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 .
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.
Claim 11 (and all claims that depend therefrom) is 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.
Claim 11 line 11 recites “covered by elongated side pocket.” It is unclear if this is the same “side elongated pocket” previously recited in line 6. For the purposes of this action, they will be interpreted as the same pocket.
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.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoll US 2023/0415861 in view of Zablocki US 9,139,267.
Regarding claim 11, Stoll discloses a method of installing an inflatable bladder into a hole below a water line to prevent a yacht from sinking comprising:
providing an inflatable bladder 1, 9 configured and sized to seal a hole in a yacht below the water line, a first end 3 of the inflatable bladder configured to be inserted into the hole before a second end 4 of the inflatable bladder, the first end opposes the second end, a side elongated pocket 7 on a side of the inflatable bladder having extending in a direction from the first end of the inflatable bladder to the second end of the inflatable bladder, the side elongated pocket having an opening towards the second end of the inflatable bladder and a closed end towards the first end of the inflatable bladder [0022];
inserting an elongated push rod within the elongated side pocket, wherein a first portion of the elongated push rod is partially covered by elongated side pocket and a second portion of the elongated push rod extends away from the inflatable bladder [“At least one section (of the stiffening element) is configured to be inserted into the elongated sleeve” 0032];
using the elongated push rod to push the inflatable bladder into the hole against a flow of water through the hole into the yacht [0034]; and
inflating the inflatable bladder to seal the hole and reduce the flow water through the hole by opening a sealed container 19 containing a pressurized gas that inflates the inflatable bladder 9 [0035]; and
removing the elongated push rod from the elongated side pocket [0036].
PNG
media_image1.png
172
505
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1- Stoll Figure 1
Stoll does not teach that opening the container is accomplished by pulling a string, or adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder through a valve connected to the inflatable bladder.
Zablocki teaches an emergency inflatable bladder 04 for a marine vehicle which comprises a pull string to open a sealed container 10 containing a pressurized gas that inflates the inflatable bladder (column 7, lines 48-49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Stoll with a pull string as taught by Zablocki in order to simplify actuation of the inflation device.
Zablocki also teaches adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder through a valve connected to the inflatable bladder through backup inflator 16 (column 7, lines 50-54), and that air is added via valves (column 3, lines 10-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Stoll with backup inflation and valves as taught by Zablocki in order to ensure that the device can remain inflated after the initial pressure source is depleted.
Regarding claim 17, Stoll and Zablocki teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 11. Zablocki also teaches that the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder comprises attaching a source of pressurized air to the valve and inflating the inflatable bladder with the pressurized air, as this is inherently done.
Claims 15, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stoll US 2023/0415861 in view of Ormaechea US 2008/0229997.
Regarding claim 15, Stoll and Zablocki teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 11. Neither Stoll nor Zablocki teach that the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder comprises attaching an air pump to the valve; and pumping the air pump to inflate the inflatable bladder. Ormaechea teaches an emergency inflatable bladder 20 for a marine vehicle which comprises a pump for filling the bladder in the event that a pressurized container has been depleted [0080]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Stoll and Zablocki with a backup inflation pump as taught by Ormaechea in order to ensure that the bladder can be automatically inflated even after depletion of the initial inflation cannister.
Regarding claim 16, Stoll and Zablocki teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 11. Stoll does not teach a safety pressure release valve. Ormaechea teaches an emergency inflatable bladder 20 for a marine vehicle which comprises a safety pressure release valve 23; configured to release air from the inflatable bladder to prevent the inflatable bladder from becoming over inflated [0060]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Stoll with a safety pressure release valve as taught by Ormaechea in order to ensure that the bladder is not damaged by over pressurization.
Regarding claim 18, Stoll and Zablocki teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 17. Neither Stoll nor Zablocki teach that the source of pressurized air is a motorized air pressure system, and the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder comprises inflating the inflatable bladder with pressurized air from the motorized air pressure system. Ormaechea teaches an emergency inflatable bladder 20 for a marine vehicle which comprises a motorized air pressure system for filling the bladder in the event that a pressurized container has been depleted [0080]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Stoll and Zablocki with a motorized air pressure system as taught by Ormaechea in order to ensure that the bladder can be automatically inflated even after depletion of the initial inflation cannister.
Claims 11 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams US 2021/0031888 in view of Stoll US 2023/0415861.
Regarding claim 11, Williams teaches a method of installing an inflatable bladder into a hole below a water line to prevent a yacht from sinking comprising:
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 2- Williams Figure 28)]
PNG
media_image2.png
425
300
media_image2.png
Greyscale
providing an inflatable bladder 320 configured and sized to seal a hole in a yacht below the water line, a first end of the inflatable bladder configured to be inserted into the hole before a second end of the inflatable bladder, the first end opposes the second end; and
inflating the inflatable bladder to seal the hole and reduce the flow water through the hole by pulling a pull string 330 to open a sealed container containing a pressurized gas that inflates the inflatable bladder; and
adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder through a valve 840 connected to the inflatable bladder [0139].
Williams does not teach a side elongated pocket on a side of the inflatable bladder having extending in a direction from the first end of the inflatable bladder to the second end of the inflatable bladder, the side elongated pocket having an opening towards the second end of the inflatable bladder and a closed end towards the first end of the inflatable bladder; inserting an elongated push rod within the elongated side pocket wherein a first portion of the elongated push rod is partially covered by elongated side pocket and a second portion of the elongated push rod extends away from the inflatable bladder, or using the second portion of the elongated push rod to push the inflatable bladder into the hole against a flow of water through the hole into the yacht. Stoll discloses a method of installing an inflatable bladder into a hole below a water line to prevent a yacht from sinking comprising:
providing an inflatable bladder 1, 9 configured and sized to seal a hole in a yacht below the water line, a first end 3 of the inflatable bladder configured to be inserted into the hole before a second end 4 of the inflatable bladder, the first end opposes the second end, a side elongated pocket 7 on a side of the inflatable bladder having extending in a direction from the first end of the inflatable bladder to the second end of the inflatable bladder, the side elongated pocket having an opening towards the second end of the inflatable bladder and a closed end towards the first end of the inflatable bladder [0022];
inserting an elongated push rod within the elongated side pocket wherein a first portion of the elongated push rod is partially covered by elongated side pocket and a second portion of the elongated push rod extends away from the inflatable bladder [“At least one section (of the stiffening element) is configured to be inserted into the elongated sleeve” 0032];
using the elongated push rod to push the inflatable bladder into the hole against a flow of water through the hole into the yacht [0034]; and
inflating the inflatable bladder to seal the hole and reduce the flow water through the hole [0035]; and
removing the elongated push rod from the elongated side pocket [0036].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the inflation device of Williams with a sleeve for a push rod that partially extends from the sleeve and inserting from the inside of the hull as taught by Stoll in order to allow a user to plug a hole from the inside of the hull.
Regarding claim 15, Williams and Stoll teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 14. Williams also teaches that the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder 320 comprises attaching an air pump 842 to the valve 840; and pumping the air pump to inflate the inflatable bladder.
Regarding claim 16, Williams and Stoll teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 11. Williams also teaches that the inflatable bladder 320 includes a safety pressure release valve 808; and further comprising releasing air from the inflatable bladder to prevent the inflatable bladder from becoming over inflated [0133].
Regarding claim 17, Williams and Stoll teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 11. Williams also teaches that the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder comprises attaching a source 842 of pressurized air to the valve 840 and inflating the inflatable bladder with the pressurized air.
Regarding claim 18, Williams and Stoll teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 17. Williams does not explicitly teach that the source of pressurized air is a motorized air pressure system, and the step of adding additional pressurized gas to the inflatable bladder comprises inflating the inflatable bladder with pressurized air from the motorized air pressure system, but Williams does teach that a motorized air pressure system can be used to inflate the bladder [0062, 0064]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the secondary inflation device of Williams with a motorized air pressure system as taught by Williams in order to ensure that the bladder can be automatically inflated even after depletion of the initial inflation cannister.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached at 517 272-4530. 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.
/MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615