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 .
Claims numbered 1-7 and 10-22 are pending in the application (applicant has omitted claims 8 and 9 and has therefore improperly numbered the claims; the claims are renumbered by the examiner as claims 1-20 with claims 10-22 now identified as claims 8-20 – this claim renumbering should be used by applicant going forward in prosecution to identify the claims).
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: water turbine, mount base and controller must be clearly shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Appropriate correction is required. In addition, all features recited in the claims, including those listed in paragraph 12 of this Office Action, must be shown in the Drawings. 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. 1a-4d and 6a-9b and did not use any reference characters in Figs. 5a-5d, making it unclear what features are depicted or represented in Figs. 5a-5d. 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 (including Abstract, Specification & Claims).
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities:
Figs. 1a-4d and 6a-7c lack sufficient contrast and/or clarity and contain small and difficult to discern drawing reference characters.
Figs. 5a-5d do not contain and drawing reference characters.
Drawing reference character lead lines and Figure numbers should not contain arrows.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 paragraph 4 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.
Appropriate correction is required.
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: standardized mounting base interface geometry, mount base installation, varying materials, adhesive, jig, accommodations for a mechanism for securing the turbine module while attached to the base, removable tether or leash, accommodations for a locking mechanism for securing the mount, foot control, any means as to accommodate unforeseen control situations, purpose of but not limited to the complex nature of disabilities, wireless control, watercraft not limited to inner tubes and floating ice chests, any combination of wireless/wired configuration including the use of multiple control schemes on a single motor, turbine module may be controlled with analog or digital signaling for the purpose of controlling speed and direction, turbine module controls may send forward and reverse signals for the purpose of controlling speed and turning, turbine modules may be installed unconventionally such as in, but not limited to, innertubes that are tied together to provide cooperative propulsion and control schemes, mount base, cheap manufacturing and materials such as 3d printing and plastics, and powered by any power source between the acceptable range of the motor controller. 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 (renumbered from applicant’s improperly numbered claims previously identified as claims 1-7 and 10-22) 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.
Claims 3-9 (renumbered from applicant’s numbered claims 3-7, 10 and 11) and claims 12-19 (renumbered from applicant’s numbered claims 14-21) are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only, and cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim(s). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, these claims have not been further treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
14. 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.
15. Claims 1-20 (renumbered from applicant’s improperly numbered claims 1-7 and 10-22) 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.
16. The claimed features the turbine, The mounting device, the geometry, the strap, the mount base installation, the mount, the mount base, the turbine module, the base, the motor, the purpose, the complex nature, The turbine module, The control methods, the use of multiple controls schemes, the purpose of controlling, the turbine modules the geometry, The turbine module, the acceptable range and the motor controller 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). Also, a dependent claim should not deviate with reference to the parent claim in nomenclature and terminology. This list may not be all inclusive, applicant should review and correct all instances in the claims that present a lack of sufficient antecedent.
17. Claim 1 does not provide clear relationships for features presented, such as connections to each other or how structured and laid out cooperative relative to each other for the purpose of assembly; it appears that an assembly of parts without correlation of relative assembly.
18. Certain features identified above in paragraph 12 of this Office Action are not entirely clear since their description cannot be found in the Specification as presented in the claims.
19. It is not clear if claims 11-17 (renumbered from applicant’s improperly numbered claims 12-19) are apparatus or method claims, since they refer to or recite elements of a process.
20. The claimed mounting device, mechanism for securing the turbine module while attached to the base and mechanism for securing the mount to a watercraft are not clear with respect to respective structure in view of the Specification, since such are not clearly defined.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: mounting device, mechanism for securing the turbine module while attached to the base and mechanism for securing the mount to a watercraft, as recited in the claims. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim elements: mounting device, mechanism for securing the turbine module while attached to the base and mechanism for securing the mount to a watercraft are considered to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to clearly link or associate the disclosed structure, material, or acts to the claimed function such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function. The Specification does not clearly specify distinct structure associated to the feature(s); therefore, the feature limitations as claimed is not clear with respect to scope, structure or limiting effect in light of the Specification.
In claim 19 (renumbered from applicant’s improperly numbered claim 21), the term “cheap” in claim limitation “cheap manufacturing and materials” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “cheap” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the claim limitation “cheap manufacturing and materials” is rendered indefinite by the relative term “cheap”.
Claims 1-20 (renumbered from applicant’s improperly numbered claims 1-7 and 10-22) 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 § 102
27. 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, 2, 8, 9 and 20 (renumbered from applicant’s misnumbered claims 1, 2, 10, 11 and 22), are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1: US 12145709 B (Gibson et al.). Regarding claims 1, 2, 8, 9 and 20, D1 discloses a portable, modular, water turbine solution (assembly) [1, 2] with a mount base (shown in various embodiments in the Drawing Figures), water turbine (motor), and a watercraft appropriate (suitable) controller [17]. The controller can be designed to be hand or foot controlled. The motor can be powered by any power source [19] between the acceptable range of the motor controller: the power source will be the conventional and cost-effective deep cycle AGM lead acid battery, utilized for both it's low cost and ample range, though it is important to note the system is designed to function per the intent from any deep cycle AGM or LiPo battery between voltages of 6 and 22V (col. 3, l 35-44;). See Figs. 1-31 and detailed written description.
Conclusion
29. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The prior art references disclose portable and/or modular motor assemblies for boats/watercraft.
30. 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).
31. 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
01/09/2026