CTNF 19/198,816 CTNF 97703 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim s of instant application shown below are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s of U.S. Patent No. 12,293,651 mapped to below . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are claiming the same invention with little change to the claim language. Patent claims are narrower and thus teach all the limitations of the instant claims . Claim 1 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 2 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 3 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 4 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 5 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 9 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 10 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 13 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 12,293,651. Claim 15 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 18 of Patent 12,293,651 with the interpretation that ‘a sounder’ is an ‘output device’. Claim 16 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 18 of Patent 12,293,651 with the interpretation that ‘a sounder’ is an ‘output device’ . 08-34 AIA Claims of instant application shown below are r ejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims o f U.S. Patent No. 1 1,900,791 mapped to below. A lthough the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because t hey are claiming the same invention with little change to the claim language. Patent claims are narrower and thus teach all the limitations of the instant claims . T he interpretation that ‘a fan’ of Patent 11,900,791 is a type of ‘variable airflow generator’ of instant application—is used for the following mappings : Claim 1 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 2 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 3 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 4 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 5 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 9 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 10 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 13 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 8 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 15 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 18 of Patent 11,900,791. Claim 16 of instant application is broader and thus disclosed by claim 18 of Patent 11,900,791 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Dearden (US Patent No. 11132891 B2) . In re claim 1 , Dearden teaches A self-testing fire sensing device ( Abstract : “Devices, methods, and systems for a self-testing fire sensing device are described herein.”), comprising: a sounder ( Col 2, lines 66-67 : “A fire response can include… audio alarms…”); a variable airflow generator ( Col 5, lines 46-47 : “In some examples, the variable airflow generator 116 can be a fan.”); an optical scatter chamber ( Col 3, lines 10-12 : “As shown in FIG. 1, fire sensing device 100 can include… an optical scatter chamber 104…”); and a controller ( Col 3, lines 16-19 : “In some examples, a fire sensing device 100 can also include a microcontroller including memory and/or a processor…”) configured to: activate the sounder ( Col 3, lines 23-27 : “In some examples, a fire response can be triggered in response to the optical scatter chamber 104 detecting the aerosol density level.”); activate the variable airflow generator to remove any dust or smoke particles from the optical scatter chamber ( Col 3, lines 27-31 : “Once the aerosol density level has reached the particular level, the adjustable particle generator 116 can be turned off and the variable airflow generator 116 can increase the rate of airflow through the optical scatter chamber 104.”); measure a quantity of smoke particles in the optical scatter chamber ( Cols 3-4, lines 49-67 and 1-5 : “The adjustable particle generator 102 can include a reservoir to contain a liquid and/or wax used to create particles. The adjustable particle generator 102 can also include a heat source, which can be heat source 108 or a different heat source. The heat source 108 can be a coil of resistance wire. A current flowing through the wire can be used to control the temperature of the heat source 108 and further control the number of particles produced by the adjustable particle generator 102. The heat source 108 can heat the liquid and/or wax to create airborne particles to simulate smoke from a fire. The particles can measure approximately 1 micrometer in diameter and/or the particles can be within the sensitivity range of the optical scatter chamber 104… The ability to control the aerosol density level can allow a smoke test to more accurately mimic the characteristics of a fire and prevent the optical scatter chamber 104 from becoming saturated.”); compare the quantity of smoke particles to a baseline quantity ( Col 6, lines 61-65 : “In some examples, memory 224 can store the aerosol density level sufficient to trigger a fire response from a properly firing sensing device, the aerosol density level sufficient to test a fault condition without triggering a fire response…”); and deactivate the sounder responsive to the quantity of smoke particles being less than or equal to the baseline quantity ( col 9, lines 37-47 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3 and the variable airflow generator can continue and/or increase the airflow, moving the generated particles through the optical scatter chamber.” and cols 9-10, lines 59-67 and 1-2 : “In the example optical scatter chamber output 588-2, the aerosol density level reduces more than the example optical scatter chamber output 588-1 after the adjustable particle generator stops generating particles. The example optical scatter chamber output 588-2 illustrates sufficient airflow through the optical scatter chamber where the optical scatter chamber is not masked, and the fire sensing device can function properly. Once it is determined whether the fire sensing device is functioning properly, at time 552-4, the smoke self-test function can be complete, and the variable airflow generator can be turned off.”). In re claim 6 , Dearden teaches wherein the controller is configured to activate the variable airflow generator for a particular period of time ( Col 9, lines 19-26 : “In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, a variable airflow generator (e.g., variable airflow generator 216 in FIG. 2) and an adjustable particle generator (e.g., adjustable particle generator 202 in FIG. 2) can be powered off (e.g., turned off) at time 552-1. At time 552-2, the variable airflow generator and the adjustable particle generator can be powered on (e.g., turned on) to start a smoke self-test function, as previously described in connection with FIG. 2.”). In re claim 7 , Dearden teaches wherein the controller is configured to measure the quantity of smoke particles in the optical scatter chamber after the particular period of time ( Col 9, lines 37-47 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3 and the variable airflow generator can continue and/or increase the airflow, moving the generated particles through the optical scatter chamber.”). In re claim 8 , Dearden teaches wherein the controller is configured to compare the quantity of smoke particles to the baseline quantity after the particular period of time ( Col 9, lines 37-47 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3 and the variable airflow generator can continue and/or increase the airflow, moving the generated particles through the optical scatter chamber.”). Method claim 9 is rejected for the same reasons as device claim 1 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope ; examiner notes Dearden further teaches “activating a sounder responsive to the measured quantity being greater than the baseline quantity” in col 9, lines 37-47 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3 and the variable airflow generator can continue and/or increase the airflow, moving the generated particles through the optical scatter chamber.”, as well as teaching in Col 5, lines 46-47 a ‘fan’. In re claim 10 , Dearden teaches further comprising deactivating the sounder responsive to the quantity of smoke particles being less than or equal to the baseline quantity after a particular period of time ( col 9, lines 37-47 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3 and the variable airflow generator can continue and/or increase the airflow, moving the generated particles through the optical scatter chamber.” and cols 9-10, lines 59-67 and 1-2 : “In the example optical scatter chamber output 588-2, the aerosol density level reduces more than the example optical scatter chamber output 588-1 after the adjustable particle generator stops generating particles. The example optical scatter chamber output 588-2 illustrates sufficient airflow through the optical scatter chamber where the optical scatter chamber is not masked, and the fire sensing device can function properly. Once it is determined whether the fire sensing device is functioning properly, at time 552-4, the smoke self-test function can be complete, and the variable airflow generator can be turned off.”). In re claim 11 , Dearden teaches further comprising deactivating the fan ( Col 9, lines 19-23 : “In the example illustrated in FIG. 5, a variable airflow generator (e.g., variable airflow generator 216 in FIG. 2) and an adjustable particle generator (e.g., adjustable particle generator 202 in FIG. 2) can be powered off (e.g., turned off) at time 552-1.”). In re claim 12 , Dearden teaches further comprising measuring the quantity of smoke particles in the optical scatter chamber responsive to deactivating the fan (Col 9, lines 26-28 : “When powered on the adjustable particle generator (e.g., fan) can generate particles (e.g., aerosol particles)…” and col 9, lines 36-44 : “Particles can be generated until a threshold aerosol density level (e.g., set-point) 556 is met. The threshold aerosol density level can be a sufficient aerosol density level to trigger a fire response (e.g., fire threshold) 554 from a properly functioning fire sensing device without saturating an optical scatter chamber, for example. Once the threshold aerosol density level 556 is met, the adjustable particle generator can stop generating particles at time 552-3…”). In re claim 13 , Dearden teaches further comprising reporting a confirmed fire responsive to the quantity of smoke particles being greater than the baseline quantity ( Col 2, lines 25-26 : “…can more accurately determine the ability of a fire sensing device to detect an actual fire.” and col 2, lines 63-65 : “A fire sensing device 100 (e.g., smoke detector) can sense a fire occurring in a facility and trigger a fire response to provide a notification of the fire to occupants of the facility.”). In re claim 14 , Dearden teaches further comprising reporting a false alarm responsive to the quantity of smoke particles being less than or equal to the baseline quantity ( Cols 3-4, lines 67 and 1-5 : “…generate an aerosol density level sufficient to test a fault condition without triggering a fire response or saturating the optical scatter chamber 104. The ability to control the aerosol density level can allow a smoke test to more accurately mimic the characteristics of a fire and prevent the optical scatter chamber 104 from becoming saturated.” and col 6, lines 14-17 : “The monitoring device 201 can be configured to send commands to and/or receive test results from a fire sensing device 200 via a wired or wireless network.”) . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-5 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 and by overcoming the double patenting rejections set forth above; claims 15-20 are objected to as claim 15 and 16 are rejected under 101 for double patenting, but would be allowable by overcoming the double patenting rejections set forth above. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter : The prior art does not disclose the combination of limitations presented in the claimed invention . Similar to the explanation of reasons for allowance in grandparent U.S. Patent No. 11900791 B2 , the closest prior arts of Barson (US Patent No. 20120235822 A1) and Zhao (CN Patent No. 110517439 B) , either alone or in combination, does not expressly teach all of the limitations as recited in the independent claims . Furthermore, prior art Desjardins ( US Patent No. 20190113494 A1 ) teaches in para [0071] "When the processor 405 determines that the detected measure received from one of the smoke detection sensor 410, the carbon monoxide sensor 415 and the temperature sensor 420 are above the predetermined threshold, the processor 405 may actuate the exhaust fan 455 for a predetermined period of time so as to purge the detection chamber 905 and push debris accumulated on the exterior surface of the filter 910.", however, Desjardins invention requires the use of a filter, as well as measuring 3 values, which Applicant's claimed invention does not require . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES EDWARD MUNION whose telephone number is (571)270-0437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00. 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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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. /JAMES E MUNION/Examiner, Art Unit 2688 06/12/2026 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 2 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 3 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 4 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 6 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 7 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 8 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 9 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 10 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 11 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 12 Art Unit: 2688 Application/Control Number: 19/198,816 Page 13 Art Unit: 2688
Prosecution Insights