Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/097,924

AUTOMATIC FIRE BLANKET COVERING DEVICE FOR BURNING LITHIUM BATTERY OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 02, 2025
Priority
Dec 30, 2024 — TW 113151508
Examiner
BOECKMANN, JASON J
Art Unit
3752
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Taiwan Intelligent Robotics Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
Est. Remaining
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allowance Rate
494 granted / 1009 resolved
-21.0% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
1066
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.5%
+8.5% vs TC avg
§102
26.2%
-13.8% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1009 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 control unit of claim 1, the at least one pneumatic device arraigned on the fire blanket box and coupled to four corners of the fire blanket (the pneumatic devices are shown as 12, but they are not shown as coupled to the fire blanket box and coupled to four corners of the fire blanket), the bottom plate of claim 2, the fire blanket covering the bottom plate of claim 2, the driving device of claim 3, the switch of claim 4, the one side of the fire blanket located outside the fire blanket box has a pattern of claim 5, and the fixed straps at the corners of the fire blanket box of claim 8 (they are not shown at the corners) 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 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: [0023] The air pressure ratio of the pneumatic device 12 will be filled with a corresponding pressure value according to a mounting height. [0023] so that a pneumatic power source is not too large at first, and the system or device can be simplified [0026] the pneumatic power source can set the output magnitude of the pneumatic source, for example, throwing different distances to be suitable for the vehicle length and vehicle width of different parking spaces (or vehicle lengths/models). [0028] The pneumatic power source of the present invention can set the output magnitude and the output direction of the pneumatic source at the same time, for example, throwing different distances or angles to determine the mounting height of a ceiling of the fire blanket box 10 to be suitable for different floor heights Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 requires at least one pneumatic device arraigned on the fire blanket box and coupled to four corners of the fire blanket. The drawings just show the pneumatic devices as a back dot and the specification does not describe what the pneumatic devices are made of or how the pneumatic devices work. Paragraph [0024] states that the pneumatic device ejects the rubber bullet, but does not explain how the bullet is ejected. Nor does it explain how the bullet is connected to the fire blanket Paragraph [0028] states the pneumatic power source of the present invention can set the output magnitude and the output direction of the pneumatic source at the same time, for example, throwing different distances or angles to determine the mounting height of a ceiling of the fire blanket box 10 to be suitable for different floor heights, but doesn’t state how the magnitude or output direction are set. The specification does not provide enough information about the pneumatic devices to prove that the applicant at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The remainder of the claims are rejected due to dependency. 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 1-8 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. Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by the term “fire blanket magazine” the figures point to an empty space above the blanket in the fire blanket box and the specification does not describe the fire blanket magazine. Is the fire blanket magazine just an empty space, or is a structural element that performs a function? Claim 8 recites the limitation "the corners" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The remainder of the claims are rejected due to dependency. 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, 6, 7 is/are rejected, as best as understood, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hitchcock (5,423,150). Regarding claim 1, Hitchcock shows an automatic fire blanket covering device for a burning lithium battery of an electric vehicle, (the device of Hitchcock can be used to cover a burning lithium battery of an electric vehicle) comprising: a fire blanket box (20, 22), comprising a fire blanket magazine (30) and further comprising a control unit (60); a fire blanket (26), arranged on the fire blanket magazine; and at least one pneumatic device (40a, 40c), arranged on the fire blanket box and coupled to four corners of the fire blanket (fig 7), the pneumatic device being in signal connection with the control unit (fig 2, the control unit opens valve 50 to pneumatically eject 40). Regarding claim 6, further comprising at least one sensor (62), wherein the sensor is in signal connection with the control unit (fig 2). Regarding claim 7, wherein the sensor is a smoke detector, an image detection device or a thermal imaging sensing device (col 4, line 48). 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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitchcock (5,423,150) in view of Gill (9,376,050) Regarding claim 8, Hitchcock shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to shows wherein the fire blanket box comprises a plurality of fixed strips and a plurality of dampers; the fixed strips are arranged at the corners of the fire blanket box; and the dampers are arranged at free ends of the fixed strips Gill teaches a strap system that includes fixed straps (12) and dampers (16) connected to the free ends of fixed straps (fig 1), the straps are used to tie down a box with the fixed straps being over the corners of the box (fig 6). 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 fixed straps with dampers of Gill to tie down the fire blanket box of Hitchcock with the fixed straps being on the corners, in order to secure the fire blanket box to the building. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected, as best as understood, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitchcock (5,423,150) in view of Butler (2025/0135251) and Freeman (11,771,934) Regarding claim 4, Hitchcock shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1,including a switch (66 is a testing unit that inherently has a switch to activate the device) and safety lock (valve 50 is a safety lock that safely locks the gas in container 44) in signal connection with the controller (fig 3), but fails to shows wherein the fire blanket box further comprises a socket, a caution light, and the control unit is in signal connection with the switch, the socket, the safe lock and the caution light. Butler shows a fire blanket system that includes a caution light 118) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to add a caution light to the device of Hitchcock, and have it in communication with the controller, in order to create awareness of detected issues (Gill [0035]) Freeman teaches a fire fighting apparatus with a socket (col 5 line 66-col 6, line 5) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to add a socket tot eh device of Hitchcock as modified above in order to provide power to the controller with a cord. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 3 and 5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 2 is allowable due to the siding feature of the bottom plate Claim 5 is allowable due to the one side of the fire blanket located outside the fire blanket box has a pattern. However, both of these features are not shown in the drawings. All claimed subject matter must be shown in the drawings. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kang (2021/0283437) 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 8/13/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12766533
HAND-HELD PAINT SPRAYER
2y 9m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12758043
Paper Straw
5y 1m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12752917
UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) PEST ABATEMENT DEVICE
5y 3m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12746558
PAINT NOZZLE MODULE FOR A PAINT SPRAYING DEVICE
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12734386
SPRINKLER HEAD
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
49%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+28.7%)
3y 7m (~2y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1009 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month