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 .
The present application is 371 of PCT/US2021/055352 filed on October 18, 2021.
Drawings
The drawings were received on April 12, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Marcy et al. (US 11,371,808).
Marcy et al. discloses the same boat gate system and method as claimed, as shown in Figures 1-9, which is comprised of a floating barrier with a plurality of connected floating segments, each defined as Part #100, a floating gate segment, defined as Part #170, that spans an opening in said floating barrier, a latch, defined as Part #210, with striker and hook portions on an extendable boom, as shown in Figure 5, that is adapted to join said floating gate segment to an adjacent floating barrier segment, as shown in Figure 6, movement means for said latch, defined as Part #212, which can be in the form of a linear actuator, as described in lines 9-15 of column 4, one or more thrusters, each defined as Part #221, that are operatively connected to said floating gate segment and are adapted to move said floating gate segment between an open position and a closed position, as shown in Figures 5-6, and a wireless control system, defined as Parts #300, 400 and 500, that is operatively connected to said floating gate segment, said latch and said one or more thrusters, where said wireless control system is further comprised of one or more digital processors, defined as Part #500, and positional detection systems in the form of a Global Positioning System (GPS) and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR), where said latch and said one or more thrusters are autonomously or remotely operated by said wireless control system to position said floating gate segment and engage said latch, as shown in Figures 5-6, to move said floating gate segment from an open position to a closed position. Capture gear, defined as Part #240, is attached to a barrier termination of one of said floating segments, where said latch with said striker and hook portions is actuated by said movement means in order to engage said capture gear to close and lock said floating gate segment, as shown in Figure 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 3-5, 7-8 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marcy et al. in view of Cesar (FR 3075756 A1).
Marcy et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a transmitter that is mounted on a floating gate segment, and a control system with a receiver for receiving signals from said transmitter.
Cesar discloses an aquatic protection device, as shown in Figures 1-7, which is comprised of a floating barrier, defined as Part #10, with a plurality of connected floating segments, defined as Parts #50, 60 and 70, a plurality of monitoring and alert modules, each defined as Part #700, that are each configured with a transmitter so as to transmit a radio wave carrying information, and a wireless control system, defined as Part #730, with a receiver for receiving all information that is transmitted by said plurality of monitoring and alert modules, as shown in Figure 7.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize a floating barrier with a plurality of transmitters, and a wireless control system with a receiver for receiving information that is transmitted by said plurality of transmitters, as taught by Cesar, in combination with the boat gate system as disclosed by Marcy et al. for the purpose of providing an access barrier system with means to wirelessly transmit and receive position information in order to facilitate operation of said access barrier system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9-10 and 13 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARS A OLSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-6685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00am - 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, SAMUEL J MORANO can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
December 1, 2025
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615