DETAILED ACTION
1. This is a first action on the merits of application 18195691.
2. Claims 1-27 are pending.
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.
3. Claim(s) 1-23, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a as being anticipated by Underwood GB 573950.
4. Claim 1 and 27, Underwood discloses a plurality of interconnected frames and a plurality of buoyant members supporting the structure, wherein at least some of the frames are substantially triangular in planform. See figs. 1-3 and claim 1
5. Claim 2, Underwood discloses wherein all of the frames are substantially triangular in planform. See claim 8 and fig. 5
6. Claim 3, Underwood discloses at least two adjacent ones of said frames are substantially triangular in planform and the adjacent frames that are substantially triangular in planform are movably connected. See pg. 3 line 128- pg. 4 line 2.
7. Claim 4, Underwood discloses the adjacent frames that are substantially triangular in planform are pivotably connected. See pg. 3 line 128- pg. 4 line 2.
8. Claim 5, Underwood discloses the frames that are substantially triangular in planform have substantially the same shape. See figs. 1-3
9. Claim 6, Underwood discloses the frames that are substantially triangular in planform have substantially the same dimensions. See figs. 1-3.
10. Claim 7, Underwood discloses at least one of the frames that are substantially triangular in planform has dimensions which are a multiple of the dimensions of another one of the frames that are substantially triangular in planform. See fig. 3
11. Claim 8, Underwood discloses said frame that is substantially triangular in planform has a base, an apex and two sides connecting opposite ends of the base with the apex, at least two adjacent ones of said frames are substantially triangular in planform and adjacent ones of said frames that are substantially triangular in planform are connected along their respective sides such that the base of a first frame is closest to the apex of a second frame and the base of the second frame is closest to the apex of the first frame. See fig. 3
12. Claim 9, Underwood discloses said frame that is substantially triangular in planform has a base, an apex and two sides connecting opposite ends of the base with the apex, at least two adjacent ones of said frames are substantially triangular in planform and adjacent ones of said frames that are substantially triangular in planform are connected along their respective bases. See fig. 3
13. Claim 10, Underwood discloses said frame that is substantially triangular in planform comprises at least one triangle including a right triangle. See fig. 1
14. Claim 11, Underwood discloses said frame that is substantially triangular in planform comprises at least one triangle including a isosceles triangle. See fig. 1
15. Claim 12, Underwood discloses said frame that is substantially triangular in planform comprises at least one triangle including a equilateral triangle. See claim 5
16. Claim 13, Underwood discloses wherein the at least one isosceles triangle has an apex angle of between about 20-120°. See fig. 1 and claim 5.
17. Claim 14, Underwood discloses at least one corner is chamfered or rounded. See fig. 1
18. Claim 15, Underwood discloses have a substantially load bearing structure, wherein all three sides of the triangle comprise beams connected at or near their ends. See fig. 1
19. Claim 16, Underwood discloses wherein the beams of the sides of the triangle support an internal grid or a platform. See fig. 1 and claims 1-2
20. Claim 17, Underwood discloses the triangle frame is supported by at least one buoyant member. See fig. 5
21. Claim 18, Underwood discloses wherein the at least one buoyant member supporting each said frame is connected to the respective frame that is substantially triangular in planform that it supports by at least one post. See fig. 5
22. Claim 19-20, Underwood discloses frame that are substantially triangular in planform is supported by at least three said buoyant members and each said buoyant member is connected to a respective frame that is substantially triangular in planform near a corner of the frame. See fig. 5 and claim 2
23. Claim 21, Underwood discloses wherein at least two adjacent ones of said frames are substantially triangular in planform, each said frame that is substantially triangular in planform has a base, an apex and two sides connecting opposite ends of the base with the apex, at least two adjacent ones of said frames are substantially triangular in planform, adjacent ones of said frames that are substantially triangular in planform are connected along their respective sides such that the base of a first frame is closest to the apex of a second frame and the base of the second frame is closest to the apex of the first frame and each said buoyant member is connected to a respective frame that is substantially triangular in planform at a position along a one said side or the base which is offset with respect to a position of another said buoyant member along a side or base of an adjacent frame that is substantially triangular in planform to which the first side or base is connected. See fig. 5
24. Claim 22, Underwood discloses anchoring means. See pg. 3 lines 50-52.
25. Claim 23, Underwood discloses an installation supported by the floating structure. See fig. 1 launching pads for aircraft.
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.
26. Claim(s) 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Underwood et al, and further in view of Gaveau FR 3014830
27. Claim 24-25, Underwood discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1, and wherein at least some of the frames that are substantially triangular in planform have a substantially open load-bearing structure, wherein all three sides of the triangle comprise beams connected at or near their ends, the beams of the sides of the triangle support. He does not disclose an internal grid or a platform and the installation is arranged on the internal grid or the platform of a respective triangular frame and the installation comprises a plurality of PV panels. Gaveau discloses this in figs. 7-8. Thus, it 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 to have combined the disclosures to attain the above configuration to provide solar power to an instillation.
28. Claim 26, Underwood discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1, and wherein at least one said buoyant member is connected to the respective frame that is substantially triangular in planform that it supports by at least one post, he does not disclose the number of the buoyant members and their volume of the buoyant members, as well as a length of the at least one post are selected as a function of the a weight of a respective frame and its installation, such that the frame is supported at a distance above a still waterline of a body of water in which the floating structure is used. It is the belief that optimal size or dimensions is of ordinary skill thus, it 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 to design the post with sufficient size and length to support a said structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOVON E HAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-3115. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-6pm M-F.
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 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.
/JOVON E HAYES/
Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615