DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A preliminary amendment was filed by applicant on 08/08/2023.
Claims 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28 and 29 are amended.
Claims 2-6, 8, 13, 16, 19, 24, 25 and 33 are canceled.
No claims are added.
The amended Specification is accepted.
The replacement Abstract is accepted.
Claims 1, 7, 9-12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20-23 and 26-32 are remaining in the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed feature limitations: “wherein the conveyor comprises a plurality of driveable belts arranged adjacent to one another on the conveyor”, “wherein adjacent driveable belts are spaced apart from one another”, and “wherein adjacent driveable belts abut one another at their edges” as recited in claims 11 & 12 (suggest that features such be shown with an appropriate reference character(s) corresponding to these feature(s) presented in both the drawings and in the specification) or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Appropriate correction is required.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above feature(s) consistent with the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
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. No new matter should be entered.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality:
The Specification does not refer to the drawings regarding the features indicated in paragraphs 9 and 10 of this Office Action (OA).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 30 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only, and cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, claim 30 has not been further treated on the merits. Had claim 30 been indicated as dependent on claim 1, the claim would have been rejected based on the prior art indicated in paragraph 21 of this OA.
On line 2 of claim 14, “wherein driveable belt” should be – wherein the driveable belt – .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
16. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
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.
17. Claims 17, 18, 20, 22, 21 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, regards as the invention.
18. The claimed features “the boat” (claims 17, 18, 20 and 21), “the waterline” (claim 20), and “the deck conveyor ramp” (claim 22) lack sufficient antecedent basis as recited.
19. The phrases “to cover an and” and “to access to an” in claim 27 are unclear (it appears that either typos exist here or words are missing, clarification is needed).
20. Claim 18 recites “a second end” but no – first end – has been previously recited.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
21. 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 1, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 2005/257732 A1 (Waldock), cited by applicant. With respect to claim 1, D1 discloses a lifeboat (rescue boat) [10] comprising a hull, propulsion system [24, 26], conning system [18], open or openable bow, foredeck [36], powered recovery ramp (hinged platform) [38] extending forward and below the openable bow (open between forward tapered sections [32, 34] of pontoons [28, 30]) attached to the foredeck (deck) [36] for deployment forwards of the bow for recovery of a casualty ahead of the bow; motor assembly [52] powers the raising and lowering of the ramp [38]. Regarding claims 18 and 20, the recovery ramp is pivotally mounted at one end that permits pivoting between a stowed (up) and deployed (down position) that extends through a level of a waterline [14]. See Figs. 1-15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
23. 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 7, 9, 10-12, 14, 15, 17, 23, 28, 29, 31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 2005/257732 A1 (Waldock), cited by applicant, in view of D2: WO 2019/158904 A1 (Mayall), also cited by applicant. D1 discloses all claimed features as indicated previously, except the specifically claimed subject matter of claims 7, 9, 10-12, 14, 15, 17, 23, 28, 29, 31 and 32. Regarding claims 7, 9 and 10, D2 discloses a lifeboat with a powered recovery ramp [18] that comprises a conveyor [54] with a driveable belt [20] and slats (bars) [19] extending across a width of the belt that extends from an open transom and has a driven conveyor for recovering a casualty from behind the stern of the lifeboat. Regarding claims 11, 12 and 14, belt [20] links slats [19] but D2 does not specify if belt [20] is a single belt extending over a width of the ramp or a plurality of belts arranged adjacent or abutting one another; however, making such a belt extend over the width of the ramp would increase strength and durability of the device; similarly, making such a plurality of belts adjacent to one another either spaced apart or abutting one another would also increase strength and durability of the device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims 15 and 17, ramp has a frame [51] with channels [55] allowing linear translation and pivoting of the conveyor forward at an aft deck portion and allowing the conveyor to be raised parallel with the aft deck portion and to a deployed position in which the back end of the conveyor is below water (see Figs. 5 and 6 and corresponding written description). Regarding claim 23, ramp extension [54] of D1 is considered a door inasmuch as such may be elevated at 90 degrees and folded further, and can provide a stop and protection for crew, and is considered to provide at least a partial enclosure at the bow of the lifeboat. Regarding claim 28, adding an additional recovery ramp similar to D2 at the stern of D1 would enable additional recovery capability at the stern, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claim 29, providing or modifying to provide such features would be considered retrofitting inasmuch such would be adding to something that did not have it before, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims 31 and 32, the method steps are considered inherent in the assembly of such a device. Therefore, providing such aforementioned features as disclosed in D2 with D1 would facilitate deployment and improve upon the device for rescue purposes as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. In view of the foregoing, it would have been considered obvious 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 provide such features to facilitate and enhance rescue capability for the device as desired with a reasonable expectation of success, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The rejection combines known features to achieve expected results; no unknown features or unexpected results are achieved for the claimed subject matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
As best understood by the examiner, claim 26 is 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 21, 22 and 27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
27. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The prior art references cited by the examiner disclose life/rescue boats with deployable ramps.
28. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J. Morano can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
29. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Daniel V Venne/
Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3615
11/12/2025