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 .
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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baungaard et al (WO 2020/254896; cited by Applicant). With respect to claim 1, Baungaard et al disclose the basic claimed structure including a spreading device 10 for trawl fishing, seismic survey operations or other water activities where it is desirable to keep distance between two sides of a towed device (trawl door 10 of Figures 1-2, 3-4), the spreading device having at least one part (upper trawl door section 10a and lower trawl door section 10b), at least one part comprises two or more foils 18, 20, 22 (note also page 7, lines 31-33) with the foils in use arranged such that a fist foil 18 is arranged foremost in the intended travel direction of the spreading device (page 8, lines 6-7), a last foil 20 is arranged rearmost with respect to the intended travel direction (Figures 1, 4), the foils 18 having one or more movable sections 44 arranged on one or both sides a stationary foil (Figures 3), where each foil has a front surface and a rear surface, the surfaces each being defined by two edges and two side limitations, in use being front and rear edges (Figures 2-3), an upper and lower side limitations where the upper and lower side limitations of the two or more foils are connected to respective upper and lower frames 12, 14, 16, with an axis being defined as passing through the leading edge of the first foil and the trailing edge of the last foil 18, 20 (Figure 4) and with the first foil 18 overlapping or at least overlaps a part of all other foils (22, page 7, lines 31-33; 22 Figure 4) and with a second foil 22 (Figure 4) overlaps the rearmost foil 20 (Figure 4) with at least one foil 20, 22 being stationary and where one or more sections 44 of another foil 18 being pivotably connected to another foil (44, page 8 lines 16-17) such that the one or more sections 44 may be moved from a position where the surface of any section is flush with the surface of another foil, to a position where the surface is out of plane with the surface of the other foil. Not disclosed by Baungaard et al is the overlap of the first foil relative to the second foil is between 50% and 90% measured along the axis and where the overlap of the second foil relative to the last foil is between 305 and 90% measured along the axis. With respect to claims 1, 6 and 10-12, it would have been an obvious choice of engineering design to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Baungaard et al with the overlap of the first foil relative to the second foil is between 50% and 90% measured along the axis and where the overlap of the second foil relative to the last foil is between 305 and 90% measured along the axis, with the section constitutes between 30% and 60% of the surface area of the foil, the section constitutes approximately 40% of the surface area of the foil and the parts are angled relative to each other and the section constitutes between 20% and 80% of the surface area of the foil of Baungaard et al with a high likelihood of success to provide a more versatile spreading device to be operated in an easier manner. Note also MPEP 2144.04 IV A. The combination combines known features to achieve predictable results. With respect to claims 2-5 and 7-9, see pages 5, lines 9-11 and page 8, lines 16-19; Figures 2, 4, parts 16, 18, 22. With respect to claim 9, it would have been an obvious choice of engineering design to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the sections of Baungaard et al to be flush with a high likelihood of success for reduced drag and reduced fuel consumption. With respect to claim 7, the method steps have been given limited weight since method steps do not further limit apparatus claims.
Claims 3, 5 and 9 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. The use of “may” in claims 3, 5 and 9 is indefinite.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Baungaard et al (WO 2018/108222) show a spreading device. Breugelmans (GB 2122562 A) shows a trawl door.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN AVILA whose telephone number is (571)272-6678. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6-4.
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 J. 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.
STEPHEN AVILA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3617
/STEPHEN P AVILA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615