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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 9, 12, 19 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gonring US 8,803,711 in view of Hagstrom US 4,742,794.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Gonring teaches a control system 18 for a boat light display 14;
wherein the light 16 is communicatively coupled to at least one of:
a sensor 11 providing sensed information; and
a user input 34 device providing a user input (column 4, lines 6-10);
wherein the light is configured to convey quantitative information related to at least one of the sensed information and the user input (column 2, lines 28-42); and
wherein the light is configured to be directly visible to a person who looks down at the stern of the boat (or wherever the light is located), such that the light is configured to convey the quantitative information to the person (column 4, lines 5-27).
PNG
media_image1.png
256
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1- Gonring Figure 1
While Gonring teaches that the light system can display any desired characteristic (column 2, lines 28-42) and be placed anywhere on the vessel such that it can be viewed by users in the boat or water (column 2, lines 54-61), Gonring does not teach a trim tab system.
Hagstrom teaches a trim tab assembly comprising:
a trim tab 11;
an actuator 20 comprising:
a housing 21 configured to be coupled to a boat by way of a first bracket 35; and
a rod 27 configured to extend and retract with respect to the housing and configured to be coupled to the trim tab by way of a second bracket 29.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the boat of Gonring with trim tab assemblies as taught by Hagstrom in order to actively control trimming of the boat.
Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the light/display is on at least one of the housing, the first bracket, the second bracket, and the trim tab. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to locate the display on the housing, brackets or trim tabs in order to free up space on the boat, avoid making more markings on the transom and/or bundle attachments together in order to simplify maintenance, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claims 2, 3 and 19, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the light is integrated into/embedded within the housing, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the components together in order to reduce part count or make the device more resistant to the outside environment, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Gonring also teaches that the light is one of a plurality of lights that are configured to be illuminated in a plurality of different colors: and wherein the quantitative information is conveyed by way of a color or colors of one or more of the lights in the plurality of lights that are illuminated (column 2, line 67-column 3 line 2).
Claims 6-8, 11, 15-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gonring US 8115644 in view of Hagstrom US 4,742,794 and Wada US 2015/0324093.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the information relates to a depth of water in which the boat is operating. Wada teaches a boat information display system which is configured to display information related to a depth of water in which the boat is operating [0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the display of Gonring with depth information as taught by Wada in order to provide users with more useful information about the operating conditions of the boat.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the information relates to an amount of extension of the rod with respect to the housing. Wada teaches a boat information display system which is configured to display information related to an amount of extension of a trim actuator rod with respect to its housing [0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the display of Gonring with trim tab information as taught by Wada in order to provide users with more useful information about the operating conditions of the boat.
PNG
media_image2.png
279
379
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2- Wada Figure 2
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 5 and 14. Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the information is conveyed by way of a number. Wada teaches a boat information display system which is configured to display a variety of information related to a boat by way of numbers [0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the display of Gonring with depth, position or temperature information numbers as taught by Wada in order to provide users with more useful information about the operating conditions of the boat.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Gonring and Hagstrom teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claims 1 and 12. Neither Gonring nor Hagstrom teach that the light is configured to indicate a status of at least one of the actuator and the trim tab to which the actuator is coupled. Wada teaches a boat information display system which is configured to display information related to a status of at least one of the actuator and the trim tab to which the actuator is coupled [0043]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the display of Gonring with trim tab information as taught by Wada in order to provide users with more useful information about the operating conditions of the boat.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00.
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, Marc Jimenez can be reached at 517 272-4530. 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.
/MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615