Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/882,645

MARINE RECHARGEABLE POWER SOURCE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 08, 2022
Examiner
AMAYA, CARLOS DAVID
Art Unit
2836
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
889 granted / 1061 resolved
+15.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1085
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
40.9%
+0.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1061 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 With respect to the Drawings and specification, Applicant argues that it conforms with its original content as filed before WIPO and corresponds to the original drawings. It is submitted that Applicant’s amendment to the specification of 3/20/2025 deleted the claim to priority. Therefore, the objection with respect to the drawings and the specification is maintained. If Applicant desires to claim priority to the WIPO document, Applicant needs to submit an Application Data Sheet, and correct the claim in the specification. 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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell et al. (US 2017/0015397) in view of Littrell (US 2020/0055415). With respect to claim 1, Mitchell discloses a marine rechargeable power source system for a water vessel at least partially electrically driven comprising: a rechargeable power source (battery pack 18/modules 34, shown in the figures); a source management system to manage charging and/or discharging said rechargeable power source; a power transfer interface to transfer power to and/or from said rechargeable power source (figures 8, 16 disclose that the battery modules comprise connectors and BMS to control charging or discharging); a buoyant or nonbuoyant container containing at least said rechargeable power source (figure 4 discloses that the module is provided in a housing). Mitchell; however, does not expressly disclose said marine rechargeable power source system further comprises or is at least coupled with a payment terminal enabling at least one payment selected from the group consisting of online payments, cash payments, mobile payments, chip card payments, magnetic stripe card payments, or combinations thereof, wherein an acceptation of said payment via said payment terminal is in relation with charging and/or discharging said water vessel at least partially electrically driven and/or with a power transfer between said water vessel at least partially electrical driven and said rechargeable power source. Littrell discloses a payment acceptance device that is couple to a rechargeable power source, the payment is of the online and card type, paragraphs 0028, 0037. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention, to have modify Mitchell and include the different type of payments disclosed by Littrell, for the purpose of providing a payment means to thus obtain the services/devices required. With respect to claim 2, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source further comprises a thermal management system to thermally manage said rechargeable power source and/or said power transfer interface and/or said power cable, wherein at least one said thermal management system is selected from the group consisting of air tempering systems, liquid tempering systems, liquid tempering systems using offshore water as a thermal medium, or combinations thereof. Figure 6 discloses a liquid cooling thermal management system. With respect to claim 3, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source further comprises or is at least coupled with a power source to charge and/or discharge said rechargeable power source, wherein at least one said power source is selected from the group consisting of onshore power sources, offshore power sources, arrays of solar cells, fuel cells, wind energy to electric energy converters, wave energy to electric energy converters, water currents energy to electric energy converters, tidal energy to electric energy converters, motor generators, smart grids, or combinations thereof. Abstract discloses a shore base power source. With respect to claim 4, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source further comprises a mobility device providing said container with mobility, wherein at least one said mobility device is selected from the group consisting of mobile containers, mobile buoyant containers, or combinations thereof. Figure 24 discloses that battery pack is mobile and comprises a mobility device. With respect to claim 5, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said container is shaped to convene to said water vessel at least partially electrically driven. Figures 1-3 discloses that the battery pack convene to watercraft 14. With respect to claim 6, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source is provided as part of an offshore charging system comprising: said water vessel at least temporarily coupled to said power transfer interface. Paragraph 0052 discloses that the watercraft is power via the battery interface and that is charge during travel. With respect to claim 7, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, providing at least one data transmission selected from the group consisting of wired data transmissions, wireless data transmissions, or combinations thereof, wherein said data transmission is in relation with charging and/or discharging said rechargeable power source and/or said water vessel at least partially electrically driven and/or with a power transfer between said water vessel and said rechargeable power source. Figure 16 discloses communication between the BMS of the modules. With respect to claim 8, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source is provided as part of a cloud-based communication system, comprising: one or more communication nodes, wherein at least one said communication node is selected from the group consisting of operators, said marine rechargeable power sources, said water vessels at least partially electrically driven, or combinations thereof; a cloud, wherein said communication node is in wired and/or wireless communication with said cloud. Littrell discloses in figures 1-2 that the system is part of cloud based communication systems with different communication nodes communicating with each other. With respect to claim 9, Mitchell in view of Littrell disclose the marine rechargeable power source according to claim 1, wherein said marine rechargeable power source is provided as part of a modular system, comprising: a module, wherein at least one said module is selected from the group consisting of said rechargeable power sources, said source management systems, said containers, power transfer interfaces, power cables, thermal management systems, arrays of solar cells, fuel cells, wind energy to electric energy converters, wave energy to electric energy converters, water currents energy to electric energy converters, tidal energy to electric energy converters, motor generators, payment terminals, mobility devices, hydrogen production systems, hydrogen storage systems, fuel dispensers, fuel storage systems, fueling line systems, or combinations thereof, wherein said module is modularly scalable and/or exchangeable and/or couplable with at least one element of said marine rechargeable power source. Mitchell discloses battery modules 34 with the different components to provide power to the watercraft and also to be charge by shore power. Response to Arguments With respect to Applicant’s arguments filed 12/17/2025 with respect to the drawings and specification see above. With respect to the arguments that a combination of two patents is not obvious if the result is non-obvious, unexpected, or provides a new synergistic function requiring more than just simple assembly. And with respect to the argument that Littrell teaches nothing about marine applications, and that Mitchel’s invention must be modified by another person skilled in a different art to provide the claimed invention. It is respectfully submitted that the Examiner recognizes that reference references cannot be arbitrarily combined and that there must be some reason why one skilled in the art would be motivated to make the proposed combination of primary and secondary references. In re Nomiya, 184 USPQ 607 (CCPA 1975). However, there is no requirement that a motivation to make the modification be expressly articulated. The test for combining references is what the combination of disclosures taken as a whole would suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re McLaughlin, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). References are evaluated by what they suggest to one versed in the art, rather than by their specific disclosure. In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545 (CCPA) 1969. In this case Mitchell et al. discloses a marine rechargeable power source, and Littrell discloses a payment terminal as required by the claim. Whit respect to the argument that Mitchell does not teaches “an independent marine source which can or need not be integrated into a hull.” And that the present invention teaches a specific offshore power source, “selling” energy to a user using a payment terminal. It is submitted that the limitations that Applicant argues are not in the claims or that the limitations are in the alternative. With respect to the argument that “it could not be obvious for a person skilled in the art of battery packs for water wessels to provide them with a payment terminal, as there are no payments concerning a crew of the water vessel when using the modular battery pack. And, similarly it could not be obvious for a person skilled in the art of onshore charging stations, how to provide a (shape conformed) modular battery pack for use in marine applications. These are completely separated disciplines.” It is submitted that Mitchell and Littrell teach battery packs provided in vessel and a payment terminal enabling payment as required by the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS AMAYA whose telephone number is (571)272-8941. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00AM-4:00PM. 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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. /CARLOS AMAYA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 20, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 08, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603529
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PERFORMING WIRELESS POWER TRANSMISSION ON BASIS OF FOREIGN MATERIAL DETECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597780
SEMI-AUTONOMOUS ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION SYSTEM AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592566
DIRECT CURRENT CIRCUIT BREAKER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592583
REMOTE SENSING AND CONTROL AT THE POINT OF COMMON COUPLING IN AN ELECTRICAL GRID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576800
ROBUST HIGH VOLTAGE CABLE ROUTING/MOUNTING COUPLING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+13.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1061 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month