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 .
Election/Restrictions
No claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 11/01/2024.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species IX in the reply filed on 11/01/2024 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “…no serious burden exists, and the Restriction Requirement is improper…the Examiner has not met the burden of providing a restriction requirement is necessary regarding any of the Groups in the case. The Examiner recites blanket statements about the Groups. The only explanation provided by the Examiner for the species groupings is one single ‘example’ stating that ‘Species IX requires a module box housing with fins for directing the flow of water not required in Species I-VIII…”. This is not found persuasive because each of the species has unique features not required in the search of the other species and which therefore presents a burden of search. The Examiner stated in the single example that the feature of “a module box housing with fins for directing the flow of water” associated with Species IX represents a feature not required in the search of the other species and therefore provides the basis for Examiner’s position that there is a burden to search all of the species present in the application. If applicant is traversing on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the Examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/11/2025. These drawings are approved by the Examiner.
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 1-20 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.
In regard to claim 1, line 7, the term “the motion of the one or more propeller blades” lacks positive antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 1, line 9, the term “said housing structure” lacks positive antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 1, lines 9-10, the phrase “said decoy structure, said propeller, and said housing structure are rigidly connected along a central axis” renders the claim vague and indefinite since it is unclear to what other structure that the decoy structure, propeller, and housing structure are rigidly connected to and also it is unclear as to what structure the central axis is being designated. Possibly the phrase should be rewritten as --said decoy structure, said propeller, and said housing structure are rigidly connected to each other along a central axis of the buoyant decoy--.
In regard to claim 8, the term “the decoy element” lacks positive antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 9, the phrase “the propeller has a pitch and comprises at least one blade” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the propeller itself does not have a pitch and that instead the blades of the propeller have a pitch (also see paragraph 0090 of the present specification which states “The propeller blades may also have a defined pitch” and also includes various pitch values measured in inches for the propeller blades). Possibly the phrase should be rewritten as --the propeller comprising at least one blade having a pitch--.
In regard to claim 18, lines 4-5, the phrase “a propeller having a pitch comprising at least one propeller blade” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the propeller itself does not have a pitch and that instead the blades of the propeller have a pitch (also see paragraph 0090 of the present specification which states “The propeller blades may also have a defined pitch” and also includes various pitch values measured in inches for the propeller blades). Possibly the phrase should be rewritten as --a propeller comprising at least one propeller blade having a pitch--.
In regard to claim 18, lines 10-11, the phrase “wherein the propeller, and the decoy structure are rigidly connected along a central axis” renders the claim vague and indefinite since it is unclear to what other structure that the propeller and decoy structure are rigidly connected to and also it is unclear as to what structure the central axis is being designated. Possibly the phrase should be rewritten as --wherein the propeller and the decoy structure are rigidly connected to each other along a central axis of the buoyant decoy apparatus--.
In regard to 20, the phrase “the propeller has a pitch” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the propeller itself does not have a pitch and that instead the blades of the propeller have a pitch (also see paragraph 0090 of the present specification which states “The propeller blades may also have a defined pitch” and also includes various pitch values measured in inches for the propeller blades). Also the term “a pitch” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the term “a pitch” was previously recited at line 4 of claim 18 and therefore it is unclear whether the term in question of claim 20 represents the same or different “pitch” than that recited in claim 18. Possibly the phrase should be rewritten as --the pitch of the at least one propeller blade is between 0.1 and 6 inches--.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are:
the basic structural relationship between the decoy structure and the power supply;
the basic structural relationship between the decoy structure and the motor;
the basic structural relationship between the decoy structure and the propeller; and
the basic structural relationship between the decoy structure and the propeller guard.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Hanson 2017/0280707.
In regard to claim 1, Hanson discloses a buoyant decoy comprising: a decoy structure (14) which is at least partially in the shape of at least a portion of a waterfowl; and a housing (12,16,18,20,37) comprising a motor (16 with shaft 60), a battery (inside 18), and a propeller (18,20) further comprising one or more propeller blades (18,20; the structure of the propeller blades is not being particularly claimed), wherein the propellor and motor are configured such that when said motor is activated, the motor turns (shaft 60 turns) said one or more propeller blades (18,20) causing a downward thrust (the downward thrust is not being particularly claimed and it can be broadly interpreted as the force which causes the head 14 to be disposed under the water surface as shown in Fig. 5; see Figs. 1,5) from propulsion generated by the motion of the one or more propeller blades (motion of 18,20 toward 12 thereby propels 14 into the water); said decoy structure (14), said propeller (18,20) and said housing structure (12,16,18,20,37) are rigidly connected (14 is rigidly connected to 12 and 18,20 are rigidly connected to 12 since rigid armature 20 is of a rigid material and 20 is rigidly connected to shaft 60 which is in turn connected to motor 37 which is attached to bottom surface 54 of 12) along a central axis (central axis of 12 which is a horizontal axis in Fig. 1) such that the downward thrust of the propellor causes at least a portion of the decoy to dip below the water line (see Fig. 5).
In regard to claim 2, Hanson discloses wherein said housing comprises an outer buoy structure (12) and an inner housing (37).
In regard to claim 4, Hanson discloses said housing further comprises a buoyant material filling (12 is a sealed air chamber 38).
In regard to claim 6, Hanson discloses wherein said housing (12,16,18,20,37) is coupleable to said decoy structure (14) via watertight connection means (sealed air chamber 38’ forms part of the connection between 12,16,18,20,37 & 14).
In regard to claim 7, Hanson discloses wherein said downward thrust is counteracted and counteracts the downward motion of the decoy portion caused by the propeller so that the decoy bobs within the water while the propellor is engaged by the motor (see paras. 0008, 0040-42).
In regard to claim 8, Hanson discloses wherein the thrust created by the propeller is operatively configured to the buoyancy of the decoy element to allow for the bobbing motion when the motor is activated (see paras. 0008, 0040-42).
In regard to claim 15, Hanson discloses a receiver (see para. 0040) in communication with the motor (16) and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor.
In regard to claim 16, Hanson discloses wherein the housing comprises a location for storing the receiver within said housing (see paras. 0017, 0040, 0049, 0050).
In regard to claim 17, Hanson discloses wherein the receiver receives a signal from a transponder selected from a group comprising a remote control (30), a Bluetooth device, or a cellular phone.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Anthony 7,788,838.
In regard to claim 1, Anthony discloses a buoyant decoy comprising: a decoy structure (84) which is at least partially in the shape of at least a portion of a waterfowl; and a housing (60) comprising a motor (66), a battery (62), and a propeller (24) further comprising one or more propeller blades (the end portions of each of 24 simulating the webbed foot of a duck has a blade-like shape/structure), wherein the propellor and motor are configured such that when said motor is activated, the motor turns (66 turns 67-68) said one or more propeller (24) blades causing a downward thrust (see Fig. 12 wherein when one of 24 is at least partially submerged, it will serve to act against the water above it to serve to push at least the left side of the decoy at least partially below the water surface 90) from propulsion generated by the motion of the one or more propeller blades (the upper surfaces of 24 catch water in Fig. 12 to cause some downward thrust); said decoy structure, said propeller (24), and said housing structure are rigidly connected (84 & 60 are rigidly connected to each other, 24 is rigidly connected to 60 via 22,66-68) along a central axis (central axis extending vertically through 60 & 84 in Fig. 12) such that the downward thrust of the propellor causes at least a portion of the decoy to dip below the water line (see Fig. 12).
In regard to claim 2, Anthony discloses wherein said housing comprises an outer buoy structure (12) and an inner housing (60).
In regard to claim 3, Anthony discloses said inner housing (60) comprising a plurality of cavities (cavities receiving 62,64,72 & cavity defined by right angle mounting bracket in Fig. 6 for receiving 66) capable of receiving a battery (62) and electronics (64,66,72).
In regard to claim 4, Anthony discloses said housing further comprises a buoyant material filling (60 is sealed to contain air filling due to grommet 76,78 forming water resistant seal).
In regard to claim 5, Anthony discloses wherein said inner housing (60) is at least partially surrounded by a buoyant material (sealing gasket 82 forms watertight connection with 84 to contain air therein, wherein the outer perimeter of 84 surrounds the interior portions of 60).
In regard to claim 6, Anthony discloses wherein said housing (60) is coupleable to said decoy structure (84) via watertight connection means (82,86,88).
In regard to claim 7, Anthony discloses wherein said downward thrust is counteracted and counteracts the downward motion of the decoy portion caused by the propeller so that the decoy bobs within the water while the propellor is engaged by the motor (alternating motion of each of 24 moving back and forth creates a bobbing motion).
In regard to claim 8, Anthony discloses wherein the thrust created by the propeller is operatively configured to the buoyancy of the decoy element to allow for the bobbing motion when the motor is activated (alternating motion of each of 24 moving back and forth creates a bobbing motion of 84 with respect to surface of water 90).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Brock, IV 6,845,586.
In regard to claim 1, Brock, IV discloses a buoyant decoy comprising: a decoy structure (32) which is at least partially in the shape of at least a portion of a waterfowl; and a housing (40,62) comprising a motor (62), a battery (70), and a propeller (64) further comprising one or more propeller blades (blades of 64 in Figs. 1, 4), wherein the propellor and motor are configured such that when said motor is activated, the motor turns (62 turns a shaft) said one or more propeller blades (64) causing a downward thrust (see Fig. 2) from propulsion generated by the motion of the one or more propeller blades (see Fig. 2); said decoy structure (32), said propeller (64), and said housing structure (40,62) are rigidly connected (via frame 40 with side walls 42,44,46,48 which are individual pieces of metal which is a rigid material & via guide wire 38 wherein wire is a somewhat rigid material) along a central axis (central axis of 62 or central axis of 38) such that the downward thrust of the propellor causes at least a portion of the decoy to dip below the water line (see Fig. 2).
In regard to claim 2, Brock, IV discloses wherein said housing comprises an outer buoy structure (40) and an inner housing (housing of 62).
In regard to claim 7, Brock, IV discloses wherein said downward thrust is counteracted and counteracts the downward motion of the decoy portion caused by the propeller so that the decoy bobs within the water while the propellor is engaged by the motor (see col. 5, line 59 to col. 6, line 20 and Fig. 2).
In regard to claim 8, Brock, IV discloses wherein the thrust created by the propeller is operatively configured to the buoyancy of the decoy element to allow for the bobbing motion when the motor is activated (see col. 5, line 59 to col. 6, line 20 and Fig. 2).
In regard to claim 9, Brock, IV discloses wherein the propeller (64) has a pitch and comprises at least one blade with a blade angle and a length (see Figs. 4-9).
In regard to claim 10, Brock, IV discloses wherein the pitch is between 0.1 and 10 inches (motor 62 is conventional trolling motor, wherein the attached propeller 64 associated with conventional trolling motors and that a common trolling motor prop pitch is about 4 inches).
In regard to claim 11, Brock, IV discloses wherein the blade angle is between 2 and 35 degrees (average trolling motor propeller blade pitch angle typically falls within a range of 10-15 degrees).
In regard to claim 12, Brock, IV discloses herein the motor rotates between 1-250 rpm when activated (a typical trolling motor usually operates around 200-300 RPM).
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Saxton et al. 2018/0028929.
In regard to claim 1, Saxton et al. disclose a buoyant decoy (device 10 with hollow body 11; also see Fig. 2) comprising a decoy structure (20) which is at least partially in the shape of at least a portion of a waterfowl (device 10 depicts a fish like animal but can be made to resemble other animals such as a duck; see para. 0018); and a housing (30) comprising a motor (80), a battery (90), and a propeller (42) further comprising one or more propeller blades (42), wherein the propeller and motor are configured such that when said motor is activated, the motor turns said one or more propeller blades (42) causing a downward thrust (weight 100 is placed in an offset position from axle pin 74 and functions as dead weight and as a result the force of gravity pulls the weight 100 downwards causing the hollow housing 11 to spin about a rotational axis A counter to the spinning direction of drive system 70 and this motion causes the self-propelled spinning device 10 to move in an eccentric motion; see para. 0031) from propulsion generated by the motion of the one or more propeller blades; said decoy structure, said propeller, and said housing structure are rigidly connected along a central axis (longitudinal axis of 10) such that the downward thrust of the propeller (when device 10 is deployed in a body of water and when any waves in the body of water causes the second hemisphere 20 to be pointed even slightly downward then the projections 42 will generate thrust in a downward direction since projections 42 move device 10 in a forward direction; the structure of the present invention which causes it to be oriented in the body of water as shown in Figs. 1A-B or 21A-B of the application) causes at least a portion of the decoy structure to dip below the water line (also the weight 100 at an offset position results in temporarily directing the device 10 in a downward orientation due to the imbalance it causes during rotation of the device 10; see Fig. 2).
In regard to claim 2, Saxton et al. disclose wherein said housing (30) comprises an outer buoy structure (16; outer buoy structure not being particularly claimed) and an inner housing (housing of 70; see Figs. 5-6).
In regard to claim 3, Saxton et al. disclose wherein said inner housing comprising a plurality of cavities capable of accepting a battery (91) and electronics (electronics associated with switch 76 and battery 91).
In regard to claim 6, Saxton et al. disclose wherein said housing (30) is couplable to said decoy structure (20) via a watertight connection means (60; see para. 0024).
In regard to claim 7, Saxton et al. disclose wherein said downward thrust is counteracted and counteracts the downward motion of the decoy portion caused by the propeller (42) so that the decoy bobs within the water (due to the weight 100 causing imbalance and eccentric path) while the propeller is engaged by the motor (80).
In regard to claim 8, Saxton et al. disclose wherein the thrust created by the propeller (42) is operatively configured to the buoyancy of the decoy element to allow for the bobbing action (due to the weight 100 causing imbalance and eccentric path) when the motor (80) is activated.
In regard to claim 9, Saxton et al. disclose wherein the propeller (42) has a pitch and comprises at least one blade with a blade angle and length (see Figs. 3, 5-7).
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(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saxton et al. 2018/0028929 in view of Gibson 6,443,799.
In regard to claims 4-5, Saxton et al. discloses a hollow housing (11) filled with air and the device (10) with a ring (60) acting as a protective seal against water from seeping through the hollow housing (11) when in a closed position and wherein the inner housing (70) is at least partially surrounded by the air (see Fig. 5), but does not disclose wherein said housing further comprises a buoyant material filling or wherein said inner housing is at least partially surrounded by a buoyant material. Gibson discloses a swim bladder (29) provided inside housing (10) around an inner housing comprising a battery compartment (22) and a motor mount (21), wherein the swim bladder (29) may be comprised of a hollow air pocket or a solid floatation material, such as polystyrene foam. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the buoyant material filling of Gibson for the air of Saxton et al. in order to provide an alternative yet equally effective configuration to provide the necessary buoyancy to the decoy, wherein the buoyant filling can be used to more specifically adjust the buoyancy of the decoy by adjusting the specific gravity of the buoyant material filling.
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saxton et al. 2018/0028929.
In regard to claims 10-12, Saxton et al. do not disclose wherein the pitch is between 0.1 and 10 inches, the blade angle is between 2 and 35 degrees, or wherein the motor rotates between 1-250 rpm when activated. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pitch such that it is between 0.1 and 10 inches, modify the blade angle such that it is between 2 and 35 degrees, and such that the motor rotates between 1-250 rpm when activated since applicant has not disclosed that by doing so is critical to the design or produces any unexpected results and it appears that the decoy of Saxton et al. would perform equally as well by doing so, and because a person of ordinary skill in the art would readily adjust the pitch according to the desired amount of acceleration and speed desired, would readily adjust the blade angle to select the amount of thrust to the generated by the propeller, and would readily adjust the rpm of the motor in order to control the speed at which the decoy moves or to accommodate a propeller of a given pitch and blade angle to generate the desired amount of thrust.
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthony 7,788,838 in view of Higdon 11,602,145.
Alternatively in regard to claim 2, Anthony discloses wherein the housing comprises an outer buoy structure (60), but does not disclose wherein the housing comprises an inner housing. Higdon discloses wherein the housing (300) comprises an outer buoy structure (310) and an inner housing (waterproof housing containing 330,332). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Anthony such that it comprises an inner housing in view of Higdon in order to provide a waterproof area within the housing that can contain electrical components to prevent them from water damage during use of the decoy.
In regard to claim 3, Anthony and Higdon disclose wherein said inner housing (waterproof housing containing 330,332 of Higdon) comprises a plurality of cavities (see Fig. 6 of Anthony; areas within waterproof housing for 330,332 of Higdon)
Alternatively in regard to claim 4, Anthony does not disclose the housing further comprises a buoyant material filling. Higdon discloses a body (110) including an outer shell that imitates a waterfowl appearance and an interior cavity filled with a foam and that body (110) is unsinkable in some instances, such as when formed using a mixture of silicone rubber and spherical EVA foam (see col. 3, line 57 to col. 4, line 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the housing of Anthony such that it comprises a buoyant material filling in view of Higdon in order to provide an unsinkable decoy in the event that the housing has been penetrated by water or been hit with gunshot to cause it not to be watertight anymore.
Alternatively in regard to claim 5, Anthony does not disclose wherein said inner housing is at least partially surrounded by a buoyant material. Higdon discloses a decoy (400 or 300) with a body (410 or 310) that has an appearance that mimics a waterfowl and that the body (410 or 310), similarly to the first embodiment, is molded from or filled with a buoyant material such as foam battery (430 or 330) is contained within a waterproof housing when decoy (400 or 300) is configured to be operated on a surface (412 or 312) of water and that battery (430 or 330) is optionally housed with a timer (432 or 332) that determines the frequency of motion by driving motor (428) or bilge pump (328) at predetermined durations and at predetermined frequencies, wherein said inner housing (waterproof housing for 400,430 or 300,330) is at least partially surrounded by a buoyant material (foam). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner housing of Anthony such that is at least partially surrounded by a buoyant material in view of Higdon in order to protect the inner housing from impact and to also ensure that the inner housing is maintained substantially at or above the surface of the water so as to greatly reduce the possibility of water from short circuiting the decoy’s battery and electronics.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthony 7,788,838 in view of Hanson 2017/0280707.
In regard to claim 15, Anthony discloses a start switch (72) on the housing (60) in communication with the motor (62), but does not disclose a receiver in communication with the motor and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor. Hanson discloses a receiver (see para. 0040) in communication with the motor (16) and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the decoy of Anthony such that it comprises a receiver in communication with the motor and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor in view of Hanson in order to provide a means for controlling the operation of the decoy from a distance so that the user can be located a distance away from the decoy without raising suspicion of the intended targeted waterfowl.
In regard to claim 16, Anthony and Hanson discloses wherein the housing comprises a location for storing the receiver within said housing (see paras. 0017, 0040, 0049, 0050 of Hanson).
In regard to claim 17, Anthony and Hanson discloses wherein the receiver receives a signal from a transponder selected from a group comprising a remote control (30 of Hanson), a Bluetooth device, or a cellular phone.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brock, IV 7,788,838 in view of Anthony 7,788,838.
In regard to claim 3, Brock, IV does not disclose said inner housing comprising a plurality of cavities capable of accepting a battery and electronics. Anthony discloses said inner housing (60) comprising a plurality of cavities (cavities receiving 62,64,72 & cavity defined by right angle mounting bracket in Fig. 6 for receiving 66) capable of receiving a battery (62) and electronics (64,66,72). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the inner housing of Brock, IV such that it comprises a plurality of cavities capable of accepting a battery and electronics in view of Anthony in order to provide a means for conveniently containing the battery and related electronics in a single container for ease in transport from location to location by the user.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brock, IV 7,788,838 in view of Yerger 4,375,337 or Goodman et al. 9,402,387.
In regard to claim 13, Brock, IV do not disclose a protective guard at least partially around said propellor comprising intersecting longitudinal and latitudinal members. Yerger or Goodman et al. disclose a protective guard (16 OR propeller 24 is surrounded by a housing to protect it from hitting underwater debris and from becoming entangled with underwater materials it may encounter; see col. 5, lines 30-34) at least partially around said propellor comprising intersecting longitudinal and latitudinal members (see Fig. 2 OR Fig. 5A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the decoy of Brock, IV such that it comprises a protective guard at least partially around said propellor comprising intersecting longitudinal and latitudinal members in view of Yerger or Goodman et al. in order to provide a means for preventing underwater debris and obstructions from entangling or damaging the propeller which would adversely affect the ability of the propeller in providing sufficient downward thrust to operate the decoy.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brock, IV 7,788,838 in view of Yerger 4,375,337 or Goodman et al. 9,402,387 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Mah 7,000,559 or Mah 6,848,385 or Lu 10,960,269.
In regard to claim 14, Brock, IV and Yerger or Goodman et al. do not disclose wherein said protective guard is connected to said buoy structure via external connection arms to prevent said protective guard from impeding the motion of said propeller. Mah, Mah, and Lu disclose wherein said protective guard (59 OR 31 OR mesh of 15) is connected to said buoy structure via external connection arms (51,53,55,57 OR 27 OR longitudinally extending arms of 15 extending between 11 & 16) to prevent said protective guard from impeding the motion of said propeller (93 OR 36 OR 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protective guard of Brock, IV and Yerger or Goodman et al. such that it is connected to said buoy structure via external connection arms to prevent said protective guard from impeding the motion of said propeller in view of Mah ‘559, Mah ‘385 or Lu in order to provide means for supporting and maintaining the protective guard to be at a distance from the propeller despite any oncoming debris or other obstacles that may cause the protective guard to collapse onto and come into contact with the propeller which will hinder the performance of the propeller.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brock, IV 7,788,838 in view of Hanson 2017/0280707.
In regard to claim 15, Brock, IV discloses a start switch (72) on the housing (60) in communication with the motor (62), but does not disclose a receiver in communication with the motor and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor. Hanson discloses a receiver (see para. 0040) in communication with the motor (16) and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the decoy of Brock, IV such that it comprises a receiver in communication with the motor and operationally configured to receive a signal to control the motor in view of Hanson in order to provide a means for controlling the operation of the decoy from a distance so that the user can be located a distance away from the decoy without raising suspicion of the intended targeted waterfowl.
In regard to claim 16, Brock, IV and Hanson discloses wherein the housing comprises a location for storing the receiver within said housing (see paras. 0017, 0040, 0049, 0050 of Hanson).
In regard to claim 17, Brock, IV and Hanson discloses wherein the receiver receives a signal from a transponder selected from a group comprising a remote control (30 of Hanson), a Bluetooth device, or a cellular phone.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brock, IV 7,788,838 in view of Yerger 4,375,337 or Goodman et al. 9,402,387.
In regard to claim 18, Brock, IV discloses a buoyant decoy apparatus for use in a body of water comprising: a decoy structure (32) shaped to mimic at least a portion of an animal; a power supply (70); a motor (62) in connection with said power supply and a propeller (64) having a pitch (see Figs. 4-9) comprising at least one propeller blade (64 has two blades), wherein the motor is capable of rotating said propeller between 1-250 rotations per minute (a typical trolling motor usually operates around 200-300 RPM); wherein at least a portion of the decoy structure shaped to mimic an animal is positioned on the surface of the water at least when not acted upon by the propeller (see Fig. 1); wherein the propeller (64), and the decoy structure (32) are rigidly connected (via frame 40 with side walls 42,44,46,48 which are individual pieces of metal which is a rigid material & via guide wire 38 wherein wire is a somewhat rigid material) along a central axis (central axis of 62 or central axis of 38), and the motor and propeller are configured such that when the motor is powered, it rotates the propeller to create a downward force relative to surface of the water that propels the decoy deeper into the water (see Fig. 2); and wherein the buoyancy of the decoy causes the decoy to return towards the surface of the water when not counteracted by the propeller (see Fig. 1), but does not disclose a propeller guard operationally positioned at or near the propeller. Yerger or Goodman et al. disclose a protective guard (16 OR propeller 24 is surrounded by a housing to protect it from hitting underwater debris and from becoming entangled with underwater materials it may encounter; see col. 5, lines 30-34) operationally positioned at or near the propeller (see Fig. 2 OR Fig. 5A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the decoy of Brock, IV such that it comprises a propeller guard operationally positioned at or near the propeller in view of Yerger or Goodman et al. in order to provide a means for preventing underwater debris and obstructions from entangling or damaging the propeller which would adversely affect the ability of the propeller in providing sufficient downward thrust to operate the decoy.
In regard to claim 19, Brock, IV discloses wherein the propeller has a blade angle is between 10 and 60 degrees (average trolling motor propeller blade pitch angle typically falls within a range of 10-15 degrees).
In regard to claim 20, Brock, IV discloses wherein the propeller has a pitch between 0.1 and 6 inches (motor 62 is conventional trolling motor, wherein the attached propeller 64 associated with conventional trolling motors and that a common trolling motor prop pitch is about 4 inches).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARREN W ARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/DARREN W ARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
DWA