DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendments were filed by applicant on 12/04/2025 and 12/19/2025.
Claims 1-21 are previously canceled.
Claims 22, 34, 40 and 41 are amended.
Claims 22-41 are remaining in the application.
The amended Drawings (Annotated, Replacement and New Sheets) are accepted, unless otherwise noted in this Final Office Action (OA).
The amended Specification is accepted, unless otherwise noted in this Final OA.
New Matter
The amendments filed on 12/04/2025 and 12/19/2025 are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because of new matter introduced into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: The amendments add new depictions and descriptive content where not previously provided in the disclosure. This new matter is specifically identified and further explained within this Final OA to follow. If not for this new matter, the previously identified objection of the Drawings and Specification would apply. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Final OA. The previous objection of the Drawings and Specification is provided below in highlight & italics for reference.
Drawings
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, the claimed double-walled and triple-walled tear and punction resistant material must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Similarly, the claimed inner fabric backing covered with an outer coating, stiffening element, light source and carrying bag must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above features as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
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. No new matter should be entered.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality:
No drawing reference characters are included for the features indicated in paragraphs 7 and 8 of this Office Action.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The Drawings are objected to under are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because of new matter introduced into the disclosure. The Drawings include added features and new figures to depict claimed subject matter not previously illustrated as such in the Drawing figures as provided in the original disclosure filed with the application. The applicant added such material in response to the examiner’s previous objection of the Drawings for not showing every feature of the invention as specified in the claims. Such an objection of the Drawings was not an invitation for applicant to add such features where not previously illustrated. This new material essentially depicts claimed subject matter in spatial relationships not previously shown in the Drawings. The original description is inadequate to support such new material as now shown in the Drawings. Therefore, such material is considered new matter. Applicant was specifically instructed in the Non-Final OA that 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. No new matter should be entered.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because of new matter introduced into the disclosure. The Specification includes added description for features and reference to such new features in the Drawings to expound on claimed subject matter not previously described as such nor illustrated in the Drawing figures as provided in the original disclosure filed with the application. The applicant added such material in response to the examiner’s previous objection of the Specification and Drawings for not showing every feature of the invention as specified in the claims. Such an objection of the Drawings and Specification was not an invitation for applicant to add such features where not previously described and illustrated as such. This new material essentially expounds upon description for claimed subject matter where not previously described as such in the Specification. Therefore, such material is considered new matter. Applicant was specifically instructed in the Non-Final OA in underlined text that no new matter should be entered.
The Specification is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant has not provided a marked up copy of the Specification showing (with strikeouts or brackets) all written material that is removed from the Specification and showing (with underlines) all material that is added to the Specification for comprehensive clarity and comparison, along with an additional clean (replacement) copy of the Specification that includes all changes made since the most recent previous version of the Specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The following newly added claimed features/limitations are not found in the Specification as are newly recited in the amended claims: “wherein the inner bag, the reinforcing bag and the outer bag are independent bags”, “when the salvage bag is at least partially inserted into the hole”, “which the inflatable salvage bag is at least partially inserted”, “the inner bag is independent of the reinforcing bag”, “the reinforcing bag is independent of the outer bag” and “inner passage is disposed between the valve and the inner bag”. Claim features/limitations should be as described in the Specification and terminology/nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, including the Specification and Claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 40 is objected to because of the following informality:
“man-hones man-holes” should be replaced with just -man-holes -.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 22-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims contain new matter as explained below and are also supported by new matter added to the disclosure as previously explained in this Final OA (see paras. 8, 9 and 12).
The following newly added claimed subject matter is not fully supported by the original disclosure as filed since it cannot be found in nor is described as is newly claimed: “wherein the inner bag, the reinforcing bag and the outer bag are independent bags”, “the inner bag is independent of the reinforcing bag”, “the reinforcing bag is independent of the outer bag” and “inner passage is disposed between the valve and the inner bag”.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Final OA.
If not for the new matter rejection explained in this Final OA, the previous prior art rejection in the Non-Final OA would apply as provided below in highlight & italics for reference:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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.
14. As best understood by the examiner, claims 22-27, 29, 30, 32-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: CN 109080785 A (UWT), cited by applicant. Regarding claims 22, 40 and 41, D1 discloses an inflatable salvage bag [1], for reducing fluid flow through a hole in a hull structure of a marine vessel or in a storage tank, the inflatable salvage bag [1] including: an inner bag [17], wherein the inner bag [17] is inflatable; an additional bag* [15, 16], wherein bag* [15, 16] surrounds the inner bag [17] and is configured to be tear and puncture resistant**; an outer bag [14], wherein the outer bag [14] surrounds the reinforcing bag [15, 16]; a valve (13), configured to connect the inner bag [17] with an external source of pressurized gas [31], in order to inflate the inflatable salvage bag [1]; and one or more friction bands, configured to enhance the friction between the inflatable salvage bag [1] and the perimeter of the hole in which the inflatable salvage bag [1] is inserted. See Figs. 1-3 and paras. [0015] and [0021]. *The additional bag [15, 16] is not explicitly disclosed as a reinforcing bag nor is such a bag explicitly disclosed as tear and puncture resistant. However, see D1 para. [0021]: "reinforcing layer comprises a horizontal weave layer [15] and an intermediate weave layer [16]; **in addition, every material is considered to be tear and puncture resistant to some degree, especially if said material is disclosed to include "a reinforcing layer comprising two weave layers [15, 16]". Therefore, the disclosed additional bag [15, 16] would have been considered a reinforcing bag and also puncture resistant inasmuch as such bag includes reinforcing layers as described above, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims, 24-27, 29, 32-37 and 38, see D1 Figs. 1-3 and corresponding written description. Regarding claim 23, D1 discloses a composite, elastic or rubber material; however, polyurethane is a well-known durable and elastic material, and providing such material would have facilitated a durable device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims 30 and 39, providing an additional bag, sleeve or protective cover in the shape of a bag or a sleeve that would accommodate the device for carrying and transport would have provided an additional protective barrier for the device for storage when not in use and would have facilitated transportation of such a device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. In view of the foregoing, it would have been considered 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 to provide such features to facilitate a durable device with a reasonable expectation of success, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The rejection combines known features to achieve expected results; no unknown features or unexpected results are achieved for the claimed subject matter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
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.
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The claimed limitation “the inner bag” lacks sufficient antecedent basis in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
23. If not for the new matter rejection in this Final OA, claims 28 and 31 would be 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
24. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
25. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J Morano can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
26. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Daniel V Venne/
Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3617
01/06/2026