim 19, an activator (6) to provide at least one of heat and electrical current from the detector to the trigger to activate the trigger.
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664) as modified by Oag (8,814,064) above, further in view of SUNG (KR 101983001 B1)
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Tanklevski et al. as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 1 and 12 above, but fails to disclose the detector includes a fixed temperature detector having a bimetallic element.
SUNG teaches a fire sprinkler that includes a bimetallic element sensor as a temperature detector (paragraph 15)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the detector of SUNG in the fire sprinkler of Tanklevski et al. as modified above in order to accurately detect a fire.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanklevski et al. (2017/0304664) as modified by Oag (8,814,064) above, further in view of ZHANG (CN 209060425 U)
Regarding claims 21, Tanklevski et al. as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1 above, including and a resistor (4) to coupled with the sensor, the resistor to be heated to deliver heat to the trigger to cause operation of the trigger, but fails to disclose the detector comprises a housing having one or more vents, a sensor in the housing,
ZHANG teaches a fire sprinkler that includes a detector (2) comprises a housing having one or more vents (7), a sensor in the housing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the detector of ZHANG including the vents, in the fire sprinkler of Tanklevski et al. as modified above in order to accurately detect a fire.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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.
/JASON J BOECKMANN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 6/12/2026
Prosecution Insights