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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS has been considered by the examiner and the signed copy is included with this action.
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 19 and 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.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "The ballasts system", “the combination of ballasts”, “the connection”, “the drain” in the first and second lines of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It appears the applicant may have wished this claim to be dependent however that is unclear. Because of these issues the claims 19 and 20 are treated on the merits as best understood.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-12, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HydroHoist Ultralift2 6600UL Boat Lift as seen in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StAHv8A_KZI with details also be seen in the HydroHoist UL2 Manual included (herein after called Hydro, portions of the video are shown at the end of the section of the instant office action) in view of CA02770645 (called 645). See also annotated figure by the Supervisory Patent Examiner, the figure comes from the UL2 manual.
Re claims 1,15, and 18-20, Hydro discloses a boat support elevator (entire video) comprising: a rigid frame comprising a boat receiving support (1min 15secs (1st screenshot) - silver frame and boat guides); and a plurality of ballasts secured to the rigid frame (1m 52s (2nd screenshot) and 2m 06s (3rd screen shot)- bolts frame to ballast, two blue ballasts), a connection connecting at least two of the plurality of ballasts into a combination of ballasts (32s - black tube underwater connecting two ballasts together), with the combination of ballasts being adapted to be fluidly connected to an air-pump (2min 17secs - Pump Control) system for wherein control of air volume in the combination of ballasts allows to control elevation of the combination of ballasts and according of the frame (2min 37secs — ballasts are raised above the water). See Screenshots below for details.
645 discloses controlling air volume in each one of the ballasts of the combination of ballasts (Description Page 10 Lines 1-7), and controlling the slope of the combination of ballasts (Fig. 6 — shows 4 individual tanks with separate valves that allow the user to fill varied individual tanks more than other to achieve a variable angle as well as varied elevation in the water). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to have combined the teaching of the varied controllable tanks and valves of 645 so as to more closely control the angles and height or elevation of a craft on top of the device to allow for increased usability with different height vessels and also different height docks. The variable level and angle arrangement would allow for ease of access and loading of vessels especially for mobility impaired people.
With respect to claim 19, As the claim is best understood because of the 112 rejection seen above. There is a connection fluidly connecting the drain port of the first to the pressurizing port of the second in that there are hoses that run from the first to the second ballast at least seen in the hoses from the inflation pump to the ballasts.
With respect to claim 20, as best understood it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of application to use one way valves in the control and in the hoses of the device so as to keep the air and water from escaping when the device is in use and the pump isn’t running. One way valves are old and well known in the art for controlling water and air systems. They would be used to save power and limit wear on the pump while the device is not raising or lowering.
Re claim 2, Hydro discloses a boat receiving support secured to the frame and adapted to interface with a hull of a boat seen about at 1min 15 sec in the video - silver frame and boat guides.
Re claim 3, Hydro discloses the ballasts are secured to the frame below the boat receiving support, as seen at about 2min 6 second on the video (3rd screenshot- frame bolted to top of ballast by bolts).
Re claim 4, Hydro discloses the frame has a longitudinal orientation and a transversal orientation, and wherein the ballasts of the combination of ballasts are secured to the frame neighbor to each other relative to the longitudinally orientation (1min 52s).
Re claim 5, Hydro as modified above dislcloses the plurality of ballasts comprise at least two ballasts secured to the one next to it relative to the transversal orientation (figure 1 of 645).
Re claims 6 and 17, Hydro discloses the ballasts have a top and bottom and wherein at least one of the plurality of ballasts comprises a drain port located about the bottom for water to enter and exit the ballast through the port, see 2min 10 seconds for air escaping through the bottom hole.
Re claim 7, Hydro shows a port “about the top” for air, as seen in the annotated figure below at least, air enters and exits there for lifting the device, see video.
Re claim 8, Hydro discloses at least one of the plurality of ballasts comprises a connection portion comprising a hole to secure the plurality of ballasts to the frame as seen about 2min 6 seconds in the video. See the frame bolted to the top of the ballast by bolts.
Re claim 9, Hydro discloses that the ballasts comprise a bottom wall protruding portion extending below the bottom wall, as seen in the annotated figure below at least.
Re claim 10, Hydro discloses that the bottom wall is sloped as seen at least in the annotated figure below.
Re claim 11, Hydro discloses at least one of the ballasts comprises a top wall and protruding portion above the wall at about 2 minutes 37 seconds in the video. The top wall has a middle portion that is above the rest.
Re claim 12, Hydro discloses the top wall comprises an incline portion as seen about at 2 min 37 seconds where the middle portion is inclined.
Re claim 16, Hydro as modified may not specifically teach of the top protruding portion comprising a pressurizing port above the top wall for fluid exchange however it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to relocate a port to that location to make it the highest part of the device to allow air to escape more fully. This would be useful to completely fill the device with water while submerging, allowing for more stability while under water.
PNG
media_image1.png
699
1313
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
965
1344
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
983
1311
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
991
1361
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
989
1344
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 14 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY D COLLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-6886. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5am-2pm.
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, TC Director Namrata Boveja can be reached at (571)272-8105. 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.
TIMOTHY D. COLLINS
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3644
/TIMOTHY D COLLINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3644