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 .
Notice to Applicant
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-14, 16-21 have been examined in this application. This communication is a final rejection in response to the “Amendments to the claims” and “Remarks” filed 1/5/2026.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 10 are rejected under 35 USC 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Number 3,431,879 to Westling.
Regarding claim 1, Westling discloses an apparatus, comprising:
A base (bottom plate 22);
Three or more planar sides connected to the base and to one another (plates 24), forming an enclosed pyramidal shaped structure (see Figure 1) having a cavity therein (column 2, line 23, “Anchor 14 is hollow”), said structure when viewed from a side comprising a height and a width (see Figure 1);
An inlet for placement of a flowable material having a density greater than sea water into said cavity (column 1, lines 50-52 disclose “By filling the anchor with bottom material, a heavier anchor is obtained for the same amount of anchor material as would go into a solid anchor”, and Figure 1 shows pipe 46 forming an inlet for the bottom material), wherein said inlet comprises a pressure regulating element (Pipe 46 is connected to anchor filling line 42, which has a valve 40 that comprises a pressure regulating element);
An outlet adapted to permit water within said cavity to flow out of said cavity, in response to placement of said flowable material within said cavity (column 2, lines 60-62 disclose “The bottom material settles in the anchor and the water flows out openings 26 and 28”);
One or more attachment points for a deployment line (anchor hook 20 comprises an attachment point for a deployment line); and
One or more attachment points for a mooring line (anchor hook 20 also comprises an attachment point for a mooring line”).
Regarding claim 4 (dependent on claim 1), Westling discloses the outlet comprises a pressure regulating element. Column 2, lines 63-68 disclose “Openings 26 serve as an automatic full anchor bypass also, i.e., since the holes are at the top, no destructive back pressure will be created on the pump by continued pumping after the anchor is full, since continued filling thereafter will simply overflow through openings 26 and 28”.
Regarding claim 10, Westling discloses an apparatus, comprising:
A base (bottom plate 22);
Four planar sides connected to the base and to one another (plates 24), forming an enclosed pyramidal shaped structure (see Figure 1) having a cavity therein (column 2, line 23, “Anchor 14 is hollow”), said structure when viewed from a side comprising a height and a width (see Figure 1);
An inlet for placement of a flowable material having a density greater than sea water into said cavity (column 1, lines 50-52 disclose “By filling the anchor with bottom material, a heavier anchor is obtained for the same amount of anchor material as would go into a solid anchor”, and Figure 1 shows pipe 46 forming an inlet for the bottom material);
An outlet adapted to permit water within said cavity to flow out of said cavity, in response to placement of said flowable material within said cavity (column 2, lines 60-62 disclose “The bottom material settles in the anchor and the water flows out openings 26 and 28”);
Wherein at least one of said inlet and said outlet further comprise pressure regulating elements (valve 40 at the top of anchor filling line 42 comprises an inlet pressure regulating element and openings 26 comprises an outlet pressure regulating element as described in column 2, lines 63-68);
One or more attachment points for a deployment line (anchor hook 20 comprises an attachment point for a deployment line); and
One or more attachment points for a mooring line (anchor hook 20 also comprises an attachment point for a mooring line”).
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 2, 7-8, 11-14 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 3,431,879 to Westling.
Regarding claims 2 (dependent on claim 1), 11 (dependent on claim 1), Westling does not disclose the height being about 30% and 40% of said width. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the anchor of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Regarding claims 7 (dependent on claim 1), 12 (dependent on claim 11), 14 (dependent on claim 13), Westling discloses said three or more sides comprise four sides (see Figure 1).
Westling does not disclose upper ends of said sides terminating in a flat surface forming a truncated pyramidal shape. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the anchor of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Westling as modified further teaches at least one of said attachment points positioned substantially centrally on said flat surface. Figure 1 shows link 20 being positioned centrally on the top of the anchor, and as modified would make the top surface flat.
Regarding claims 8 (dependent on claim 7), 13 (dependent on claim 12), Westling does not disclose said flat surface comprises a side length, and wherein said side length is between about 20% and 30% of said width. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the anchor of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 3,431,879 to Westling in view of US Patent Application Number 2021/0362809 by Levy.
Regarding claims 6 (dependent on claim 1), 16 (dependent on claim 14), Westling discloses the one or more sides comprise openings therein (openings 26 and 28), the one or more attachment points comprise ring elements (link 20).
Westling does not disclose plates fastened over at least one of said openings. However, this limitation is taught by Levy. Levy discloses a variable weight boat anchor, and the embodiment of Figure 6 discloses a plate (door 611/621) fastened over an opening. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Westling using the teachings from Levy in order to allow better control of when water and/or bottom material can be released from openings 26 and 28.
Westling and Levy do not disclose said one or more attachment points for a mooring line comprise ring elements attached to said plates. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to position attachment points wherever desired to attach lines in different directions as needed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim 9, 18-20 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 3,431,879 to Westling in view of US Patent Number 4,239,417 to Slatten.
Regarding claims 9 (dependent on claim 1), Westling does not disclose one or more sides comprises a skirt section extending beyond said base. However, this limitation is taught by Slatten. Slatten discloses an anchor 7 with a V-shaped rim 17, and Figure 3 shows rim 17 extending horizontally and vertically beyond truncated cone 13 of the anchor. Column 4, lines 4-9 disclose “To a certain extend this edge 17 will act as an anchoring skirt. Alternatively the ring element may be provided with a skirt (not shown) or rib extending around the ring element which, together or instead of said edge, is designed to provide adequate anchorage for the ring element”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Westling using the teachings from Slatten in order to better help the anchor settle into the sea floor.
Regarding claim 18 (dependent on claim 1), 19 (dependent on claim 9), 20 (dependent on claim 10), Slatten further teaches stiffening members disposed on outer surfaces of said sides. Column 4, lines 5-9 disclose “Alternatively the ring element may be provided with a skirt (not shown) or rib extending around the ring element which, together or instead of said edge, is designed to provide adequate anchorage for the ring element”. Ribs extending around the ring element would comprise stiffening members on the outer surfaces of the sides.
Claim 17, 21 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 3,431,879 to Westling in view of US Patent Application Number 2021/0362809 by Levy, in further view of US Patent Number 4,239,417 to Slatten.
Regarding claims 17 (dependent on claim 16), Westling does not disclose one or more sides comprises a skirt section extending beyond said base. However, this limitation is taught by Slatten. Slatten discloses an anchor 7 with a V-shaped rim 17, and Figure 3 shows rim 17 extending horizontally and vertically beyond truncated cone 13 of the anchor. Column 4, lines 4-9 disclose “To a certain extend this edge 17 will act as an anchoring skirt. Alternatively the ring element may be provided with a skirt (not shown) or rib extending around the ring element which, together or instead of said edge, is designed to provide adequate anchorage for the ring element. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Westling using the teachings from Slatten in order to better help the anchor settle into the sea floor.
Regarding claim 21 (dependent on claim 17), Slatten further teaches stiffening members disposed on outer surfaces of said sides. Column 4, lines 5-9 disclose “Alternatively the ring element may be provided with a skirt (not shown) or rib extending around the ring element which, together or instead of said edge, is designed to provide adequate anchorage for the ring element”. Ribs extending around the ring element would comprise stiffening members on the outer surfaces of the sides.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument that valve 40 in Westling is positioned not on, or as an element of anchor 14, anchor filling line 42 is used to pump bottom material into the anchor, and therefore comprises an inlet for placement of a flowable material having a density greater than sea water into said cavity as claimed, and valve 40 is positioned within line 42 and therefore within the inlet.
Regarding the argument that valve 40 of Westline cannot be read to comprise a pressure regulating element and that the normal use of the term valve does not regulate pressure, while it’s true that not all valves regulate pressure, the rejection pointed to column 2, lines 63-68, which discloses that openings 26 and 28 are needed to prevent destructive back pressure by continuing to run the pump after the anchor is full. This means that running the pump creates pressure in the anchor. Valve 40 closes fill line 42, and would prevent pump 12 from filling the anchor, and would thus regulate pressure. Furthermore, the claim provides no additional limitations that would further limit what is considered a pressure regulating element that would exclude the valve of Westline, and applicant’s disclosure provides no additional description of what type of pressure regulating element is used in the applicant’s invention.
Similarly, regarding the argument that openings 26 and 28 are not pressure regulating elements, column 2, lines 63-68 disclose the openings being used to prevent destructive back pressure, which comprises a pressure regulating element.
Regarding the argument that there is no basis for which a person having ordinary skill in the art would add doors or covers to the free-flowing openings 26 and 28 in Westling, the examiner listed the provision of additional control of when water and/or bottom material can be released as the rationale. Furthermore, regarding the argument that openings 26 and 28 are free-flowing openings and thus it wouldn’t be obvious to add doors, Westling discloses openings 26 and 28 letting water flow out as an automatic full anchor bypass to prevent destructive back pressure from pumping after the anchor is full. This means that openings 26 and 28 could be covered when not pumping.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the newly amended skirt element are moot in view of the current grounds of rejection.
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 MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30.
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, Josh Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
MICHAEL H. WANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights