DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A preliminary amendment was filed by applicant on 09/27/2023.
It appears that claims 1-8 are amended from those previously presented but the specific amendments made to the claims is not entirely clear as compared to the previous version filed on 07/06/2023 since no markings are shown to indicate what has been added or removed. The originally filed claims on 07/06/2023 are not numbered and the amended claims presented with the preliminary amendment are not provided with proper status indicators within parentheses following each claim number as follows: (Currently Amended). Amended claims must have proper status indicators and show all changes from the previous version using underlines for added material and using strikeouts or brackets identifying all removed material. Such was provided to the applicant by the examiner with the Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment mailed on 10/31/2025 for which there has been no reply by the applicant. Applicant should provide a complete reply to that Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment in response to this Office Action.
It appears that claims 1-8 are remaining in the application.
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. See list of registered patent practitioners at https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/. You may also obtain a list of locally registered patent practitioners by writing to Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed features: kayak accessibility aid, anchoring device, anchoring system, handle strap, handle/strap, compression plugs, rust resistant hardware, side clasps, hinged retainer clasp, scupper holes, fasteners, slide, hinged metal loop, metal loop, flange annulus, bolt/machine screw, stainless steel locking nut, remaining elements, stainless steel washers, conical shaped rubber-based plugs, lock nut, and bolt must be clearly shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Appropriate correction is required. It is recommended that such be shown with appropriate reference characters corresponding to these feature(s) in the specification and using reference character lead lines that connect the reference characters to the individual features in the drawing figures. It is noted that applicant only used reference character lead lines in Figs. 1, 1A and 3 and did not use any in Fig. 2 making it unclear which reference character corresponds to which feature. It is also noted that there are no reference characters or lead lines at all in Figs. 4 and 5. It is also noted that applicant appears to use varying terms for the same features; applicant should use the identical terms for the same features throughout the disclosure (Specification & Claims).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the above feature(s) consistent with the Specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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. No new matter should be entered.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The Specification does not refer to the drawings regarding all of the features indicated in paragraphs 6 and 7 of this Office Action.
The Specification uses different terms for the same features; the same terms should be used to consistently identify individual features without deviating from terminology. In addition, this same terminology for individual features should also be used in the claims.
The disclosure, including Specification and Claims, contain typographical and/or grammatical errors; applicant should review and correct all such errors.
Appropriate correction is required.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. It is suggested that applicant replace the title with “Kayak Accessibility Aid” or similar, consistent with the disclosure.
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate sub-combinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The following claimed features are not be found in the Specification as recited in the claims: add-on-accessory, nylon web handle/strap, handle/strap, opposing ends, adjustments to the overall length, handle loop, hinged retainer clasp, shaped compression plugs, top of the boat, underside of the boat, fasteners, slide on each end, unit, hinged metal loop, flange annulus, bolt/machine screw, device components, stainless-steel locking nut, stainless steel washers, conical shaped rubber-based plugs, lock nut, remaining elements, the system, and secure connection. Claimed features should be consistent with features identified in and described in the Specification. In addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, including the Title, Abstract, Specification and Claims.
Claims 1-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Inconsistent terms are used for claimed features throughout the claims, and inconsistent with terminology used for these same features throughout the Abstract and Specification. Claim terminology/nomenclature should not deviate throughout the Abstract, Specification and Claims.
At least claims 5-8 contain more than one sentence; individual claims should be in one sentence only and end in a period.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
15. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
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.
16. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, regards as the invention.
17. The claimed features The device, the user, the seated position, the strap, the overall length, the boater, the other, the capability, the handle loop, the users comfort, the nylon strap, the top, the boat, the underside, the manufacturers blow molded hull, the scupper holes, the hull, the plugs, the unit, The invention, the users handle, the opposing end, the anchor point, the user’s position, the handle strap, the 1” strap, the metal loop, the anchoring system, the device components, the bolt/machine screw, the remaining elements, the said bolt/machine screw, said device, the outside, the plugs, the top, the bottom, the 3.5” bolt and the system lack sufficient antecedent basis as recited in the claims (independent claim 1 and subsequent dependent claims). A claimed feature where first recited should not have a “the” or “said” preceding the claimed feature, and should only have “the” or “said” preceding the feature where it is subsequently recited in the claims. In addition, the same feature where subsequently recited in the claims should be specified with the same exact term as previously used in the claims (and be identical to the same term used for this same feature as described elsewhere in the disclosure (especially the Abstract & Specification). This list may not be all inclusive, applicant should review and correct all instances in the claims that present a lack of sufficient antecedent.
18. Claims 5-8 contain more than one sentence making them unclear if more than one claim is presented or intended for each numbered claim, or if they are comprehensive and complete.
19. Claim 1 does not provide relationships for each feature presented, such as connections to each other or how structured and laid out together relative to a kayak for a purpose intended; it appears that the claim presents an assembly of parts without correlation of relative assembly.
20. Certain features identified above in paragraph 17 of this Office Action are not entirely clear since their description cannot be found in the Specification as presented in the claims.
Claims 1-8 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
22. 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 2013/0219668 A1 A (Bredesen et al.), in view of D2: US 5988098 A (Hillhouse). Regarding claim 1, D1 discloses a kayak accessibility aid (retractable leash) [10] which can be used for a kayak or sports board, comprising a handle strap (attachment member) [41], anchoring device (housing assembly) [30], compression plug [44] and hardware (fastener bolt) [42]. D1 does not disclose the specific size of the strap nor its composition of nylon webbing, nor multiple plugs nor the hardware being rust resistant. Nylon webbing used for straps is well known in the art; see D2 which uses nylon webbing for a kayak harness that includes elastic straps which facilitates resilience and extensibility for the harness. The particular size of the nylon webbing used for the strap of the device would have been considered a matter of preference to suit the desired resilience and extensibility for the device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The attachment member can be used as a handle and therefore can be considered a handle strap, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The housing assembly can be anchored with a fastener bolt [42] and plug [44]. Having more than one plug to fasten the device or devices such as for a double person kayak or kayak with a plurality of scuppers and scupper plugs would enhance versatility for the device or allow for more than one anchor point for a multiple strap device for improved reliability and or durability for the device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. All hardware is rust resistant to a certain degree, and making the hardware to fasten the device rust resistant in a marine environment would have improved durability for the device, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been considered obvious 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 to provide such arrangement to facilitate any one or more of resilience, extensibility, fastening, anchoring, use, reliability and/or durability of the device as desired with a reasonable expectation of success, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The rejection combines known features to achieve expected results; no unknown features or unexpected results are achieved for the claimed subject matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
As best understood by the examiner, claims 2-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
25. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The prior art references cited by the examiner disclose kayaks with various accessibility aids.
26. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J. Morano can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
27. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Daniel V Venne/
Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3615
01/07/2026