CTNF 18/308,142 CTNF 82667 DETAILED ACTION It appears the inventor(s) filed the current application pro se (i.e., without the benefit of representation by a registered patent practitioner). While inventors named as applicants in a patent application may prosecute the application pro se, lack of familiarity with patent examination practice and procedure may result in missed opportunities in obtaining optimal protection for the invention disclosed. The inventor(s) may wish to secure the services of a registered patent practitioner to prosecute the application, because the value of a patent is largely dependent upon skilled preparation and prosecution. The Office cannot aid in selecting a patent practitioner. A listing of registered patent practitioners is available at https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/ . Applicants may also obtain a list of registered patent practitioners located in their area by writing to Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-25 AIA Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CANADA on 04/29/2022 . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CA3160382 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings 06-36-01 AIA Figure 1-4 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: reference numeral 5 is used for both “transmission cable” and “conductor” reference numeral 6 is used for both “passive rectifier” and “active rectifier” reference numeral 7 is used for both “variable voltage direct current (DC) bus” and “transmission cable” reference numeral 8 is used for both “inverter” and “voltage regulator” reference numeral 9 is used for both “alternating current (AC) bus” and “direct current (DC) bus” reference numeral 11 is used for both “waterway” and “waterway fluid” reference number 12 is used for both “short” and “distance” Appropriate correction is required. Different reference numerals may be used for the different elements in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-02 AIA Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The actual fluid claimed as “a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid” is not explicitly described by the original disclosure . 07-33-01 Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without the exact description of “a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid” , which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew , 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). No specifics about the nature of the low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid is provided, only a description of such fluid is provided in the specification . 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-3 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 1 recites the limitations "the active rectifier", "the generator", "the water-based energy capturing device" and "the same waterproof enclosure". Claim 2 recites the limitation "the volume" and "the waterproof enclosure". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claim 3 is rejected due to its dependency. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KALRA et al. (US 20220077798 A1) in view of BATES et al. (US 20090121200 A1) . Re claim 1. KALRA discloses (abstract) a method of integrating (FIG.2 – illustration of arrangement of components) the active rectifier 290A-290C and the generator 230A-230C of the water-based energy capturing device . (interpreted as intended use given that the claim does not in any way describe or require that energy capturing device operates with water, any energy generating device could operate nearby bodies of water, such as wind turbines placed on a shore, or a hydropower plant placed near a river for instance) However, KALRA fails to explicitly disclose : within the same waterproof enclosure. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that electrical devices, such as electronic circuitry and components, benefit from being protected from water. One of ordinary skill in the art further understands that protecting electrical components in any environment is critical to integrity of operation of large machines/structures, such as energy generation devices. BATES teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, using waterproof enclosures to protect against damages due to water leaks, etc. [0005-0006] Any water leak could create a potential situation for environmental damage to any areas around the electrical apparatus, including [0002] electrical power generation machines/structure. Clearly, BATES suggests to one of ordinary skill in the art, using similar waterproof enclosures for internal electrical components would protect surrounding environment and integrity of such electrical components. Furthermore, BATES suggests insulating fluids for electrical apparatus [0009]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try protecting energy capturing devices from any water damage as taught by BATES in order to protect internal electrical components such as active rectifier and generator from potential damage. Re claim 2. However, KALRA fails to explicitly disclose : the method according to claim 1 where the volume within the waterproof enclosure that surrounds the generator and active rectifier is filled with a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid. KALRA clearly teaches [0009] using a fluid to help protect electrical apparatus components, such as a fluid with a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid, which would fill around electrical components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try insulating electrical components by filling with a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid as taught by BATES in order to protect internal electrical components such as active rectifier and generator from potential damage . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KALRA et al. (US 20220077798 A1) in view of BATES et al. (US 20090121200 A1) further in view of LORES et al. (RU 2516470 C2) . Re claim 3. However, KALRA fails to explicitly disclose : the method according to claim 2 where the low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid is environmentally friendly and biodegradable. LORES teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, protecting electric equipment by using a dielectric oil which includes a low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive fluid which is environmentally friendly and biodegradable (i.e. High erucic acid oil). (see below) At least one embodiment of the invention addresses the need for electrical equipment that uses an insulating liquid that is non-toxic, biodegradable, relatively non-flammable, environmentally friendly, and must comply with existing specifications and requirements for dielectric fluids, and have operating characteristics comparable to those of currently used insulating oils l or even superior to them. An advantage of at least one of the embodiments of the present invention is that it provides a low viscosity insulating oil, which improves its thermal conductivity . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using an environmentally friendly and biodegradable fluid as suggested by LORES in order to further protect from against potential environmental pollution and improve disposability of fluids used during operation . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art listed in the 892 form includes various references which clearly and explicitly teach the benefits of using various fluids with the characteristics including, low viscosity, electrically insulative, and thermally conductive, used within motor and electrical components across various industries, arts and technologies. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS E GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1354. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-6pm F 9-5pm. 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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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. CARLOS E. GARCIA Primary Examiner Art Unit 2686 /Carlos Garcia/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686 12/18/2025 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 2 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 3 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 4 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 5 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 6 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 7 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 8 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 9 Art Unit: 2686 Application/Control Number: 18/308,142 Page 10 Art Unit: 2686