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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed 17 April 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-18 and 21-22 remain pending in the application. Claims 1-9, 11 and 13-16 are currently amended. Claims 10, 12 and 17-18 are previously presented. Claims 19-20 are cancelled. Claims 21-22 are new.
Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 17 October 2025.
In view of the amendment to the claims 1-9, 11 and 13-16 the previous rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendment to the claims. Therefore, the rejection to the previous claims 1-20 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made, please refer to the detailed discussion below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 {Examiner note: claims 19-20 are cancelled as cited in Applicant’s Arguments page 13 of 17 April 2026.} have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “205” has been used to designate both “rear end portion 205 of the drive shaft 203” (See at least: fig. 6) and “electric motor 205” (See at least: figs. 10-11). 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 34 of 47 recites “a rear end portion 205” and pages 39-42 of 47 recites “electric motor 205” and “motor 205” multiple times. The spec. is not clear in view of figs. 6 and 10-11 as reference character “205” has been used for different structure.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 11, 14, 18 and 21-22 objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 11, 14, 18 and 21-22 all recite structure without reference characters in parentheses. The claim language of at least claims 11, 14, 18 and 21-22 are therefore inconsistent with the other claims. {Examiner notes: Examiner points out the above claims as an example and other claims may also be missing reference characters in parentheses.}
Claim 11 lines 2-3 “an electric motor”.
Claim 14 lines 2, 4 and 7 “electric motor”.
Claim 18 lines 2-3 “tail unit”.
Claim 21 in full has no reference characters in parentheses.
Claim 22 line 20 “tail unit”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6 and 11-12 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.
Claim 6 line 12 recites “and is a stator (174)” which is unclear in view of the preceding “wherein said safety member is provided downstream or upstream of said propulsion device (200)”. The claim language is not clear if the Applicant is only referring to the stator (174) being claimed as the preceding claim language conflicts with the positioning of the stator (174) (See at least: fig. 6 showing the stator 174 only downstream propulsion device (200)). Therefore, any additional safety members disclosed by the Applicant are not read in claim 6. It is not clear if the Applicant intended to limit the claim language to only the stator (174). For purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets only the stator (174) to be “the safety member”.
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "optionally", in line 4, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(h).
Claim 12 is rejected based on the claim 11 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ).
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)(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.
Claims 1-2 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Aoki et al. (US 20200010162 A1) {Examiner notes: this prior art is the U.S. Patent Application Publication for EP-3578453-A1 previously cited on Applicant’s IDS of 17 February 2023. This will be Aoki et al. (2020) as another prior art of Aoki et al. is used below.}. See at least: Aoki et al. (2020) fig. 1 reproduced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
449
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses a fuselage assembly (100) (underwater propulsion unit 1, housing 5; See at least: fig. 1) configured to be attached to a mast assembly (50) (Strut 3; See at least: fig. 1) of a powered hydrofoil watercraft (1) (an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle); See at least: para. [0024]), wherein said fuselage assembly (100) comprises a front portion (101) (first portion 5a; See at least: fig. 2) and a rear portion (140) (second portion 5b; See at least: fig. 2) detachably fixed to the front portion (101) (“...waterproof case 6 may be members separable at the boundary between the first portion 5a and the second portion 5b..”; See at least: figs. 2-3 and para. [0067]), wherein the front portion (101) comprises a mast assembly fixation section (106) (fixing part 6a with associated “an unillustrated fixing member (e.g. a bolt or the like)”; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0032]) and the rear portion (140) comprises an outer housing portion (170) (waterproof case 6, stream guiding case 8, filter covers 7, supporting case 9, and rear case 10; See at least: figs. 1-3) which accommodates a propulsion device (200) (propeller 11, propeller shaft 14, boss part 43; See at least: figs. 1-3 where propeller 11 is found inside rear case 10), wherein said outer housing portion (170) at least partially limits an outer dimension of a flow channel (161) (channel 23; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 6, 8, 9 and 10 with covers 7 define the channel 23) through which water is transported during operation of said hydrofoil watercraft (1), wherein said flow channel (161) is formed such that its cross sectional area is reduced towards an outlet side (spout outlet 22; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045]) of said flow channel (161), wherein said outer housing portion (170) is defined by a propulsion device accommodating section (171) (See at least: fig. 2 where the view best shows the space created by cases 6, 8, 9 and 10 with covers 7) configured to accommodate said propulsion device (200), and a nozzle section (172) (stream guiding case 8 or supporting case 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where figs. 1 and 2 best shows a slope and reduction in cross-sectional area internal to these cases) with an outlet opening (191) (spout outlet 22 or any separation joint of cases 8, 9 and 10 where the flow of water exits the respective case; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045]), wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises an upstream end portion (177) (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is upstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) defining an inlet opening (178) (introduction inlets 21 or any portion of cases 8, 9 and 10 or filters 7 where the flow of water enters the respective case; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0067]) and wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises a downstream end portion (179) (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is downstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) which comprises said nozzle section (172), and wherein said propulsion device (200) is accommodated in said outer housing portion (170) such that a user is prevented from touching said propulsion device (200) (filter 31, rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32; boss part 43, rectifying blades 44 and cases 9, 10; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0037] where the listed elements all prevent a user from touching at least the propeller 11 when the invention is operating), wherein said nozzle section (172) is detachably mounted to a downstream end portion of the propulsion device accommodating section (171) (cases 8 or 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 8 and 9 best show parting lines in fig. 2 and change in cross-sectional area).
Regarding claim 2, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein said outer housing portion (170) is configured for detachably fixing a tail unit (300) (supporting case 9, and rear case 10; See at least: figs. 1-3 where any of these cases can be interpreted as “a tail unit” due to being at a tail end of the invention {Examiner note: it is not clear that the tail unit must include a wing or foil due to the claim language.}) to the propulsion device accommodating section (171) (case 8; See at least: fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 13, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein said mast assembly fixation section (106) is provided on a top side (upper portion; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0032]) of said fuselage assembly (100), wherein said mast assembly fixation section (106) comprises a mounting recess (107) (“an unillustrated fixing member (e.g. a bolt or the like)”; See at least: figs. 1-4 and para. [0032] where “a bolt or the like” would include a hole for mounting the bolt and therefore is interpreted as “mounting recess”) in which a fuselage assembly fixation portion (54) (“an unillustrated fixing member (e.g. a bolt or the like)”; See at least: figs. 1-4 and para. [0032] where “a bolt or the like” is interpreted as “fixation portion”) of said mast assembly (50) can be inserted and locked (where bolts can be inserted into bolt holes and can be locked with lock washer or sealant; See at least: figs. 1-4 and para. [0032]), wherein said mast assembly fixation section (106) is designed for a positive locking (“an unillustrated fixing member (e.g. a bolt or the like)”; See at least: figs. 1-4 and para. [0032] where “a bolt or the like” is interpreted as “designed for a positive locking”) or an integral connection (this is not disclosed) of said mast assembly (50) with said mast assembly fixation section (106).
Regarding claim 14, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses an integrated propulsion unit (underwater propulsion unit 1; See at least: fig. 1) for a powered hydrofoil watercraft (an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle); See at least: para. [0024]), comprising the fuselage assembly (100) according to claim 1 (See at least: claim 1 rejection above), an electric motor (motor 12; See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029] “The motor 12 is configured as an alternating current electric motor for example.”) provided in said fuselage assembly (100) (See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029] where the motor 12 is shown to be internal to both housing 5 and waterproof case 6) and the propulsion device (200) provided in said outer housing portion (170) (See at least: figs. 1-3), said electric motor being operatively connected to said propulsion device (200) by means of a drive shaft (203) (propeller shaft 14; See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029]) accommodated in an inner housing portion (180) (internal space of waterproof case 6; See at least: fig. 2and para. [0029]), or wherein said propulsion device (200) is directly coupled to an output shaft (output shaft 13; See at least: fig. 2 and para. [0029] “An output shaft 13 of the motor 12 extends rearward and is coupled to a propeller shaft 14 rotatably supported by the waterproof case 6 with interposition of a coupling 15.”) of said electric motor.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3-5, 7, 15-18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (US 20190389551 A1) {Examiner notes: this prior art is the U.S. Patent Application Publication for EP-3581482-A1 previously cited on Applicant’s IDS of 17 February 2023. This will be Aoki et al. (2019) as another prior art of Aoki et al. is used above.}. See at least: fig. 9 of Aoki et al. (2019) reproduce below.
PNG
media_image2.png
422
731
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses limitations of claim 2 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose further comprising a wing attachment section (105) and a front wing (112) attached to said wing attachment section (105), wherein said wing attachment section (105) is provided at the front portion (101) of said fuselage assembly (100) and is configured to detachably mount said front wing (112).
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches further comprising a wing attachment section (105) (bow hydrofoil 43; See at least fig. 1-4) and a front wing (112) (right wing 46, left wing 47; See at least figs. 1-4 and para. [0067]) attached to said wing attachment section (105), wherein said wing attachment section (105) is provided at the front portion (101) (See at least: Fig. 1 where the bow hydrofoil 43 uses “bow” in the nautical meaning of “the forward end of a vessel”) of said fuselage assembly (100) (underwater propulsive device 20; See at least: figs. 1-9) and is configured to detachably mount said front wing (112) (See at least: fig. 9 and para. [0063] “More specifically, the bow hydrofoil 43 is detachably attached to the bow portion 31”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with bow hydrofoil 43 with wings 46, 47 of Aoki et al. (2019) with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing stabilization to the watercraft (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0022] “traveling of the watercraft with the flotation unit floating above the water surface can be stabilized.”).
Regarding claim 4, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 3 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein said tail unit (300) and/or said front wing (112) mounted on said fuselage assembly (100) are configured to be transferable between a use state in which said tail unit (300) is able to exert a stabilizing function and/or said front wing (112) is positioned to generate a lifting force, and a stowing state, wherein in said stowing state a mast assembly profile and a profile of said tail unit (300) and/or of said front wing (112) are arranged substantially in one plane, wherein said tail unit (300) and/or said front wing (112) are rotatable about a longitudinal middle axis (A1) of said fuselage assembly (100) or an axis parallel to said longitudinal middle axis (A1), such that said tail unit (300) and/or said front wing (112) are rotatable about 90° between said use state and said stowing state.
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein said tail unit (300) (stern hydrofoil 44;See at least: fig. 9 showing the stern hydrofoil 44 is detachable or attachable and para. [0066]) and/or said front wing (112) mounted on said fuselage assembly (100) are configured to be transferable between a use state in which said tail unit (300) is able to exert a stabilizing function (See at least figs. 1-4 and 13-14; para. [0077] “…The stern hydrofoil 44 is configured to reduce tilts of the watercraft 1 in the bow direction and the stern direction during traveling in order to stabilize traveling of the watercraft 1...”) and/or said front wing (112) is positioned to generate a lifting force (See at least figs. 1-4; para. [0056] “…the bow hydrofoil 43 is configured to generate upward lift by traveling of the watercraft 1...”), and a stowing state, wherein in said stowing state a mast assembly profile and a profile of said tail unit (300) and/or of said front wing (112) are arranged substantially in one plane, wherein said tail unit (300) and/or said front wing (112) are rotatable about a longitudinal middle axis (A1) (cylinder axis direction; para [0059]) of said fuselage assembly (100) or an axis parallel to said longitudinal middle axis (A1), such that said tail unit (300) and/or said front wing (112) are rotatable about 90° between said use state and said stowing state (See at least: figs. 1-8 where the fig. 8 best shows that both the stern portion 34 and the bow portion 31 to be able to be disassembled such that rotation of about 90˚ about the barrel portion 32 can occur, where fig. 9 shows the bow hydrofoil 43 would then be reinstalled therefore the invention of Aoki et al. is configurable with all wings (54, 55, 46 and 47) aligning in the same directional plane of the strut 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with detachable bow hydrofoil 43 with and stern hydrofoil 44 of Aoki et al. (2019) with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing detachable hydrofoils where they can be reassembled to retain the mating parts in different configurations to enhance portability (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0013] “bow portion may include a detachable bow hydrofoil, and the stern portion may include a detachable stern hydrofoil (sixth configuration)” with para. [0021] “the sixth configuration, portability of the watercraft can be enhanced.”).
Regarding claim 5, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein a cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178) (See at least: fig. 2 showing an internal cross sectional area of filters 7, and cases 8 and 9 in the propulsion direction going from larger to smaller as the water flows through channel 23) is larger than a cross sectional area of said outlet opening (191) (See at least: figs. 1-2 where spout outlet 22 has a cross sectional area that is smaller than that of filters 7, case 8 and portions of case 9), wherein said cross sectional area at said outlet opening (191) is at least 5% smaller than said cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178) and wherein said cross sectional area at said outlet opening (191) is 90% to 80% the size of said cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178), wherein said nozzle section (172) is made from a plastics material.
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein a cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178) (See at least: figs. 7-8 in the area near water inlet 29) is larger than a cross sectional area of said outlet opening (191) (See at least: figs. 7-8 in the area near water jet outlet 30), wherein said cross sectional area at said outlet opening (191) is at least 5% smaller than said cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178) and wherein said cross sectional area at said outlet opening (191) is 90% to 80% the size of said cross sectional area of said inlet opening (178), wherein said nozzle section (172) (See at least figs. 7-8; para [0089] “…then further decreases near the water jet outlet 30. Thus, a flow velocity of water flowing from the water inlet 29 to the water jet outlet 30 by rotation of the propeller 23 increases with a decrease in cross-sectional area of the channel, and is at maximum near the water jet outlet 30…” which is understood to be a nozzle) is made from a plastics material (see at least para. [0058] “…the stern portion 34 include stainless steel, and are not limited to specific materials…”).
However, Aoki et al. (2019/2020) does not explicitly disclose the specific sizing, percentages differences of the cross-sectional area, nor lists all the material that could be selected.
However, at the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to (1) used Aoki et al.(2020) fig. 2 or Aoki et al.(2019) para. [0089] “...decrease in cross-sectional area of the channel…” to have developed a design allowing proper thrust velocity to propel a user on a hydrofoil that is sized in the ranges as disclosed by the Applicant; or (2) to have selected a material such as “…plastics (ABS resin) …” (see at least: Aoki et al. para [0107] for selection related to the inner case 74) as disclosed by the Applicant. Applicant has not disclosed that specific sizing or percentages differences of the cross-sectional area; or that plastic material; provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the decreasing cross-sectional area and stainless-steel material because the law of conservation of mass is a known concept to create a velocity jet stream with materials that can withstand the pressure and temperature range of the design application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art to modify the underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Regarding claim 7, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein said flow channel (161) is formed between said outer housing portion (170) and an inner housing portion (180) (waterproof case 6; See at least fig. 2 where waterproof case 6 and filter covers 7 form a pair of flow channels) which is suitable for supporting said propulsion device (200) (See at least: fig. 2 showing waterproof case 6 have bearings 41 that support the propeller shaft 14), and/or wherein said flow channel (161) is formed as a ring channel extending about a longitudinal middle axis (A1) and circumferentially surrounding said inner housing portion (180) with its cross section in a direction perpendicular to said longitudinal middle axis (A1) defining a ring (See at least: fig. 2 where channel 23 is formed by portions internal to case 8 and external to case 6 having the shape and directions as claimed) and/or wherein said inlet opening (178) is formed between said upstream end portion (177) and an outer surface section (181) of said inner housing portion (180) (See at least: fig. 2 where channel 23 is formed by portions internal to filters 7/case 8 and external to case 6), and/or wherein said inlet opening (178) is formed as an annular inlet opening (See at least: fig. 2 where channel 23 is formed by portions internal to case 8 and external to case 6 having annular shape) or an elliptical inlet opening (See at least; fig. 4 where the combination of both filters 7 appear elongate but not elliptical), and/or wherein said flow channel (161) is configured such that an inlet angle (184) smaller than 20˚ is realized at said inlet opening (178) (See at least: fig. 2 and para. [0038] where filter covers 7 having “rod-like member 32 is inclined at an angle smaller than approximately 45° relative to the axis 11c of the propeller 11”).
Therefore, claim 7 is rejected for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 5 above. Further motivation is the benefit when the underwater propulsion unit causes propulsion, water present further forward than the projection can be introduced smoothly into the housing through the introduction inlet (See at least: Aoki et al. (2020) para. [0012]).
Regarding claim 15, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 14 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses a hydrofoil watercraft (1) (an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle); See at least: para. [0024]), comprising a board assembly (10) (a horizontal plate; See at least: para. [0024]), a mast assembly (50) (strut 3; See at least: fig.1) coupled to a lower portion (12) (“lower portion”; See at least: para. [0024] “the underwater propulsion unit 1 is attached onto a lower portion of an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle)”) of said board assembly (10), and the integrated propulsion unit according to claim 14 (See at least: rejection to claim 14 above), wherein a front wing (112) and a tail unit (300) are attached to said fuselage assembly (100) of said integrated propulsion unit.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does disclose wherein a front wing (112) and a tail unit (300) are attached to said fuselage assembly (100) of said integrated propulsion unit.
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a lower portion (12) of said board assembly (10) (watercraft 1 and flotation unit 2; See at least: fig. 1 which shows strut 3 attached to a lower portion of the flotation unit 2) and teaches wherein a front wing (112) (right wing 46, and left wing 47; See at least: fig. 2-3) and a tail unit (300) (stern hydrofoil 44; See at least: figs.2-3 and 9 showing the stern hydrofoil 44) are attached to said fuselage assembly (100) of said integrated propulsion unit.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with bow hydrofoil 43 and stern hydrofoil 44 of Aoki et al. (2019) with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing stabilization to the watercraft (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0022] “traveling of the watercraft with the flotation unit floating above the water surface can be stabilized.”).
Regarding claim 16, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 2 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein said detachable fixing of the tail unit (300) to the outer housing portion (170) is achieved by means of positive locking, and wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises an attachment portion (310) for detachably attaching said tail unit (300).
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein said detachable fixing of the tail unit (300) to the outer housing portion (170) is achieved by means of positive locking (screws 57; See at least: para. [0075] and figs. 7 and 9), and wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises an attachment portion (310) (internal threads 58; See at least: para. [0076] and figs. 7 and 9) for detachably attaching said tail unit (300) (stern hydrofoil 44;See at least: fig. 9 showing the stern hydrofoil 44 is detachable or attachable and para. [0066]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with detachable stern hydrofoil 44 of Aoki et al. (2019) with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing detachable hydrofoils where they can be reassembled to retain the mating parts in different configurations to enhance portability (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0013] “bow portion may include a detachable bow hydrofoil, and the stern portion may include a detachable stern hydrofoil (sixth configuration)” with para. [0021] “the sixth configuration, portability of the watercraft can be enhanced.”).
Regarding claim 17, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 16 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein the positive locking is a latching plug and socket connection having a dovetail geometry or being realized by pins.
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein the positive locking is a latching plug and socket connection (internal threads 58 with screws 57; See at least: para. [0075]-[0076] and figs. 7 and 9) having a dovetail geometry or being realized by pins (screws 57; See at least: para. [0075] and figs. 7 and 9).
Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 16 above.
Regarding claim 18, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 16 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein the tail unit comprises an attachment flange having a threaded opening.
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein the tail unit comprises an attachment flange (See at least fig. 9 for countersunk or counterbore surface) having a threaded opening (internal threads 58: See at least fig. 7 and 9 and para. [0076]).
Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 16 above.
Regarding claim 22, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses a fuselage assembly (100) (underwater propulsion unit 1, housing 5; See at least: fig. 1) configured to be attached to a mast assembly (50) (Strut 3; See at least: fig. 1) of a powered hydrofoil watercraft (1) (an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle); See at least: para. [0024]), wherein said fuselage assembly (100) comprises a front portion (101) (first portion 5a; See at least: fig. 2) and a rear portion (140) (second portion 5b; See at least: fig. 2) detachably fixed to the front portion (101) (“...waterproof case 6 may be members separable at the boundary between the first portion 5a and the second portion 5b..”; See at least: figs. 2-3 and para. [0067]), wherein the front portion (101) comprises a mast assembly fixation section (106) (fixing part 6a with associated “an unillustrated fixing member (e.g. a bolt or the like)”; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0032]) and the rear portion (140) comprises an outer housing portion (170) (waterproof case 6, stream guiding case 8, filter covers 7, supporting case 9, and rear case 10; See at least: figs. 1-3) which accommodates a propulsion device (200) (propeller 11, propeller shaft 14, boss part 43; See at least: figs. 1-3 where propeller 11 is found inside rear case 10), wherein said outer housing portion (170) at least partially limits an outer dimension of a flow channel (161) (channel 23; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 6, 8, 9 and 10 with covers 7 define the channel 23) through which water is transported during operation of said hydrofoil watercraft (1),wherein said flow channel (161) is formed such that its cross sectional area is reduced towards an outlet side of said flow channel (161) (spout outlet 22; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045] where fig. 2 best shows the cross sectional area of the water traveling opposite of the propulsion direction is reduced as it travels to spout outlet 22), wherein said outer housing portion (170) is defined by a propulsion device accommodating section (171) (See at least: fig. 2 where the view best shows the space created by cases 6, 8, 9 and 10 with covers 7) configured to accommodate said propulsion device (200), and a nozzle section (172) (stream guiding case 8 or supporting case 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where figs. 1 and 2 best shows a slope and reduction in cross-sectional area internal to these cases) with an outlet opening (191) (spout outlet 22 or any separation joint of cases 8, 9 and 10 where the flow of water exits the respective case; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045]), wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises an upstream end portion (177) (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is upstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) defining an inlet opening (178) (introduction inlets 21 or any portion of cases 8, 9 and 10 or filters 7 where the flow of water enters the respective case; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0067]) and wherein said outer housing portion (170) comprises a downstream end portion (179) (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is downstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) which comprises said nozzle section (172), and wherein in said propulsion device accommodating section (171) said outer housing portion (170) comprises an attachment portion (310) at which a tail unit (300) is detachably attached to the outer housing portion (170), wherein said nozzle section (172) is detachably mounted to a downstream end portion of the propulsion device accommodating section (171) (cases 8 or 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 8 and 9 best show parting lines in fig. 2 and change in cross-sectional area), wherein the tail unit comprises a stabilizing member (301), wherein the stabilizing member is a stabilizing wing (302).
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose said outer housing portion (170) comprises an attachment portion (310) at which a tail unit (300) is detachably attached to the outer housing portion (170), wherein said nozzle section (172) is detachably mounted to a downstream end portion of the propulsion device accommodating section (171) (cases 8 or 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 8 and 9 best show parting lines in fig. 2 and change in cross-sectional area), wherein the tail unit comprises a stabilizing member (301), wherein the stabilizing member is a stabilizing wing (302).
Aoki et al. (2019) in a similar field of endeavor, teaches said outer housing portion (170) comprises an attachment portion (310) (internal threads 58; See at least: para. [0058] and figs. 7 and 9) at which a tail unit (300) (stern hydrofoil 44;See at least: fig. 9 showing the stern hydrofoil 44 is detachable or attachable and para. [0066]) is detachably attached to the outer housing portion (170), wherein said nozzle section (172) (See at least figs. 7-8; para [0074] “…then further decreases near the water jet outlet 30. Thus, a flow velocity of water flowing from the water inlet 29 to the water jet outlet 30 by rotation of the propeller 23 increases with a decrease in cross-sectional area of the channel, and is at maximum near the water jet outlet 30…” which is understood to be a nozzle) is detachably mounted to a downstream end portion of the propulsion device accommodating section (171), wherein the tail unit comprises a stabilizing member (right wing 54 and left wing 55; See at least: fig. 9 and para. [0074]-[0075]), wherein the stabilizing member is a stabilizing wing (302) (right wing 54 and left wing 55; See at least: fig. 9 and para. [0074]-[0075]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with detachable stern hydrofoil 44 of Aoki et al. (2019) with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing detachable hydrofoils where they can be reassembled to retain the mating parts in different configurations to enhance portability (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0013] “bow portion may include a detachable bow hydrofoil, and the stern portion may include a detachable stern hydrofoil (sixth configuration)” with para. [0021] “the sixth configuration, portability of the watercraft can be enhanced.”). Further benefit of providing stabilization to the watercraft (See at least: Aoki et al. (2019) para. [0022] “traveling of the watercraft with the flotation unit floating above the water surface can be stabilized.”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al (US 20190389551 A1) and in further view of Vermeulen (US 10308336 B1). See at least: fig. 3 of Vermeulen reproduced below.
PNG
media_image3.png
527
795
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein said outer housing portion (170) and said propulsion device (200) accommodated therein are configured and arranged with respect to each other such that it is not possible to reach said propulsion device (200) with a human extremity, wherein at least one of a length of said outer housing portion (170) (See at least: figs. 1-4), the size of said inlet opening (178) (See at least: figs. 1-4), the size of said outlet opening (191) (See at least: figs. 1-4), the position of said propulsion device (200) in said outer housing portion (170) (See at least: figs. 1-4), and a dimension of said flow channel (161) (See at least: figs. 1-4) is configured such that said propulsion device (200) cannot be reached by means of a human extremity through said inlet opening (178) and said outlet opening (191) or wherein a safety member (filter 31, rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32; boss part 43, rectifying blades 44 and cases 9, 10; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0037] where the listed elements all prevent a user from touching at least the propeller 11 when the invention is operating) is provided which blocks an access for human extremities, wherein said safety member is provided downstream (boss part 43, rectifying blades 44 and cases 9, 10) or upstream (filter 31, rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32) of said propulsion device (200) and is a stator (174) (rectifying blades 44; See at least: figs. 1-3), and wherein said length of said flow channel (161) between said inlet opening (178) and said propulsion device (200) is at least 30mm, or wherein a height or width of said inlet opening (178) is equal to or smaller than 30mm, or wherein a length of said stator (174) in flow direction of said flow channel (161) is equal to or larger than 5mm, or wherein said size of said outlet opening is equal to or smaller than 30mm.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not explicitly disclose that it is not possible to reach said propulsion device (200) with a human extremity... and a dimension of said flow channel (161) (See at least: figs. 1-4) is configured such that said propulsion device (200) cannot be reached by means of a human extremity... along with the specific dimensions related to the flow channel (161)... inlet opening (178)... stator (174)... outlet opening.
Vermeulen in a similar field of endeavor, teaches that it is not possible to reach said propulsion device (200) with a human extremity. (See at least: figs. 1-4; col. 1 lines 51-55 where the problem is known “Access to the impeller/propeller is often uninhibited, which presents a safety hazard to a user especially for a watercraft where a user is consistently proximate the propulsion system such as but not limited to a powered surfboard…”) Vermeulen uses techniques of an internal impeller 60, a nozzle 4, an impeller guard 62 to protect the user through the use of shielding the internal impeller from the user with the use of blocking parts or standoff distances while in use and a sliding standby technique to completely block access making the internal impeller 60 “inaccessible” when not in use.
Aoki et. al (2020) uses the known techniques of the internal propeller 11, filter 31, rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32; boss part 43, rectifying blades 44 and cases 9, 10 taught by Vermeulen to keep the user safe. Where the rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32 makes the inlet “inaccessible” to a user as the spacing is close enough to prevent “foreign matter” introduction to the channel 23 which is an improvement on the standby technique of Vermeulen. The rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32 all provide standoff distances or blocking parts (which are known in the art as; guards, shrouds, mesh, cages…) as taught by techniques of Vermeulen.
Therefore, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, could have applied the known techniques of Vermeulen in the same way to the underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et. al (2020) and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make use these known techniques for the benefit of preventing incidental access to the impeller/propeller by the user while using or handling the underwater propulsive device (See at least: Vermeulen col. 1 lines 51-55).
Additionally, at the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have sized channel 23, introduction inlets 21 or rectifying blades 44 to the Applicant’s disclosed range. Applicant has not disclosed that specific sizing provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicants' invention to perform equally well with sizing outside the disclosed range. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art to modify the underwater propulsion unit 1 of Aoki et. al (2020) to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al (US 20190389551 A1) and in further view of Schibli (US 20190106190 A1). See at least fig. 13C of Schibli reproduced below.
PNG
media_image4.png
401
466
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose further comprising a flap mechanism...
Schibli in a similar field of endeavor, teaches further comprising a flap mechanism (closable flaps 1376, 1377 with hinges 1375.1, 1375.2, 1376.1, 1376.2; See at least figs. 13A-13D; para. [0123]) for selectively opening and closing said inlet opening (178) (closable water inlet ports 1387; See at least fig. 13B and para [0122]), wherein said flap mechanism is designed such that a negative pressure (a negative pressure zone P2; See at least: fig. 13C and para. [0123]) generated by said propulsion device (200) (device 1300) automatically actuates said flap mechanism (See at least: fig. 13C and para. [0123]), wherein said flap mechanism comprises one or more flaps (See at least: figs. 13A-13D showing more than one) which are pre-biased in the closing direction (See at least: figs. 13A-13C and para. [0123] “…Doors or flaps 1376, 1377 can further be operatively connected to a spring or leaflet to body 1312 of device 1300 to assist in the closing or opening of doors or flaps 1376, 1377), and which flaps (closable flaps 1377) are moved into an opened position against the pre-biasing force when there is a corresponding negative pressure and are automatically moved into a closed position driven by the pre-biasing force when there is no sufficiently large negative pressure (See at least: figs. 13A-13D; paras. [0123]-[0124]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the underwater propulsive device 1 of Aoki et al, (2020) with the propulsion device 1300 consisting of closable flaps 1376, 1377 of Schibli with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing drag on the watercraft when the propulsion device is not powered (See at least: Schibli para [0122] “…when propulsion device 1300 is not powered, it is preferable to reduce a drag of watercraft to a maximum...”).
Claims 11-12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Montague et al. (US 20180072383 A1). See at least: selected figs. from Montague et al. below.
PNG
media_image5.png
491
901
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses wherein the front portion (101) is adapted to house an electric motor (motor 12; See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029] “The motor 12 is configured as an alternating current electric motor for example.”)...
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein said electric motor is thermally coupled to a casing (110) of said front portion (101) for cooling purposes, wherein optionally a motor housing of said electric motor also forms a part of said casing (110) of said front portion (101) in such a manner that said motor housing gets in contact with water on its outer side, such that a direct cooling of said electric motor is possible.
Montague et al. in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein the front portion (101) is adapted to house an electric motor (the power system to include the motor: See at least para. [0125]) wherein said electric motor is thermally coupled to a casing (110) (housing 1302; See at least fig. 13 para [0113]) of said front portion (101) for cooling purposes (See at least para. [0125] “In some implementations, a propulsion pod that houses part of the power system (e.g., motor, gearbox, motor controller, etc.) can be made of a material such as aluminum that dissipates heat, so that the whole propulsion pod acts as a heat sink, cooling the inside components as the jetfoiler passes through water. Alternatively, the propulsion pod may be made from carbon fiber or a similar material and have a heat sink panel, similar to the propulsion pod 1300 of FIG. 13.”), wherein optionally a motor housing of said electric motor also forms a part of said casing (110) of said front portion (101) in such a manner that said motor housing gets in contact with water on its outer side, such that a direct cooling of said electric motor is possible (See at least: para. [0128] “…the motor system 1508, that is made of aluminum or a similar material so that the whole pod acts as a heat sink...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the underwater propulsive device 1 of Aoki et al. (2020) with a heat sink panel or materials that dissipates heat of Montague et al. with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of cooling the inside components of the underwater propulsive device as it passes through water (See at least: Montague para [0125] “… cooling the inside components as the jetfoiler passes through water...”).
Regarding claim 12, Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Montague et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 11 as noted above.
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose wherein said front portion (101) is further adapted to receive a controller (inverter; See at least: para. [0033] “an unillustrated inverter for changing the rotation speed of the motor 12 is further disposed”) couplable to said electric motor, said controller being thermally coupled to said casing (110)...
Montague et al. in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein said front portion (101) is further adapted to receive a controller (motor controller 1506; See at least: para. [0128] and fig. 15A) couplable to said electric motor, said controller being thermally coupled to said casing (110) (access panel 1502; See at least: para. [0127] and fig. 15A: where the access panel is part that makes up the external housing) of said front portion (101) for cooling purposes, wherein said front portion (101) optionally comprises a controller receiving space separated and sealed from an electric motor receiving space (See at least: para [0128] “…The motor controller 1506 can also be located inside the propulsion pod, aft of the motor of the motor system 1508…” and fig. 15A).
Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 22, Aoki et al. (2020) discloses an integrated propulsion unit (underwater propulsion unit 1; See at least: fig. 1) for a powered hydrofoil watercraft) (an unillustrated sliding body (vehicle); See at least: para. [0024]), comprising: a fuselage assembly (underwater propulsion unit 1, housing 5; See at least: fig. 1) having a front portion (waterproof case 6; See at least: fig. 2) and a propulsion section (waterproof case 6, stream guiding case 8, filter covers 7, supporting case 9, and rear case 10; See at least: figs. 1-3), wherein the front portion houses an electric motor (motor 12; See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029] “The motor 12 is configured as an alternating current electric motor for example.”), wherein the electric motor is in thermal communication with an outer wall (wall of waterproof case 6; See at least: fig. 2 where the fig. shows the motor 12 and cut section of case 6 to touch and is interpreted as thermal communication through the heat transfer of conduction) of the front portion such that, during operation, heat generated by the electric motor is dissipated to ambient water surrounding the front portion, an inner housing portion (waterproof case 6; See at least fig. 2) extending rearwardly from the front portion and accommodating a drive shaft (propeller shaft 14; See at least: figs. 1-2 and para. [0029]) operatively connecting the electric motor to a propulsion device (propeller 11, propeller shaft 14, boss part 43; See at least: figs. 1-3), an outer housing portion (waterproof case 6, stream guiding case 8, filter covers 7, supporting case 9, and rear case 10; See at least: figs. 1-3) at least partially surrounding the inner housing portion, wherein a flow channel (channel 23; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 6, 8, 9 and 10 with covers 7 define the channel 23) is formed between the outer housing portion and the inner housing portion through which water is transported during operation, wherein the outer housing portion comprises an upstream end portion (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is upstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) defining an inlet opening (introduction inlets 21 or any portion of cases 8, 9 and 10 or filters 7 where the flow of water enters the respective case; See at least: fig. 1 and para. [0067]) and a downstream end portion (any end portion of cases 6, 8, 9, 10 or covers 7 end that is downstream the flow of water while operating; See at least: figs. 1-3) comprising a nozzle section (stream guiding case 8 or supporting case 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where figs. 1 and 2 best shows a slope and reduction in cross-sectional area internal to these cases) with an outlet opening (spout outlet 22 or any separation joint of cases 8, 9 and 10 where the flow of water exits the respective case; See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045]), wherein the flow channel is configured such that its cross-sectional area is reduced from the inlet opening towards the outlet opening so as to accelerate water flow exiting through the nozzle section (See at least: figs. 1-3 and para. [0045] where fig. 2 best shows the cross sectional area of the water traveling opposite of the propulsion direction is reduced as it travels to spout outlet 22; where it is well known due to the law of conservation of mass that a change in area would therefore have a direct change in velocity of the water flowing through the nozzle section), wherein a stator (rectifying blades 44; See at least: figs. 1-3) is provided upstream or downstream of the propulsion device (See at least: figs. 1-3 where rectifying blades 44 are downstream the propeller 11), wherein the propulsion section, which comprises the outer housing portion, the inner housing portion, and the propulsion device, is detachably coupled to the front portion of the fuselage assembly (See at least: para. [0067] “The waterproof case 6 may be members separable at the boundary between the first portion 5a and the second portion 5b.” where best shown in fig. 2 would include all the listed structure the Applicant defined as “the propulsion section”), and wherein the nozzle section is detachably mounted to the outer housing portion (cases 8 or 9; See at least: figs. 1-3 where cases 8 and 9 best show parting lines in fig. 2 and change in cross-sectional area) such that the propulsion device is accessible for service upon removal of the nozzle section without requiring access to the electric motor (See at least: figs. 1-3).
However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not explicitly disclose during operation, heat generated by the electric motor is dissipated to ambient water surrounding the front portion...
Montague et al. in a similar field of endeavor, teaches during operation, heat generated by the electric motor is dissipated to ambient water surrounding the front portion (See at least para. [0125] “In some implementations, a propulsion pod that houses part of the power system (e.g., motor, gearbox, motor controller, etc.) can be made of a material such as aluminum that dissipates heat, so that the whole propulsion pod acts as a heat sink, cooling the inside components as the jetfoiler passes through water. Alternatively, the propulsion pod may be made from carbon fiber or a similar material and have a heat sink panel, similar to the propulsion pod 1300 of FIG. 13.”)...
Therefore, claim 22 is rejected for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 11 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 8, in combination with the other structures required by the base claim and intervening claims, the prior art fails to disclose, teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed configuration’s element “…wherein said struts (190) are aerodynamically formed so as to reduce turbulences and may comprise a wing shape…”. The closest prior art of Aoki et al. (2020) in view of Aoki et al. (2019) and further in view of either Reuter et al. (WO 0220347 A2) or “Becker Marine Systems” (DE 202008006069 U1). Aoki et al. (2020) discloses two introduction inlets 21 for introducing water into the housing 5, where a filter 31 disposed along the opened surface of the introduction inlet 21. The filter 31 includes a large number of rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32, which are disposed at spacings (See at least: figs. 1-4 and para [0037]). Where the rod-like members (foreign matter restricting members) 32 are interpreted as “struts (190)” as para. [0037] disclose “...rod-like members 32 can reject ingress of an underwater foreign matter from the introduction inlet 21 into the housing 5. In addition, since each filter 31 is disposed along the opened surface inclined as described above, the underwater propulsion unit 1 can cause propulsion while smoothly thrusting an underwater foreign matter outward using the filter 31.” However, Aoki et al. (2020) does not disclose ...so as to reduce turbulences and may comprise a wing shape. Reuter et al. teaches an axis can be connected upstream and downstream of the rotor to the nozzle (the nozzle inner jacket) via aerodynamically shaped struts where it is particularly advantageous to design these struts as guide devices (pre-guide and guide wheel) in order to minimize flow losses (See at least: Reuters et al. text copy page 3 of 7 , 6th full para. from the top of the page; and claims 2-3). “Becker Marine Systems” similarly teaches a front nozzle which includes fins or air foils arranged in symmetry to the axis of a screw axis for the benefit of reducing the power of a screw ship. The device of “Becker Marine Systems” is placed in from of the propeller. However, both prior art of Reuter et al. and “Becker Marine Systems” are improper for combination or substitution of Aoki et al. (2020) rod-like members 32 as one for filtering and the other for minimizing flow losses or reducing power required by the vessel. See at least selected figs. from the prior art below.
PNG
media_image6.png
545
1555
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
565
1446
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim 9, depends on claim 8; therefore, claim 9 is allowable for at least the same reasoning as applied to claim 8 above.
Additional Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure and may be found in the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
“Becker Marine Systems” (DE 202008006069 U1) is relevant to at least claim 8 as discussed above.
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 ERIC ANTHONY STARCK whose telephone number is (571)272-6651. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (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, MARC JIMENEZ can be reached at (571) 272-4530. 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.
/ERIC ANTHONY STARCK/Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
Prosecution Insights