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 Response to an Election / Restriction Requirement was filed on 01/05/2026.
Claims 1-11 are original.
Claims 12-20 are canceled.
Claims 1-11 are remaining in the application.
Election/Restrictions
6. Applicant has elected, without traverse, the invention of Group I directed to claims 1-11 drawn to an underwater vehicle buoyancy system. Claims 12-20 drawn to the invention of Group II and to a method of using an underwater buoyancy system are canceled by applicant.
7. Claims 1-11 are hereby examined on the merits and are the subject of this Office Action.
Claim Objections
8. Claims 1-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-11 recite merely “apparatus” in the preamble which is considered inconsistent with the disclosure (including Title, Abstract and Specification) which describe binary opposing buoyancy for underwater lift applications, a deep-sea apparatus for retrieving deep-sea nodules and an underwater vehicle buoyancy system.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 1-5, 7, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1: US 2021/0291947 A1 (SLOCUM et al.).
Regarding claims 1-5, 7, 9 and 10, D1 discloses the claimed apparatus (submersible vehicle) [100], including opposer (inflatable lift structure) [134], gas valve [121] and release valve [138], thruster [118], variable load [132] and gas supply system [128], arranged and configured as claimed. See Figs. 1-3D and corresponding written description of Specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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, claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 2021/0291947 A1 (SLOCUM et al.), in view of D2: US 2020/0086705 A1 (XIAO et al.). D1 discloses all claimed features as indicated previously, except the recited where the gas mixture is air (claim 6) and wherein the thruster is a bi-directional reversible thruster (claim 8), as claimed. However, D2 discloses such features with disclosed air supply for airbag bodies [31] and reversible thrusters [71]. 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 features to facilitate inflation, operation, propulsion and versatility 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
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
14. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The prior art references cited disclose submersibles with lift bags and/or other static buoyancy.
15. 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).
16. 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
01/27/2026