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 .
Status
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the application papers filed on 20 December 2022 and 28 October 2025.
Claim(s) 8-9, 12, 15-16, 21, 23-25, 27, 29, and 31 are canceled.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-11, 13-14, 17-20, 22, 26, 28, 30, and 32 is/are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species C in the reply filed on 28 October 2025 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that the features added to claims 1, 22 and 26 clearly differentiate the claims from the reference Cho, as Cho does not teach any of the added restrictions. With regards to claims 1 and 22, Cho remains to teach the added restrictions, i.e. the rudder stock tube is rotatable while in the receiving shaft to align the holder element and complementary piece (e.g. see Cho Fig. 12) and is axially movable in the receiving shaft to place the holder element onto the complementary piece (e.g. see Figs. 6-7). Furthermore, Cho alone does not disclose the added limitation of claim 26, regarding filling the intermediate space with a bonding agent that is cured, Kluge et al. (US 7591230) teaches filling an intermediate space with a bonding agent that is cured. Therefore, Cho teaches the method for producing a rudder trunk comprising an intermediate space between a receiving shaft and rudder stock tube (e.g. see Cho Figs. 6-8), and upon being modified by Kluge et al. to have composite parts surrounding the intermediate space between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft, wherein the intermediate space is filled with a bonding agent that is cured (see Kluge et al. col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17), the predictable result of better alignment possibilities, suppression of welded connections and welding delay, and reducing weight (Klug et al. col. 1, ll. 51-55 and col. 4, ll. 18-23). Thus, the technical feature of an intermediate space filled with a bonding agent is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art.
The requirement for election of species is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 20 December 2022, 13 May 2025, 31 July 2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has/have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as follows:
(A) 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, (1) the heating elements of claims 19 and 32 and (2) the signal conductive means of claim 20 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 abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it refers to the purported merits of the invention (e.g. to improve hydrodynamic efficiency of a vessel) and uses implied phrases (e.g. a rudder trunk for a vessel is proposed). Appropriate correction is required (e.g. the following language for lines 1-2 is suggested: A rudder trunk for a vessel comprising: a rudder stock tube…). See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure-
(A) A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
(B) If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
(C) Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
(D) Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
(E) The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At para 101: “Fig. 2danother” is suggested to be: Fig. 2d another. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At para 104: “Fig. 5aanother” is suggested to be: Fig. 5a another. Appropriate correction is required.
(C) At para 105: “Fig. 5ba clamping” is suggested to be: Fig. 5b a clamping. Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure may have more informalities not identified above. Please review the specification for any further appropriate correction(s).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 1: “Rudder trunk” is suggested to be: A rudder trunk. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At lines 3-4: “the receiving shaft between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided” is suggested to be: the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided between the rudder stock tub and the receiving shaft
(C) At line 9: “wherein at least one complementary holder piece” is suggested to be: wherein the at least one complementary holder piece. Appropriate correction is required.
(D) At line 9: “rudder trunk” is suggested to be: rudder stock tube. Appropriate correction is required.
(E) At line 11: “rudder slock tube” is suggested to be: rudder stock tube. Appropriate correction is required.
(F) At line 12: “not filled so that” is suggested to be: not filled, so that. Appropriate correction is required.
(G) At line 13: “with respect lo each other” is suggested to be: with respect to each other. Appropriate correction is required.
(H) At line 15: “stock lube…in lhe axial direction” is suggested to be: stock tube…in the axial direction. Appropriate correction is required.
(I) At line 17: “onto the at the at least one” is suggested to be: onto the at least one. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 2 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 3: “manner so that” is suggested to be: manner, so that. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At line 4: “rudder trunk” is suggested to be: rudder stock tube. Appropriate correction is required.
(C) At line 5: “rudder trunk…comprising a rudder trunk” is suggested to be: rudder stock tube…comprising [[a]]the rudder trunk. Appropriate correction is required.
(D) At line 6: “shaft ,” is suggested to be: shaft,. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 5 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 5: “and/or that at” is suggested to be: and/or [[that]the. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 10 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 2: “tube in the state…shaft can be” is suggested to be: tube, in the state…shaft, can be. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 14 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 3: “rudder trunk so that...space a leakage…to the outer side by the sealing element is preventable” is suggested to be: rudder trunk, so that…space, a leakage…to the outer side, by the sealing element, is preventable. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 17 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 3: “the opening” is suggested to be: the at least one breakthrough. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 18 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 2: “heat input so that” is suggested to be: heat input, so that. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 20 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 2: “receiving shaft” is suggested to be: receiving shaft,. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 22 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 1: “Vessel” is suggested to be: A vessel. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At line 4-5: “the receiving shaft between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided” is suggested to be: the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided between the rudder stock tub and the receiving shaft
Claim(s) 26 is/are objected to because of the following informality(ies):
(A) At line 11: “are being placed” is suggested to be: are [[being]] placed. Appropriate correction is required.
(B) At line 12: “stock lube” is suggested to be: stock tube. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Such limitations are: Claim 11 recites “adjusting means” (see para. 49-50 for structure that supports the recited function of adjusting). Claim 20 recites “signal conductive means” (see para. 71 for structure to support the function of signal conductive).
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Holder element and complimentary holder piece in claims 1-4, 6-7, 22, 26 (see para. 25 for structure);
Clamping element in claim 5 (see para. 25 for structure);
Sealing element in claims 14, 30 (see para. 59 and 63);
Heating element in claim 19, 32 (see para. 70);
Adjusting devices in claim 28 (see para. 49-50).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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(s) 5, 26, 28, 30, 32 is/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.
(A) Regarding Claim(s) 5:
Claim(s) 5 recite(s): the at least one holder element and/or the at least one complementary holder piece is…and/or wherein the at least one holder element and/or the at least one complementary holder piece is…and/or wherein the at least one holder element and/or the at least one complementary holder piece is a clamping element. The most relevant portion(s) of the specification and/or drawings, found by the Office, at paragraph 25 discloses the same language as the claim. Thus, claim(s) 5 is/are rendered indefinite because the meaning and/or scope of the claim is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear what combinations the holder element or complementary element take due to the use of “and/or” throughout. For example, the holder element, as claimed, may be a pin and a recess and a clamping element at the same time but these objects are structurally different from each other. As a result, it is unclear what structures the holder element or complementary holder piece have when considering the “and” portion of “and/or.” Therefore, the language of the claim is such that one of ordinary skill in the art could not reasonably ascertain the metes and bounds of the claims, when construed in light of the specification, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For the purposes of examination, the Office will consider a prior art reference disclosing, teaching or suggesting the holder element and complementary holder piece each, respectively, being at least one of the objects recited to be pertinent to the relevant claim limitation(s).
(B) Regarding Claim(s) 26:
Claim(s) 26 recite(s): a rudder trunk…in a vessel…wherein a vessel is provided. The most relevant portion(s) of the specification and/or drawings, found by the Office, at paragraph 1 discloses a vessel. Thus, claim(s) 26 is/are rendered indefinite because the meaning and/or scope of the claim is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear if there is a single vessel or two vessels. Therefore, the language of the claim is such that one of ordinary skill in the art could not reasonably ascertain the metes and bounds of the claims, when construed in light of the specification, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For the purposes of examination, the Office will consider a prior art reference disclosing, teaching or suggesting at least one vessel to be pertinent to the relevant claim limitation(s).
(B) Claim(s) 28, 30, 32 is/are rejected due to inheriting the deficiency(ies) raised with regard to claim 26.
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) 1-7, 10-11, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Korean Publication No. 101903165 to Cho et al. (hereinafter “CHO”).
(A) Regarding Claim 1:
CHO discloses:
Rudder trunk for a vessel, comprising a rudder stock tube (Fig. 6, 100), a receiving shaft (which surrounds elements 320, Fig. 8) and a holder for holding the rudder stock tube in the receiving shaft (comprising elements 200 and 320), wherein, in a state of the rudder stock tube being arranged in the receiving shaft between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided (in the opening H2, i.e. the space in which the elements 200 and 320 are located), wherein the holder comprises at least one holder element (200) and at least one complementary holder piece (320), wherein the at least one holder element is arranged on the rudder stock tube (Fig. 6), wherein the at least one complementary holder piece is arranged at the receiving shaft (Fig. 8), and wherein the at least one holder element and/or wherein at least one complementary holder piece, in the state of the rudder trunk being arranged in the receiving shaft, projects into the intermediate space (Figs. 6-8), wherein the rudder stock tube is configured rotatably in the receiving shaft when the intermediate space is not filled so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece can be aligned with respect to each other by rotating the rudder stock tube as viewed in the axial direction (Fig. 12), wherein the rudder stock tube is arranged in the receiving shaft moveably in the axial direction when the intermediate space is not filled, so that the at least one holder element can be placed onto the at least one complementary holder piece (see Figs. 6-7, wherein the rudder stock tube is moved in the axial direction upward into the receiving shaft so that the holder elements 200 are placed onto the complementary holder pieces 320).
NOTE ON CLAIM INTERPRETATION:
The claims are directed to a “rudder trunk” rather than a method of assembling a rudder trunk. Therefore, the claim is directed to what the rudder trunk is and not what it does. Thus, the following is/are considered functional limitation(s): “so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece can be aligned with respect to each other by rotating the rudder stock tube as viewed in the axial direction” and “so that the at least one holder element can be placed onto the at least one complementary holder piece.” Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device meets the structural limitations of the claimed device and is capable of performing the recited function then the prior art device necessarily possesses the functionality claimed. In this case, the rudder stock tube having at least one holder element and the receiving shaft having at least one complementary holder piece of Cho meets the structural limitations of the claimed rudder trunk. Thus, the functionally defined limitations claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device (MPEP 2114(I)).
(B) Regarding Claim 2:
CHO further discloses:
The at least one holder element (200) and the at least one complementary holder piece (320) can be arranged and/or are arranged on each other in form-fit and/or force-fit manner (Figs. 6-8) so that, in the state of the rudder trunk being arranged in the receiving shaft, in particular, in a state of the rudder trunk being arranged on the vessel comprising a rudder trunk and a receiving shaft, a movement of the rudder stock tube in the receiving shaft in an axial direction of the rudder stock tube is hindered or prevented.
NOTE ON CLAIM INTERPRETATION:
The claims are directed to a “rudder trunk” rather than a method of assembling a rudder trunk. Therefore, the claim is directed to what the rudder trunk is and not what it does. Thus, the following is/are considered functional limitation(s): “so that, in the state of the rudder trunk being arranged in the receiving shaft, in particular, in a state of the rudder trunk being arranged on the vessel comprising a rudder trunk and a receiving shaft, a movement of the rudder stock tube in the receiving shaft in an axial direction of the rudder stock tube is hindered or prevented.” Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device meets the structural limitations of the claimed device and is capable of performing the recited function then the prior art device necessarily possesses the functionality claimed. In this case, the rudder stock tube having at least one holder element and the receiving shaft having at least one complementary holder piece of Cho meets the structural limitations of the claimed rudder trunk. Thus, the functionally defined limitations claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device (MPEP 2114(I)).
(C) Regarding Claim 3:
CHO further discloses:
at least two holder elements (200, Fig. 8) are provided, and/or wherein at least two complementary holder pieces (320) are provided.
(D) Regarding Claim 4:
CHO further discloses:
the at least one holder element (200, Figs. 6-8) is formed as a single piece with the rudder stock tube and/or is connected to the rudder stock tube in a materially bonded and/or form-fit and/or force-fit manner, and/or wherein the at least one complementary holder piece (320, Figs. 6-8) is formed as a single piece with the receiving shaft and/or is connected to the receiving shaft in a materially bonded and/or form-fit and/or force-fit manner.
(E) Regarding Claim 5:
CHO further discloses:
the at least one holder element (200, Figs. 6-8) and/or the at least one complementary holder piece (320, Figs. 6-8) is a projection, and/or wherein the at least one holder element (200) and/or the at least one complementary holder piece (320) is a receptacle, a recess, or a thread, and/or wherein the at least one holder element and/or that at least one complementary holder piece is a clamping element.
(F) Regarding Claim 6:
CHO further discloses:
the at least two holder elements (200, Figs. 6-8) are uniformly arranged across an outer circumference of the rudder stock tube, and/or wherein the at least two complementary holder pieces (320) are uniformly arranged across an inner circumference of the receiving shaft.
(G) Regarding Claim 7:
CHO further discloses:
the at least two holder elements (200, Figs. 6-8) are arranged spaced in the circumferential direction across the outer circumference of the rudder stock tube, and/or wherein the at least two complementary holder pieces (320, Figs. 6-8) are spaced in the circumferential direction across the inner circumference of the receiving shaft in such a way that, when inserting the rudder stock tube into the receiving shaft, the holder elements can be passed by the complementary holder pieces in the axial direction.
NOTE ON CLAIM INTERPRETATION:
The claims are directed to a “rudder trunk” rather than a method of assembling a rudder trunk. Therefore, the claim is directed to what the rudder trunk is and not what it does. Thus, the following is/are considered functional limitation(s): “in such a way that, when inserting the rudder stock tube into the receiving shaft, the holder elements can be passed by the complementary holder pieces in the axial direction.” Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device meets the structural limitations of the claimed device and is capable of performing the recited function then the prior art device necessarily possesses the functionality claimed. In this case, the rudder stock tube having at least one holder element and the receiving shaft having at least one complementary holder piece of Cho meets the structural limitations of the claimed rudder trunk. Thus, the functionally defined limitations claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device (MPEP 2114(I)).
(H) Regarding Claim 10:
CHO further discloses:
the rudder stock tube in the state arranged in the receiving shaft can be further adjusted in the receiving shaft (at least through axial movement as shown in Figs 6-7 or rotational movement as shown in Fig. 12), if the intermediate space (i.e. the space where the holder elements 200 and complementary holder pieces 320 are located) is not filled.
(I) Regarding Claim 11:
CHO further discloses:
adjusting means are provided (i.e., see in Figs. 6-7, the angled shape of the holder elements 200 and complementary holder pieces 320 allows for adjustment at least in the radial and axial directions), wherein the adjusting means are formed in such a way that a position and/or alignment of the rudder stock tube in the receiving shaft can be adjusted with respect to a radial direction of the receiving shaft and/or an angle between a central axis of the rudder stock tube and a central axis of the receiving shaft.
(J) Regarding Claim 22:
CHO further discloses:
Vessel with a rudder trunk, said rudder trunk comprising a rudder stock tube (Fig. 6, 100), a receiving shaft (which surrounds elements 320, Fig. 8) and a holder for holding the rudder stock tube in the receiving shaft (comprising elements 200 and 320), wherein, in a state of the rudder stock tube being arranged in the receiving shaft between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft, an intermediate space is provided (in the opening H2, i.e. the space in which the elements 200 and 320 are located), wherein the holder comprises at least one holder element (200) and at least one complementary holder piece (320), wherein the at least one holder element is arranged on the rudder stock tube (Fig. 6), wherein the at least one complementary holder piece is arranged at the receiving shaft (Fig. 8), and wherein the at least one holder element and/or wherein at least one complementary holder piece, in the state of the rudder trunk being arranged in the receiving shaft, projects into the intermediate space (Figs. 6-8), wherein the rudder stock tube is configured rotatably in the receiving shaft when the intermediate space is not filled so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece can be aligned with respect to each other by rotating the rudder stock tube as viewed in the axial direction (Fig. 12), wherein the rudder stock tube is arranged in the receiving shaft moveably in the axial direction when the intermediate space is not filled, so that the at least one holder element can be placed onto the at least one complementary holder piece (see Figs. 6-7, wherein the rudder stock tube is moved in the axial direction upward into the receiving shaft so that the holder elements 200 are placed onto the complementary holder pieces 320).
NOTE ON CLAIM INTERPRETATION:
The claims are directed to a “rudder trunk” rather than a method of assembling a rudder trunk. Therefore, the claim is directed to what the rudder trunk is and not what it does. Thus, the following is/are considered functional limitation(s): “so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece can be aligned with respect to each other by rotating the rudder stock tube as viewed in the axial direction” and “so that the at least one holder element can be placed onto the at least one complementary holder piece.” Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device meets the structural limitations of the claimed device and is capable of performing the recited function then the prior art device necessarily possesses the functionality claimed. In this case, the rudder stock tube having at least one holder element and the receiving shaft having at least one complementary holder piece of Cho meets the structural limitations of the claimed rudder trunk. Thus, the functionally defined limitations claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device (MPEP 2114(I)).
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) 13-14, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHO, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 7591230 to Kluge et al. (hereinafter “KLUGE”).
(A) Regarding Claim 13:
CHO teaches:
The intermediate space (i.e. the location of the holding elements 200 and the complementary holder pieces 320, see Figs. 6-8).
However, the difference between CHO and the claimed invention is that CHO does not explicitly teach the intermediate space is filled with a cured bonding agent.
KLUGE teaches:
composite parts surrounding the intermediate space between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft (Figs. 3 and 5-6), wherein the intermediate space is filled with a bonding agent that is cured (col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize composite materials and fill the intermediate space with a cured bonding agent, as taught by KLUGE, in order to form a rudder trunk in composite construction and thereby achieve the predictable result of better alignment possibilities, suppression of welded connections and welding delay, and reducing weight (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 51-55 and col. 4, ll. 18-23).
(B) Regarding Claim 14:
Modified CHO further teaches:
A sealing element is provided (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 36-37: tapered rings made of flexible materials), wherein the sealing element is attached to an outer side of the rudder trunk (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 37-38: for the lower edge of the trunk tube), so that when filling the intermediate space, a leakage of the bonding agent to the outer side by the sealing element is preventable.
(C) Regarding Claim 17:
Modified CHO further teaches:
the sealing element comprises at least one breakthrough (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 36-37: tapered rings made of flexible materials; furthermore, a “ring” structure inherently has a breakthrough), wherein the bonding agent (KLUGE col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17) can be introduced thorough the opening into the intermediate space.
(D) Regarding Claim 18:
Modified CHO further teaches:
the bonding agent can be liquified via heat input so that the rudder stock tube can be removed from the receiving shaft after liquefaction of the bonding agent (see KLUGE col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17 for bonding agent being resin; furthermore, it is known that the use of resin uses heat input to form a flow of resin material).
(E) Regarding Claim 19:
Modified CHO further teaches:
Heating elements are arranged in the intermediate space (see KLUGE col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17 for bonding agent being resin in an intermediate space; furthermore, it is known that the use of resin uses heat input to form a flow of resin material).
(F) Regarding Claim 20:
Modified CHO further teaches:
on the outer side and/or on the inner side of the rudder stock tube and/or the receiving shaft recesses are arranged (see KLUGE Figs. 4-5 at the structures 51a, 52a), wherein signal conductive means (see KLUGE Figs. 4-5 at windings 60) are arranged in the recesses.
Claim(s) 26, 28, 30, 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHO in view of KLUGE.
(A) Regarding Claim 26:
CHO teaches:
A method for producing a rudder trunk comprising a receiving shaft (which surrounds elements 320, Fig. 8) and a rudder stock tube (Fig. 6, 100) in a vessel, said rudder stock tube comprising at least one holder element (Fig. 6, 200) and said receiving shaft comprising at least one complementary holder piece (Fig. 8, 320), wherein a vessel is provided (see Fig. 1, ribs 300 and holder elements 200 for attaching to vessel not shown), wherein the receiving shaft is arranged in the vessel, wherein the rudder stock tube is inserted into the receiving shaft (Figs. 6-8), wherein the at least one holder element (200) is passed by the at least one complementary holder piece (320), wherein the rudder stock tube is rotated (Figs. 8 and 12) so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece are aligned to each other in an axial direction of the rudder trunk and/or the receiving shaft, wherein the rudder stock tube is moved in the axial direction (Figs. 6-7) so that the at least one holder element and the at least one complementary holder piece are being placed onto one another (see Figs. 7-8), and an intermediate space between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft (i.e. the space where the holding elements 200 and the complementary holder pieces 320 are located).
However, the difference between CHO and the claimed invention is that CHO does not explicitly teach the intermediate space is filled with a cured bonding agent.
KLUGE teaches:
composite parts surrounding the intermediate space between the rudder stock tube and the receiving shaft (Figs. 3 and 5-6), wherein the intermediate space is filled with a bonding agent that is cured (col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize composite materials and fill the intermediate space with a cured bonding agent, as taught by KLUGE, in order to form a rudder trunk in composite construction and thereby achieve the predictable result of better alignment possibilities, suppression of welded connections and welding delay, and reducing weight (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 51-55 and col. 4, ll. 18-23).
(B) Regarding Claim 27:
Modified CHO further teaches:
The rudder stock tube is aligned in the receiving shaft with adjusting devices, wherein alignment with a propeller axis and/or stern tube of the vessel is carried out, (i.e., see in Figs. 6-7, the angled shape of the holder elements 200 and complementary holder pieces 320 allows for adjustment at least in the radial and axial directions).
(C) Regarding Claim 30:
Modified CHO further teaches:
A sealing element is provided (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 36-37: tapered rings made of flexible materials), wherein the sealing element is attached to an outer side of the rudder trunk (KLUGE col. 1, ll. 37-38: for the lower edge of the trunk tube), so that when filling the intermediate space, a leakage of the bonding agent to the outer side is prevented by the sealing element.
(D) Regarding Claim 32:
Modified CHO further teaches:
Heating elements are arranged in the intermediate space (see KLUGE col 1, ll. 24-30 and col. 4, ll. 15-17 for bonding agent being resin in an intermediate space; furthermore, it is known that the use of resin uses heat input to form a flow of resin material).
Cited Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR 102154138, KR 20140064033, and KR 20150066007 teach a rudder carrier assembly with holder elements for a ship, US 20180346087 teaches a rudder blade with rudder blade hub connection with holder elements, DE 19646898 teaches a rudder shaft mounted clearance-free with holder element, JP S62163195 teaches rudder trunk with holder elements at the bearings.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA M MCCAFFREY whose telephone number is (571)272-3438. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (excluding Wednesday) 10AM - 2 PM EST.
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 Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached on 571-272-8648. 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.
KAYLA M. MCCAFFREY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/Kayla McCaffrey/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745