DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed 03/16/2026 has been entered.
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 § 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) 16-23, 27-29, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy et al. (7,506,606) in view of Hinze (5,341,756).
With regard to claim 16, Murphy discloses a transport and carrying device (marine handling craft 2) for transporting and carrying a watercraft (auxiliary vessel 4), comprising:
two lateral floats (16/18) spaced a predetermined distance from each other (fig. 3); a connecting front element (12) interconnecting the two lateral floats and maintaining the two lateral floats at the predetermined distance from each other (fig. 3); a sheet or mesh support structure attached laterally to the lateral floats, the support structure having a plurality of openings through which water can pass (col. 17, lines 16-21); a receiving area (31) for the watercraft defined between the lateral floats and the connecting front element and above the support structure(figs. 1, 3); and at least one lifting element (10) configured for attaching the transport and carrying device to an external lifting device for lifting and lowering the transport and carrying device (col. 9 line 54 – col. 10 line 17).
Murphy discloses a restraining device (42/44) however is silent regarding a plurality of detachable retaining elements configured to retain the watercraft in the receiving area when the retaining elements are attached to the transport and carrying device, the plurality of detachable retaining elements including :at least one top-end retaining strap configured to extend laterally across a top of the watercraft from one lateral float to the other lateral float when the watercraft is disposed in the receiving area; and at least one rear retaining strap configured to extend over a rear end of the watercraft when the watercraft is disposed in the receiving area, the rear retaining strap being configured to be attached to at least one of the connecting front element, the support structure and the lateral floats.
Hinze discloses a transport carry device for a watercraft comprising a plurality of detachable retaining elements (bands 4) configured to retain the watercraft in the receiving area when the retaining elements are attached to the transport and carrying device (fig. 1), the plurality of detachable retaining elements including: at least one top-end retaining strap configured to extend laterally across a top of the watercraft from one lateral float to the other lateral float when the watercraft is disposed in the receiving area (fig. 1; front 4); and at least one rear retaining strap (fig. 1; rear 4) configured to extend over a rear end of the watercraft when the watercraft is disposed in the receiving area, the rear retaining strap being configured to be attached to at least one of the connecting front element, the support structure and the lateral floats (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murphy and utilize the restraining elements as taught in Hinze, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to further stabilize the auxiliary vessel.
With regard to claim 17, Murphy further discloses the support structure is also attached to the connecting front element (figs. 3, 14B; col 17, lines 16-21).
With regard to claim 18, Murphy further discloses the lateral floats are oriented parallel to each other along at least a portion of their lengths (fig. 3).
With regard to claim 19, Murphy further discloses the connecting front element is disposed at a front end of the transport and carrying device and extends transversely to the lateral floats (fig. 3).
With regard to claim 20, Murphy further discloses the connecting front element includes a front float (fig. 3).
With regard to claim 21, Murphy further discloses the front float and the lateral floats are integrally formed as a joint float assembly (fig. 3).
With regard to claim 22, Murphy, as modified, discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding the lateral floats and/or the front float are inflatable.
Hinze further discloses a transport and carrying device comprising lateral and front floats (fig. 1) wherein the lateral floats and/or the front float are inflatable (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify further Murphy and utilize inflatable floats as taught in Hinze, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the buoyancy of the device to be altered.
With regard to claim 23, Murphy further discloses the support structure comprises a net (col. 17, lines 16-21).
With regard to claim 27, Murphy, as modified, further discloses the at least one rear retaining strap is configured to be attached to the support structure and to the top-end retaining strap (Hinze; fig. 1; wherein strap are “configured to” be connected).
With regard to claim 28, Murphy, as modified, discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regard two rear retaining straps. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize multiple straps, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
With regard to claim 29, Murphy, as modified, further discloses a plurality of securing elements disposed at a rear end of the lateral floats and/or at a rear end of the support structure, the securing elements being configured to retain the top-end restraining strap and/or the at least one rear retaining strap when the respective retaining strap is detached from a position in which the retaining strap retains the watercraft in the receiving area (Hinze; fig. 1; circular band around float).
With regard to claim 31, Murphy further discloses at least one lifting element comprises at least one eyelet (fig. 2; fig. 5A) located on top of one of the lateral floats or on top of the connecting front element (fig. 2).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy et al. (7,506,606) in view of Hinze (5,341,756), as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Curcio (3,011,184).
With regard to claim 30, Murphy , as modified, discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding a plurality of detachable retaining straps configured to retain the watercraft in the receiving area when the retaining straps are attached to the transport and carrying device, and a plurality of fasteners configured to attach the retaining straps to at least one of the connecting front element, the support structure and the lateral floats, the fasteners being selected from the group consisting of buckles, plug-in fasteners, snap fasteners or Velcro fasteners.
Curcio discloses a floating transport device comprising a plurality of detachable retaining straps (46) configured to retain the craft in the receiving area when the retaining straps are attached to the transport and carrying device (figs. 2-3), and a plurality of fasteners (48) configured to attach the retaining straps to at least one of the connecting front element, the support structure and the lateral floats (figs. 2-3), the fasteners being selected from the group consisting of buckles, plug-in fasteners, snap fasteners or Velcro fasteners (col. 2, lines 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify further Murphy and utilize restraining elements as taught in Curcio, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to readily allow the restraining device to be removed from the support structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 16-23 and 27-31 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN F FIORELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7012. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM EST.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/BENJAMIN F FIORELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
BF
04/04/2026
Prosecution Insights