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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim recites “A vessel having” when it should be “A vessel, comprising:” to properly transition to the rest of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
As to Claim 1, the claim recites “a controller configured to control at least the hydraulic-power unit and the gas tank valves”. It is unclear if this refers to the valve of the high-pressure tank and one of the valves of the low-pressure tanks or if this refers to the valves of the low-pressure tanks or if this refers to each of the valves. The limitation should be “and each of the gas tank valves” to make clear the controller controls all of the valves. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “to be offloaded by”. The use of “to be” makes the claim unclear. The limitation should be “is offloaded”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “to be selected when”. The use of “to be” makes the claim unclear. The limitation should be “is selected when”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “wherein in the first partial load transfer mode, to be selected when the object has been coupled to an offloading device of another vessel or offshore structure”. It is unclear if the limitation refers to the “offloading device of another vessel or offshore structure” claimed before. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “the high-pressure tank is connected to the gas-side chamber”, “in addition to the high-pressure tank, the first low-pressure tank is connected to the gas-side chamber”, “in addition to the high-pressure tank and the first low-pressure tank, the second low-pressure tank is connected to the gas-side chamber” and “wherein in the full load transfer mode, with the high-pressure tank, the first low-pressure tank, and the second low-pressure tank connected to the gas-side chamber”. It is unclear if these connections are via the gas tank valves claimed before. The limitations should incorporate “is connected via their respective gas tank valve” to make this clear. Appropriate correction is required.
As to Claim 7, the claim recites “an object”. It is unclear if this refers to the “object” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a heave motion compensated carrier”. It is unclear if this refers to the “heave motion compensated carrier” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a hull”. It is unclear if this refers to the “hull” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “an offloading device of another vessel or offshore structure”. It is unclear if this refers to the “offloading device of another vessel or offshore structure” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a sequence of modes”. It is unclear if this refers to the “sequence of modes” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “an initial full load support mode”. It is unclear if this refers to the “initial full load support mode” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a first partial load transfer mode”. It is unclear if this refers to the “first partial load transfer mode” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a second partial load transfer mode”. It is unclear if this refers to the “second partial load transfer mode” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a full load transfer mode”. It is unclear if this refers to the “full load transfer mode” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “to be selected when”. The use of “to be” makes the claim unclear. The limitation should be “is selected when”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a first part of the load”. It is unclear if this refers to the “first part of the load” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a second part of the load”. It is unclear if this refers to the “second part of the load” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “a remaining part of the load”. It is unclear if this refers to the “remaining part of the load” of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
As to Claim 18, the claim recites “a foundation to be”. The use of “to be” makes the claim unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
As to Claim 19, the claim recites “jack-up type vessel”. The use of “type” makes the claim unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
As to Claim 20, the claim recites “jack-up type vessel”. The use of “type” makes the claim unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
The dependent claims are rejected for depending on a rejected independent claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if the claims are rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Prior art in the field of heaving or motion compensation in vessels containing a high-pressure tank and two low-pressure tanks, gas valves, a controller, a hydraulic cylinder and a separator, each with the respective claimed structural and operational features and the claimed relationships between them was not found. The closest prior art found is Shanks (U.S. Patent No. 4,351,261) and Strolenberg (U.S. Patent No. 4,025,055).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday: 10:00AM to 6:00PM 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.
/EDWIN J TOLEDO-DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights