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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 39-87 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/6/26.
Applicant has elected species D (figures 17-22) with traverse, requesting that species I (figure 27) be examined as well. As art for species I was found during the search, species I and associated claims 13 and 14 will be examined herein.
Claim Objections
Claims 35-37 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims depend from claim 28 and 29, but further limit components (fuselage, fin, stabilizer) which are not introduced until claim 34. For the purposes of this action, claims 35-37 will be treated as though they depend from claim 34.
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 2 and 34 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 2 recites that “the second support is configured for coupling to the first support in a manner that allows adjustment of a combined height of the first and second supports.” It is unclear if this is a different feature that the “manner that allows adjustment of a combined length of the first and second supports” recited in parent claim 1. For the purposes of this action, they will be assumed to be the same feature.
Claim 34 recites components of the foiling assembly, but because the foiling assembly is not positively recited, it is unclear how these limitations affect the claimed device. For the purposes of this action, claim 34 will be treated as though it depends from claim 33.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. In this case, as parent claim 1 already recites that the combined length is adjustable, claim 2 recites no further limitations. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-12, 15, 16, 19, 28, 29, 33, 34 and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Missler US 11,685,481.
Regarding claim 1, Missler discloses a mast 10, comprising:
a first support 10a configured for coupling to one of a foiling platform 12 and a foiling assembly; and
a second support 10b configured for coupling to the other of the foiling platform and the foiling assembly 14 and for coupling to the first support in a manner that allows adjustment of a combined length of the first and second supports (column 8, lines 6-24).
PNG
media_image1.png
339
311
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1- Missler Figure 6
Regarding claim 2, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that the second support 10b is configured for coupling to the first support 10a in a manner that allows adjustment of a combined height of the first and second supports (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 3, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that the first support 10a includes at least one first hole; the second support 10b includes at least one second hole configured for alignment with the at least one first hole; and the aligned at least one first hole and at least one second hole are configured to receive at least one fastener (column 8, lines 25-44).
Regarding claim 4, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that the first 10a and second 10b supports are configured to slide relative to each other (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 5, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that one of the first support 10a and the second support 10b is configured to slide inside of the other of the first support and the second support (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 6, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that the first 10a and second 10b supports are configured to allow adjustment of the combined length of the first and second supports by allowing sliding of the first and second supports relative to each other (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 7, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that the first 10a and second 10b supports are configured to allow adjustment of the combined length of the first and second supports by allowing sliding of one of the first and second supports inside of the other of the first and second supports (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claims 8-12, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that one of the first 10a and second 10b supports is configured for coupling to a foiling platform 12 at any location a platform can accept. Note that the platform is not claimed, therefore as long as the unclaimed platform has a mating connection feature in the recited location, the mast as disclosed by Missler could be coupled there.
Regarding claim 15, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler also discloses that at least one of the first support 10a and the second support 10b is configured to extend approximately normal to the foiling platform 12.
Regarding claim 16, Missler discloses a mast 10, comprising:
a female support 10a having a first end configured for coupling to one of a foiling platform 12 and a foiling assembly and a having second end having an opening; and
a male support 10b having a first end configured for coupling to the other of the foiling platform and the foiling assembly 14 and the having a second end configured for extending into the opening of the female support an adjustable distance (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 19, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 16. Missler also discloses that the female support 10a includes at least one female hole; the male support 10b includes at least one male hole configured for alignment with the at least one female hole; and the aligned at least one female hole and at least one male hole are configured to receive at least one fastener (column 8, lines 25-44).
Regarding claim 28, Missler discloses a kit, comprising:
a first support 10a configured for coupling to one of a foiling platform 12 and a foiling assembly; and
a second support 10b configured for coupling to the other of the foiling platform and the foiling assembly 14 and for coupling to the first support in a manner that allows adjustment of a height between the foiling platform and the foiling assembly (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 29, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 28. Missler also discloses that the first support 10a includes at least one first alignment hole and the second support 10b includes at least one second alignment hold; and at least one fastener configured to maintain alignment of at least one first hole with the at least one second hole (column 8, lines 6-24).
Regarding claim 33, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 28. Missler also discloses the foiling assembly 14.
Regarding claim 34, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 33. Missler also discloses that the foiling assembly 14 comprises:
a fuselage 20;
a fin 16; and
a stabilizer 18.
PNG
media_image2.png
357
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2- Missler Figure 1
Regarding claim 36, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 34. Missler also discloses that the fuselage 20 has a leading end; and the fin 16 is configured for coupling to the fuselage at, or approximately at, the leading end.
Regarding claim 37, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 34. Missler also discloses that the fuselage 20 has a trailing end; and the stabilizer 18 is configured for coupling to the fuselage at, or approximately at, the trailing end.
Regarding claim 38, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 29. Missler also discloses that one of the first 10a and second 10b supports is configured slide within the other of the first and second supports (column 8, lines 6-24).
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 8, 10-12, 20--27 and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missler US 11,685,481.
Regarding claims 8 and 10-12, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. In an alternate interpretation, Missler does not teach that the supports are configured to be coupled to the foiling platform at a location other that between a middle section and a rear section of the foiling platform. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to couple the mast to the board wherever it was desired in order to account for the desired weight distribution and/or type of board, 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 20-27, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 16. Missler does not teach shapes of the male and female supports, however it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the mast profile hydrodynamic or of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient in order to reduce drag or obtain the desired flow. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Regarding claims 30-32, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 28. Missler teaches that the fastener is a pin, but does not teach a screw, bolt, nut or bushing. It would have been an obvious substitution of functional equivalents to substitute screws, bolts, nuts or bushings in for the pin in order to ensure retention and/or use fasteners that are common elsewhere on the system, since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395, 1396 (2007).
Claims 13, 14 and 20-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missler US 11,685,481 in view of Giroux US 2023/0382496.
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 3- Giroux Figure 8)]
PNG
media_image3.png
122
93
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Missler does not teach that the supports extend away from the platform at an acute or obtuse angle. Giroux teaches a hydrofoil 50 in which the support 52 extends away from the platform 10 at an acute or obtuse angle (depending on how the angle is measured- see Giroux figures 5 and 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mast of Missler to angle forward or backward as taught by Pavin in order to “aid in handling of the watercraft” [0110].
Regarding claims 20-27, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 16. Missler does not teach shapes of the male and female supports. Giroux teaches a mast 52 for a hydrofoil, which comprises a rounded/tapered leading edge, a tapered trailing edge, and a tear drop cross section [0113]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mast of Missler with a teardrop cross section as taught by Pavin in order to reduce drag on the mast.
Claims 17, 18 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Missler US 11,685,481 in view of Sommerlatt US 11,345,449.
Regarding claim 17, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 16. Missler does not teach details of the female support to foiling board connection. Sommerlatt teaches a mast 2 for a foil board comprising a plate 7 disposed at the top end of the support and configured for coupling to a foiling board. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mast of Missler with a mounting plate as taught by Sommerlatt in order to provide a secure means of fastening the mast to a board.
Regarding claim 18, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 16. Missler does not teach details of the male support to foiling assembly connection. Sommerlatt teaches a mast 2 for a foil board comprising a nipple 13 disposed at the bottom end of the support and configured for coupling to a foiling assembly 12. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mast of Missler with a mounting nipple and recess as taught by Sommerlatt in order to provide a secure means of fastening the mast to the foiling assembly.
Regarding claim 35, Missler discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 34. Missler does not teach details of the male support to foiling assembly connection. Sommerlatt teaches a foiling assembly 12 in which the fuselage 8 has a receptacle 14 configured for receiving an end of the mast 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mast of Missler with a mounting nipple and recess as taught by Sommerlatt in order to provide a secure means of fastening the mast to the foiling assembly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lobisser US 10,358,193 teaches a foil board with various different mast cross sections.
Rosen US 2022/0379999 teaches a foil board with telescopic masts.
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