DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 2-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 1/28/26.
The applicant states “Herein, claims 2-13 have been withdrawn from consideration. All objections and rejections are respectfully traversed” (page 7), but it is unclear what is being traverses, as no objections or rejections have yet been made. If the applicant is traversing the requirement for restriction, there are no arguments to which the examiner can respond.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because many are not proper black and white line drawings, and contain improper shading. Also, figure 20 comprises the label “DATACHABLE POWER SUPPLY.”
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(h)(5) because (at least) Figures 10, 11, 49-52, 72, 77, 78 and 80 show modified forms of construction in the same view. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 11 recites “and position on a bottom.” This should read –and positioned on a bottom— or similar. 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, line 2 recites “a transporter detachably connected to a commercial container.” It is unclear if the container is being positively recited, or if the device must be attached to a commercial container.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Clarke US 7,320,289 in view of Foster US 1,133,629.
Regarding claim 1, Clarke teaches an autonomous maritime container system, comprising:
a transporter 120 detachably connected to a commercial container 105 so as to move the commercial container through a body of water, comprising:
a connector apparatus 112 positioned between the commercial container and the transporter so as to detachably and mechanically connect an end of the commercial container to the transporter;
a propulsion apparatus 122; and
a control apparatus 135 operatively connected to the propulsion apparatus so as to move the commercial container toward a desired location.
PNG
media_image1.png
322
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1- Clarke Figure 2
Clarke does not teach a deployable pneumatic assembly, operatively connected to the control apparatus and positioned on a bottom portion of the container. Foster teaches a maritime vessel A which comprises a deployable pneumatic assembly A4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the container system of Clarke with a deployable pneumatic assembly as taught by Foster in order to “provide means which may always be present and always available for preventing the sinking of a sea going vessel independent of the condition of the shell thereof” (page 1, lines 11-15). Note that as modified, the deployable pneumatic assembly is operatively connected to the control apparatus and positioned on a bottom portion of the container (as the transporter is positioned on a bottom portion of the container). If the applicant disagrees, then it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to position the deployable pneumatic assembly on the bottom of the container in order to keep as much of the container above water as possible, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
PNG
media_image2.png
338
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2- Foster Figure 2
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brundritt US 4,996,936 and Lloveres US 6,550,415 teach deployable pneumatic marine flotation apparatuses.
Fossing US 5,006,031 teaches a transporter detachably connected to a commercial container.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Marc Jimenez can be reached at 517 272-4530. 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.
/MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615