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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-9 and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Townson (EP 3838736; cited by Applicant) in view of Cioanta et al (US 2017/0081000). With respect to claim 1, Townson discloses the claimed submersible robot 14 system for inspecting and or grooming objects 10, 12 in a marine environment, with a housing 62, a sensor (paragraph 0070) to generate sensor data, a processor (paragraph 0098) disposed in the housing and in communication with the sensor, a plurality of adhesion engines disposed within the housing, each adhesion engine in communication with the processor and a plurality of magnetic adhesion devices 66 to secure the system to the object, a magnetic switch motor (paragraph 0070) for switching on and off the magnetic adhesion devices, at least one grooming element 20, 78, a body rotation motor (paragraph 0110), with the processor commanding the magnetic switch motor of each adhesion engine based on the sensor data to cause the system to traverse the surface of the object. With respect to claims 2-6, 9, 12-15, 18-19, note Townson, Figures 1, 17-27; paragraphs 0016, 0036, 0070, 0080, 0094, 0098. The method of claim 11 directly follows from the apparatus of Townson. Note that Townson does not disclose illumination and imaging devices. Cioanta et al teach illumination 44, 76 and imaging 125 devices and sensor (paragraph 0082) and processor 120. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Townson with imaging and illumination devices and a sensor and processor in the manner taught by Cioanta et al with a high likelihood of success for improved hull cleaning. The combination combines known features to achieve predictable results. Note also a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have years of experience and advanced degrees in designing complex and expensive underwater systems. Such a person would have found the combination to have been obvious.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Townson (EP 3838736; cited by Applicant) in view of Cioanta et al (US 2017/0081000), as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Krause et al (WO 2019/191836). With respect to claims 10, 20, Townson does not disclose weld repair utilizing an Eddy current. Krause et al teach weld repair with utilizing Eddy current (paragraph 0006). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the device of Townson with weld repair utilizing Eddy current as taught by Krause et al with a high likelihood of success for improved hull maintenance. The combination combines known features to achieve predictable results. Note also a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have years of experience and advanced degrees in designing complex and expensive underwater systems. Such a person would have found the combination to have been obvious.
Claim 20 is 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 20 contains the trademark/trade name Eddy current. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe Eddy current and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Smith et al (US 2014/0081504) show a cleaning device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN AVILA whose telephone number is (571)272-6678. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6-4.
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, Samuel J. Morano can be reached at 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 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.
STEPHEN AVILA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3617
/STEPHEN P AVILA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615