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 .
Contents of this Office Action:
35 U.S.C. 101 claim analysis
35 U.S.C. 112(f) claim interpretation which includes an explanation of why there are no corresponding 35 U.S.C 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections
35 U.S.C. 103 rejections, including new 35 U.S.C. 103 rationale for the independent claims and new claim 13
Response to Arguments
Prior art cited but not relied on
Claim Analysis - 35 USC § 101
The present claims do not have a 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection because there is no abstract idea. The claims are directed to providing an indicator that is actuated based on a driving state of a water propulsion system.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Suzuki US20130115832A1
Regarding claims 1, 8, 11, 12, and 13, Suzuki discloses a watercraft propulsion system (Abstract discloses a marine vessel propulsion device includes a propeller rotatable around a propeller axis, a duct that surrounds the propeller around the propeller axis, an internal combustion engine that rotates the propeller relative the duct, and an electric motor that rotates the propeller relative to the duct. The propeller includes a plurality of blades, and a cylindrical rim that surrounds the plurality of blades around the propeller axis. The electric motor rotates the propeller by rotating the rim) comprising:
an electric propulsion device attachable to a hull (P89 discloses shown in FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B, the outboard motor 3 is disposed behind a hull H1. The outboard motor 3 includes the engine 6 and the engine ECU 8 both of which have been described above, an engine cover 13 with which the engine 6 and the engine ECU 8 are covered, an upper case 14 that extends downwardly from the engine cover 13, and a lower case 15 that extends downwardly from the upper case 14. P90 discloses the forward/rearward switching mechanism 19 is preferably an electric type forward/rearward switching mechanism. P9 discloses that the motor is electric);
an indicator located above a draft line of the hull and operable to indicate to surroundings of the electric propulsion device information about a state of the electric propulsion device (P27 discloses marine vessel propulsion device may further include an illuminant that emits light. The light emission state, such as brightness or lighting time, may be changed in accordance with the rotation state of the propeller. The illuminant may be disposed on either one of the duct and the propeller, or may be disposed on both of the duct and the propeller. The illuminant may be an electric lamp, or may be an LED (light emitting diode). In this case, electric power that is supplied to the illuminant may be electric power supplied from a motor power source that supplies electric power to the electric motor, or may be electric power supplied from a dedicated power supply system that supplies electric power to the illuminant. As shown in Fig. 1B, the motor which includes the propeller is above H1, the hull);
a controller including a plurality of control modes including an electric propulsion device enabled mode in which the electric propulsion device is enabled to be driven, and configured or programmed to perform an indicator control operation in the electric propulsion device enabled mode to actuate the indicator to indicate that the electric propulsion device is in a drivable state (P27 discloses marine vessel propulsion device may further include an illuminant that emits light. The light emission state, such as brightness or lighting time, may be changed in accordance with the rotation state of the propeller).
Regarding the new limitations that a propeller is to be located at an underwater position, P95 discloses that the propeller is underwater.
The new limitations that are not explicitly taught are:
That the propeller is below a draft line of the hull even when the propeller is underwater.
(for claim 13) wherein the indicator is attached to the hull
However, the placement of the indicator is an obvious design choice. As discussed in MPEP 2144.04 VI C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice.
This is analogous to the present claims where Suzuki teaches each and every limitations except for the specific location of the of the indicator, However, as discussed in the MPEP section above, the positioning of equipment which would not have modified the operation of the devices is an obvious design choice and would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Suzuki discloses claim 1 further comprising:
an engine propulsion device attachable to the hull (See Fig. 1A);
the plurality of control modes further include an electric propulsion device disabled mode in which the engine propulsion device is enabled to generate propulsive force and the electric propulsion device is disabled from being driven (As discussed above, the propeller is electrically powered, so not providing the electricity is equivalent to the propulsion device being disabled from being driven but still enabled to be able to generate propulsive force if electricity is supplied);
the controller is configured or programmed to perform an indicator stopping control operation in the electric propulsion device disabled mode to stop the actuation of the indicator (the light indicator is controlled based on electricity provided, as discussed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki discloses claim 1 further comprising:
a lift to move up and down a propeller of the electric propulsion device between an underwater position and an above-water position (P87 discloses as shown in FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B, the engine 6 is arranged in the outboard motor 3, and the electric motor 7 is preferably arranged in the propulsion unit 4. The engine 6 is preferably an internal combustion engine including a crankshaft that is rotatable around a crankshaft axis extending in an up-down direction); and
the controller is configured or programmed to enable the indicator control operation when the propeller is in the underwater position, and to disable the indicator control operation when the propeller is in the above-water position (As discussed above, the light can be changed based on any condition, so the light is “configured to enable” this control operation).
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki discloses claim 1 further comprising:
a operator operable by a user to maneuver the hull and the electric propulsion device enabled mode includes an operation response mode in which the controller drives the electric propulsion device in response to the operation of the operator (P102 discloses the present position of the control lever 28 d is output from the remote control unit 28 c to the engine ECU 8 and to the motor ECU 9. For example, when the vessel operator moves the control lever 28 d from the neutral position to the forward position, the engine ECU 8 causes the forward/rearward switching mechanism 19 to perform switching from the neutral state to the forward state. Thereafter, the engine ECU 8 and the motor ECU 9 cause the marine vessel propulsion device 1 to generate an output having an amount that is corresponding to the operational amount of the control lever 28 d from the forward output minimum position Fmin, so that the marine vessel V1 is advanced).
Regarding claim 5 and 6, Suzuki discloses storing operations and driving without operating the operator (As in claim 4, P102 discloses , when the vessel operator moves the control lever 28 d from the neutral position to the forward position, the engine ECU 8 causes the forward/rearward switching mechanism 19 to perform switching from the neutral state to the forward state. Thereafter, the engine ECU 8 and the motor ECU 9 cause the marine vessel propulsion device 1 to generate an output having an amount that is corresponding to the operational amount of the control lever 28 d from the forward output minimum position Fmin, so that the marine vessel V1 is advanced. This happens after the operator is operated – meaning that at first there is an operator that is actuated, but then it is the ECU and motor ECU controlling movement).
Regarding 7 and 10, the limitations of these claims are obvious because they are merely rearrangement of parts. Suzuki discloses the hull and propulsion device, as well as the indicator. The exact position is simply rearranging these parts. Please see MPEP 2144.04 (VI C) for further information. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to simply rearrange a set of existing parts.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are deemed moot. Regarding 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s statement that the invocation was unintentional, but the claims have to be amended to not invoke. Specifically, Applicant can amend “an electric propulsion device” to a propeller, and the indicator to the specific indicator Applicant wishes to claim.
Regarding the new amendments, the placement of the indicator is an obvious design choice. As discussed in MPEP 2144.04 VI C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice.
This is analogous to the present claims where Suzuki teaches each and every limitations except for the specific location of the of the indicator, However, as discussed in the MPEP section above, the positioning of equipment which would not have modified the operation of the devices is an obvious design choice and would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Prior Art Cited but not Relied on
Andiarena US5722864 discloses a marine propulsion system comprised of a housing unit having forward and rearward openings, a rotational unit, having forward and rearward openings and having an inner and outer periphery, rotatably secured in the housing unit such that the forward and rearward openings are aligned with the forwards and rearward openings of the housing unit, a plurality of blades rigidly secured to the inner periphery of the rotational unit, and drive means which rotate the rotational unit within the housing unit. Operation of the drive means causes the rotation of the rotational unit and the blades direct water into the forward openings of the housing unit and the rotational unit and out the rearward openings of the housing unit and rotational unit, thereby creating thrust.
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 ARYAN E WEISENFELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 5712725106. 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.
ARYAN E. WEISENFELD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3689
/ARYAN E WEISENFELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663