DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendments to the claims filed on 18 May 2026. Claims 9 – 18 are pending and currently being examined.
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
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vlock (PG Pub US 20130059489 A1).
In Re Claim 9, Vlock discloses a pump structure (2520; Figure 30 embodiment; paragraph [0102] states that it contains “the same components as described above with reference to FIGS. 18 and 19”) comprising: a pump body (body of cassette 2520, see paragraph [0106]: “pump housing”) configured to be incorporated into a stand-up paddle board (SUP) (a surfboard is disclosed as an example of the Figure 30 watercraft – see paragraph [0046], also see paragraph [0064]: “”SUP”); an inflation flow channel (inside 1695 in Figure 18, there are two channels each labeled the same – one of which is being designated the inflation flow channel and the other is being designated the exhaust flow channel; the channel is better visible in Figure 5 – it extends from inlet port 502 to exhaust port 504) disposed within the pump body (body of cassette 2520); an exhaust flow channel (inside 1695 in Figure 18, there are two channels each labeled the same – one of which is being designated the inflation flow channel and the other is being designated the exhaust flow channel; the channel is better visible in Figure 5 – it extends from inlet port 502 to exhaust port 504) disposed within the pump body (body of cassette 2520); an inflation unit (at least impeller 1699, there are two impellers depicted corresponding to the two flow channels, the impeller in the inflation flow channel is being designated the inflation unit and the impeller in the exhaust flow channel is being designated the exhaust unit) mounted on the inflation flow channel in the pump body; and an exhaust unit (at least impeller 1699, there are two impellers depicted corresponding to the two flow channels, the impeller in the inflation flow channel is being designated the inflation unit and the impeller in the exhaust flow channel is being designated the exhaust unit) mounted on the exhaust flow channel in the pump body; wherein the inflation flow channel and the exhaust flow channel are clearly separated from one another (the channel housings are separate as best seen in Figure 2); Note that the disclosure “The motorized cassette 2520 can include one or more pumps configured to provide such inflation or deflation of the one or more inflatable chambers 2510” in paragraph [0106] implies that one of the impellers (1699; Figure 18) can be an inflation unit and the other impeller (also labeled 1699; Figure 18) can be an exhaust unit; (paragraphs [0101] – [0107]; Figure 30).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 10 – 13, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vlock (PG Pub US 20130059489 A1) in view of Metzger (PG Pub US 20060085918 A1).
In Re Claim 10, Vlock discloses all the limitations of Claim 9, and Vlock further discloses that the exhaust unit comprises an exhaust pump (1699), an exhaust port (502 in Figure 5 – in the deflation mode the direction of flow would be opposite to what is shown in the figure) at a first end, a discharge port (504 in Figure 5 – in the deflation mode the direction of flow would be opposite to what is shown in the figure) at a second end, and a broadly disclosed intercommunication valve (2525), but Vlock and Bonerb do not disclose that the valve is an exhaust valve is mounted to the discharge port.
However, Figure 7 of Metzger discloses an exhaust unit (to the right of 54) comprising an exhaust pump (112, 70) and an exhaust valve (96), a first end (52) of the exhaust flow channel is in communication with an outer surface (top surface of 34) of the pump body and thereby forms an exhaust port (52); a second end (labeled 82 in Figure 6, not labeled in Figure 7) of the exhaust flow channel is in communication with the outer surface (top surface of 34) of the pump body (see communication flow arrows 126 and 132) and thereby forms a discharge port (82); and the exhaust valve (96) is mounted to the discharge port (82)(paragraphs [0044],[0045]; Figures 6, 7).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the exhaust valve as taught by Metzger in the discharge port of Vlock for the purpose of providing the capability of user desired adjustment of the pressure by manual actuation of the intake and exhaust valves (paragraphs [0009], [0038], [0044] of Metzger).
In Re Claim 11, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 10, and Metzger discloses that the exhaust valve comprises: an exhaust valve rod (93, 30) mounted at the discharge port, and an exhaust valve cover (96, 92) connected to the exhaust valve rod (93, 30), the exhaust valve cover hermetically sealing the discharge port (in the closed position shown in Figure 6)(paragraphs [0034],[0035]; Figures 6, 7).
In Re Claim 12, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 11, and Metzger discloses an elastic member (90) mounted between the exhaust valve rod (93, 90) and the pump body (36); a positioning rib (there are four ribs best seen in Figure 5) disposed on the exhaust valve rod (93, 90); and an edge (94) of the discharge port is connected to the positioning rib (paragraphs [0034],[0041]; Figures 5, 7); in order to maintain alignment of the actuating arm (92) with switch (110/112), the valve rod portion (93) cannot be allowed to rotate while it is pressed, one skilled in the art would appreciate that this is accomplished by slidably guiding the positioning rib (there are four ribs best seen in Figure 5) in a sliding groove in (94).
In Re Claim 13, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 10, and Metzger discloses that the pump structure further comprises an exhaust key switch (112) disposed in the exhaust flow channel and in contact with the exhaust valve cover (96, 92) such that pressing the exhaust valve rod (93, 30) causes the exhaust key switch (112) to activate the exhaust pump (70, 112); and the exhaust valve rod (93, 92) and the discharge port (82) are positioned such that pressing the exhaust valve rod (93, 92) opens the discharge port (82)(paragraphs [0044],[0045]; Figure 7).
In Re Claim 16, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 10, and Vlock discloses an inflation port (502; Figure 5), an intake port (504; Figure 5), but it does not disclose an intake valve is mounted to the intake port, and a one-way inflation valve mounted on the inflation port.
However, Figure 6 of Metzger discloses that a first end (50) of the inflation flow channel (to the left of 54) is in communication with the outer surface (top surface of 34) of the pump body and thereby forms an inflation port (50); a second end (labeled 80 in Figure 6, not labeled in Figure 7) of the inflation flow channel is in communication with the outer surface (top surface of 34) of the pump body (see communication flow arrows 120 and 124) and thereby forms an intake port (80); and the pump structure further comprises: an intake valve (96, 92, 93) mounted on the intake port, and a one-way inflation valve (88) mounted on the inflation port (50).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the intake valve and one-way inflation valve as taught by Metzger in the intake port and inflation port respectively of Vlock for the purpose of providing the capability of user desired adjustment of the pressure by manual actuation of the intake and exhaust valves (paragraphs [0009], [0038], [0044] of Metzger).
In Re Claim 17, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 16, and Metzger discloses that the intake valve (96, 92, 93, 28) comprises: an intake valve rod (93, 28) mounted at the intake port (80), and an intake valve cover (96, 92) connected to the intake valve rod (93, 28), the intake valve cover (96, 92) hermetically sealing the intake port (in its position shown in Figure 7); an elastic body (90) mounted between the intake valve rod (93, 28) and the pump body (36), a positioning strip (there are four strips best seen in Figure 5) disposed on the intake valve rod (93, 28), and an edge (94) of the intake port is connected to the positioning strip; the pump structure further comprises an inflation key switch (110) disposed in the inflation flow channel, such that pressing the intake valve rod (93, 28) causes the intake valve cover (96, 92) to contact the inflation key switch (110), (paragraphs [0034],[0040],[0041]; Figures 5, 6, 7); in order to maintain alignment of the actuating arm (92) with switch (110/112), the valve rod portion (93) cannot be allowed to rotate while it is pressed, one skilled in the art would appreciate that this is accomplished by slidably guiding the positioning strip (there are four strips best seen in Figure 5) in an avoidance groove in (94).
Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vlock (PG Pub US 20130059489 A1) in view of Metzger (PG Pub US 20060085918 A1) and further in view of Ku (PG Pub US 20050186072 A1).
In Re Claim 14, Vlock and Metzger disclose all the limitations of Claim 10, but they do not explicitly disclose an accommodation cavity, partition plate, guide plates and an exhaust blade.
However, Ku discloses an accommodation cavity (10; essentially the internal volume of the fan) disposed in the exhaust flow channel (from below 11 to above 12) and comprising an air vent (similar to 105 in Figure 4, it is essentially the outlet of the fan) formed in a bottom thereof, a partition (11, 17, 18) mounted at a top of the accommodation cavity; a plurality of flow guide plates (121) uniformly distributed on a side wall (12) of the accommodation cavity, each flow guide plate comprising a first end connected to the side wall (12) of the accommodation cavity and a second end (free end of 121) inclined in a direction toward a center of the accommodation cavity; an outflow port (13 between adjacent ribs 18) disposed on the partition wherein an exhaust blade (i.e. each blade of impeller 20) is mounted in the accommodation cavity (paragraphs [0016]-[0019]; Figures 1, 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the fan of Ku as the exhaust pump of Vlock / Metzger because it is only a matter of substituting one air pump for another, therefore the results of the substitution are predictable (MPEP 2141, Section III, Rationale B).
In Re Claim 15, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 14, and Ku further discloses vertical flow guide plates (15) are arranged on two sides of the outflow port (13 between adjacent ribs 18) on the partition (11, 17, 18) (paragraph [0016]; Figure 1).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vlock (PG Pub US 20130059489 A1) in view of Metzger (PG Pub US 20060085918 A1) and further in view of You (US Patent 11,713,767 B2).
In Re Claim 18, Vlock and Metzger disclose all the limitations of Claim 16, but they do not disclose a waterproof cover.
However, You discloses a waterproof cover (5 and/or 9 and/or 10; Column 4, Lines 6 – 14 disclose waterproof functionality) for the intake port and discharge port (Column 3, Lines 12 – 14; Figure 3). The cover (5, 9, 10) has external threads as shown in Figure 10, these threads engage threaded grooves of the corresponding ports.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate a waterproof cover as taught by You via grooves at the intake and discharge port of Vlock / Metzger for the purpose of blocking unwanted contaminants in the environment when the ports are not being used.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 9 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.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is not being relied upon, it is being made of record because it is considered to be relevant to applicant’s disclosure. Bonerb discloses an inflation unit in the form of an inflation pump/fan/blower (36) and a separate exhaust unit in the form of an exhaust pump/fan/blower (38) (Column 3, Lines 27 and 54; Figure 1).
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DNYANESH G KASTURE whose telephone number is (571)270-3928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu, 7:30 AM to 6:00 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/D.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/ESSAMA OMGBA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights