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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Andrewartha et al. (US 2024/0149979 A1).
Andrewartha et al. disclose a hydrofoiling watercraft comprising: a board with a top surface for supporting a user (see ¶0019: lines 4-5); left and right masts [58, 60] extending downwardly from the left and right sides of the board, respectively; and left and right fuselages [12, 14] mounted to outboard ends of the left and right mast, respectively, wherein a forward portion of each fuselage extends toward a direction of travel for the watercraft and a rearward portion of each fuselage extends opposite the forward portion. A hydrofoil wing [16] is mounted to the forward portions of the left and right fuselages; and a tail wing [18] is mounted to the rearward portion of the right fuselage and the rearward portion of the left fuselage.
Re claim 10, the masts are positioned inboard of the board (see ¶0075: line 5), and therefore, considered as extending downwardly from a bottom surface of the board. Each fuselage is rigidly mounted to an outboard end of a respective one of the masts, wherein the hydrofoil wing is rigidly mounted at the forward portion of the respective fuselage; and the tail wing is rigidly mounted at the rearward portion of the respective fuselage.
Claims 1, 3-4, 9, 15 and 19-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rosen (US 2022/0380005 A1).
Rosen shows a hydrofoiling watercraft (see Fig 5) comprising: a board [4] having left and right sides and a top surface for supporting a user; left and right masts [10] extending downwardly from the left and right sides of the board, respectively; and left and right fuselages [50] mounted to outboard ends of the left and right mast respectively, wherein a forward portion of each fuselage extends toward a direction of travel for the watercraft and a rearward portion of each fuselage extends opposite the forward portion. A hydrofoil wing [16] is mounted to the forward portions of the left and right fuselages; and a tail wing [16] is mounted to the rearward portion of the right fuselage and the rearward portion of the left fuselage.
Re claim 3, the hydrofoil wing further comprises: a right side portion extending outwardly from the right mast, a left side portion extending outwardly from the left mast, and wherein the right and left side portions both sweep rearwardly away from the direction of travel for the watercraft (see Fig 5 and Fig 6).
Re claim 4, the hydrofoil wing further comprises: a right side portion extending outwardly from the right mast, a left side portion extending outwardly from the left mast, and wherein the right and left side portions both angle downwardly away from the board (see Fig 6).
Re claim 9, the hydrofoil wing comprises a cross-section having a concave lower surface (see Fig 6) and a downward-sloped trailing edge (see Fig 5).
Re claim 15, the hydrofoil wing comprises: a first wing portion extending substantially between the right mast and the left mast; a right side wing portion extending outwardly from the right mast; and a left side wing portion extending outwardly from the left mast; wherein the right side wing portion and the left side wing portion both sweep rearwardly away from a direction of travel for the watercraft.
Re claim 19, the right side wing portion and the left side wing portion both angle downwardly away from the board.
Re claim 20, the first wing portion, the right side wing portion, and the left side wing portion each comprise a cross-section having a concave lower surface and a downward-sloped trailing edge (see Fig 5 and Fig 6).
Claims 15-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith (US 7192323 B2).
Smith discloses a hydrofoiling watercraft (see Fig 10) comprising: a board [110] having a top surface for supporting a user; right and left masts mast [116, 118] extending downwardly from right and left sides of the board, respectively; and a hydrofoil wing [112] comprising a first wing portion extending substantially between the right and left masts. The hydrofoil further comprises a right side wing portion extending outwardly from the right mast; and a left side wing portion extending outwardly from the left mast; wherein the right side wing portion and the left side wing portion both sweep rearwardly away from a direction of travel for the watercraft.
Re claim 16, a center mast [114] extends downwardly from the bottom surface of the board; wherein the hydrofoil wing is rigidly mounted to the center mast.
Re claim 19, in an embodiment shown in Fig 8, the right side wing portion and the left side wing portion both angle downwardly away from the board.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrewartha (US 2024/0149979 A1) in view of Sommerlatt (US 11,345,449 B2).
Andrewartha et al. disclose a hydrofoiling watercraft comprising: a board; left and right masts connected to a respective side of the board; and fuselages rigidly mounted to an outboard end of a respective one of the masts.
Andrewartha et al. however fails to expressly disclose the left and right masts as being rigidly connected to the board.
Sommerlatt discloses a hydrofoiling watercraft comprising a mast that is rigidly connected to a board.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to connect the masts of Andrewartha et al. to the board in a rigid manner, as taught by Sommerlatt. Having such an arrangement would have provided a hydrofoiling watercraft that was easy and inexpensive to manufacture, and which could be easily and safely operated in a predictable manner without requiring much training.
Claim 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosen (US 2022/0380005 A1) in view of DE 102018215176 A1 (‘176)
Rosen shows a watercraft comprising: a board [4] and a hydrofoil wing [16] with right and left side portions, as described above.
Rosen, however, fails to show the hydrofoil wing as having wingtip portions attached to the hydrofoil right and left side portions that angle upwardly toward the board.
DE ‘176 shows a watercraft (see Fig 1) comprising: a board [1] and a hydrofoil, wherein wingtip portions [7a, 7b] are attached to the hydrofoil right and left side portions, and wherein the wingtip portions angle upwardly toward the board.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the hydrofoil wing of Rosen with wingtip portions, as taught by DE ‘176. Having such a modification would have reduced wingtip vortices to reduce drag and improve hydrodynamic efficiency of the hydrofoils.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosen (US 2022/0380005 A1) in view of You et al. (US 11535343 B2)
Rosen shows a watercraft comprising: a board [4] having a top surface for supporting a user, as described above.
Rosen, however. fails to show a removable flotation portion surrounding at least a portion of the board.
You et al. show a watercraft comprising: a board [14] and a removable flotation portion [12] surrounding at least a portion of the board.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the board of Rosen with a removable flotation portion, as taught by You et al. Having such an arrangement would have provided the board of Rosen with increased displacement, thereby improving stability and safety of the board.
Regarding claim 8, although You et al. do not expressly disclose the use of gas for inflating the removable flotation portion, it is noted that air is a common and frequently used gaseous medium employed in inflatable marine watercraft. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to inflate the removable flotation portion of modified Rosen with air. Having such an arrangement would have provided an inexpensive and easily available source of inflation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 11-14 and 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20230042907 shows a hydrofoiling watercraft having masts connected to an anhedral hydrofoil wing
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJAY VASUDEVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6689. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 am - 3:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J. Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AJAY VASUDEVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615