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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “300” has been used to designate both the repositioning part and the housing. In this case, figure 1 shows the housing labeled as 300. 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. 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. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 8 “ repositoning ” should be spelled –repositioning-- . 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. In this case the following limitations will be interpreted as follows: Claim 3: “driving means for driving the repositioning unit” is an actuator. Claim 3: “coupling means...coupled to the propulsion part” is a mobile link between the repositioning part and the propulsion part. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1 , 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11 (and all claims that depend therefrom) 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. Regarding claim 1, lines 1 and 2 recite “ A propulsion unit for a lifebuoy, comprising: a buoyancy body (100) provided to float on water surface …” It is unclear if the buoyancy body is the lifebuoy or a different component, and if the lifebuoy is part of the claimed invention, or if only the propulsion unit is being claimed. Claim 5 line 2 recites “ wherein the driving module (320) slidingly moves from one end of the housing (310) toward the other end …” It is unclear how the recitation of an action limits an apparatus claim. This should be rephrased as -- wherein the driving module (320) is configured to slidingly move from one end of the housing (310) toward the other end —or similar. Claim 6 recites “ a detachable fastening part (500) detachably coupled to at least one or more selected from the buoyancy body having various shapes and the auxiliary fastening parts. ” It is unclear what has various shapes- the fastening part, or the buoyancy body. Also, does this mean that the component comprises various shapes in one embodiment, or that there are several shape options? Or does this mean that the fastening part and the buoyancy body are different shapes? Claim 8 line 2 recites “a plurality of auxiliary fastening parts is provided.” It is unclear if this is the same as the “at least one or more auxiliary fastening parts” recited in parent claim 1. Claims 10 and 11 recite “and drives the repositioning parts…” It is unclear how the recitation of an action limits an apparatus claim. This should be rephrased as –and configured to drive the repositioning parts— or similar. 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)(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 -3 , 5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Perdomo Tornbaum US 11 , 591 , 057 . Regarding claim 1, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses a propulsion unit for a lifebuoy, comprising: a buoyancy body 1 provided to float on water surface; at least one or more auxiliary fastening parts ( ribs connecting the device to the vessel ) coupled to the buoyancy body; at least one or more repositioning parts 150 coupled to the auxiliary fastening parts; and at least one or more propulsion parts 270 fastened to the repositioning parts so as to move the buoyancy body. Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1 - Perdomo Tornbaum Figure 11 Regarding claim 2, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses that the repositioning parts 150 are provided to change positions of the propulsion parts 270 on the basis of the water surface so as to allow the propulsion parts to be positioned underwater when the buoyancy body is floating, and the repositioning parts are provided so as to rotate at a predetermined angle. Regarding claim 3, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 2. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses that each of the repositioning parts 150 includes: a housing 40 provided to form a predetermined space therein; a driving module 240 , 600 , which is provided so as to be separated from the housing, has a part accommodated inside the housing, and includes a driving means for driving the repositioning part; and a coupling means 230 , which is provided to be coupled to the propulsion part while being rotated by being fastened to the driving means, and has a rotating shaft parallel to propulsion direction of the propulsion part (note that while not shown in figure 11, rotation device 150 is included which aligns the rotating shaft and propulsion direction- column 11, lines 3-7) . Regarding claim 9, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 2. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses: a control unit 600 provided to generate a control signal for controlling one or more selected from the propulsion parts and the repositioning parts; and a sensing unit 300 , 720 provided to detect at least any one or more selected from driving loads and arrangement positions of the propulsion parts (column 11, lines 17-29) . Regarding claim 10, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses that: the sensing unit includes a load sensing means 720 for sensing driving loads of the propulsion parts, and the control unit 600 obtains at least one or more load values through the load sensing means, and (is configured to drive ) the repositioning parts by generating control signals for driving the repositioning parts when the load values obtained through the load sensing means are less than a preset load value. Please note that Perdomo Tornbaum senses the load on the motor 282 for alignment of the propeller blades 287 . This takes place while the repositioning parts move arm 230 , meaning that control signals are generated at points when the load values are less than a preset value (such as before and after the arm enters the prop rotation range- see Perdomo Tornbaum figure 24). Regarding claim 10, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses that: the sensing unit includes a position sensing means 300 for sensing positions of the propulsion parts, and the control unit 600 obtains at least one or more position values of the propulsion parts through the position sensing means, and (is configured to drive ) the repositioning parts by generating control signals for driving the repositioning parts when the position values obtained through the position sensing means are out of a preset position value range. In this case Perdomo Tornbaum teaches several configurations for position sensor 300 . The control signals for the repositioning parts reflect the current known position of the propulsion parts. 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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perdomo Tornbaum US 11 , 591 , 057 . Regarding claim 5, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 3. Perdomo Tornbaum also discloses that: (parts of) the driving module ( is configured to ) slidingly move from one end of the housing 40 toward the other end thereof so as to be detachably coupled to the housing ( note that as all components are detachable, they can slidably move ), and the driving module includes: a module body 240 provided to be accommodated inside the housing and slidingly coupled to the housing; a control unit 600 , which is coupled to the module body and performs driving control of the driving module; and a power supply unit ( not shown ), which is provided to be coupled to the module body so as to supply power to the driving module. Perdomo Tornbaum teaches that the actuator 240 can be electric (column 6, lines 61-64), but is silent as to the nature of the electricity source. However, Perdomo Tornbaum does teach that the propulsion part 270 can have a battery. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to power actuator 240 with a battery as is taught for the propulsion part in order to use a simple, inexpensive and reliable source of power. Perdomo Tornbaum does not teach that all driving module components are within or coupled to the housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have formed the actuator, control unit and power source into a single module body in order to make maintenance or assembly easier , since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works , 150 U.S. 164 (1893). As modified, the entire module body can slidably move along the housing. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perdomo Tornbaum US 11 , 591 , 057 in view of Terada US 10 , 000 , 266 . Regarding claim 4, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 3. Perdomo Tornbaum does not teach details of the fastening parts. Terada teaches a propulsion unit which is attached to a buoyancy body by auxiliary fastening parts 102 , wherein each of the auxiliary fastening parts further includes a guide member 106 extending from the buoyancy body 20 in propulsion direction of the propulsion unit 16 , and each of the propulsion units further includes a sliding coupling part 104 coupled by sliding in extension direction of the guide member. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the propulsion unit of Perdomo Tornbaum with the sliding connection parts of Terada in order to simplify alignment and installation of the propulsion unit. Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 2 - Terada Figure 14 Claim s 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perdomo Tornbaum US 11 , 591 , 057 in view of Johnson US 5 , 931 , 710 . Regarding claim 6, Perdomo Tornbaum discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 2. Perdomo Tornbaum does not teach the recited detachable fastening part. Johnson teaches a deployable propulsion unit 10 which comprises a detachable fastening part 32 detachably coupled to at least one or more selected from the buoyancy body 1 8 having various shapes and the auxiliary fastening parts. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the propulsion unit of Perdomo Tornbaum with the detachable fastening part (safety chain) of Johnson in order to ensure that the propulsion unit is restrained and cannot move beyond the intended range, or to ensure that the assembly is retained in the case of catastrophic failure. Please note that all components are detachable. If applicant disagrees, then it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the fastening part detachable in order to simplify part replacement , since it has been held that if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to a first component to which a second component is applied, it would be obvious to make the second component removable for that purpose. In re Dulberg , 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 . Regarding claim 7, Perdomo Tornbaum and Johnson teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 6. Johnson also teaches that the detachable fastening part 32 includes: a fastening member ( bracket attached to transom ) detachably fastened to the buoyancy body 18 ; and a plurality of detachable bodies ( chain links ), which are coupled to the (propulsion unit) and hinge-coupled at at least one or more points so as to be foldable. Neither Perdomo Tornbaum nor Johnson explicitly teach that the detachable bodies are coupled to the auxiliary fastening parts, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to couple the detachable bodies to the auxiliary fastening parts in order to provide a safety retention method to the brackets without obstructing the rest of the device , since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse , 86 USPQ 70. Please note that all components are detachable. If applicant disagrees, then it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the fastening part detachable in order to simplify part replacement , since it has been held that if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to a first component to which a second component is applied, it would be obvious to make the second component removable for that purpose. In re Dulberg , 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 . Regarding claim 8, Perdomo Tornbaum and Johnson teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 7. Perdomo Tornbaum also teaches that a plurality of auxiliary fastening parts (attachment ribs) is provided . As modified, there would then be a detachable fastening part (chain) to each auxiliary fastening part. If applicant disagrees, then i t would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a detachable fastening part on each auxiliary fastening part , since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co. , 193 USPQ 8. Johnson also teaches that the detachable bodies ( chain links ) include: a first detachable body ( chain link of the first chain ) provided to be hinge-coupled to any one auxiliary fastening part selected from the plurality of auxiliary fastening parts; a second detachable body ( chain link of the second chain ), which is provided to be hinge-coupled to the first detachable body and hinge-coupled to the other one auxiliary fastening part selected from the plurality of auxiliary fastening parts; and an angle fixing member ( the first link attached to the bracket ), which is provided to restrain at least one or more of the detachable bodies selected from the first detachable body and the second detachable body, and both end portions of which are coupled to the auxiliary fastening parts adjacent to the both end portions, respectively. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the propulsion unit of Perdomo Tornbaum with the detachable fastening part (safety chains) of Johnson in order to ensure that the propulsion unit is restrained in the case of catastrophic failure. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Goudsmit US 2010 / 0136857 , Houle US 10 , 167 , 069 and Kraus US 11 , 801 , 926 teach propulsion devices that can be lowered into the water when desired. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Marc Burgess whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9385 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Samuel (Joseph) Morano can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 517 272-6684 . 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. /MARC BURGESS/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615