DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on September 5, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 11, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7 and 19 are 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 7 recites the limitation "the walkable surface" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Antecedent basis is provided for “a walkable surface” in claim 4, not in claim 3.
On line 1 of claim 19, a “toon boat” is disclosed. It is unclear to the examiner what the applicant is intending to claim as a “toon boat”. It is assumed by the examiner that the applicant intended to claim a pontoon boat.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7-8 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Baylor (US 7,159,531).
Baylor discloses the same adjustable height boat as claimed, as shown in Figures 1-6, which is comprised of a hull, defined as Part #12, with a topside or lower deck, defined as Part #16, a top or upper deck, defined as Part #28, and a plurality of linear actuators or telescopic support legs, defined as Parts #56, 58, 60 and 62, each with one end that is operatively connected to said topside or lower deck, and another end that is operatively connected to said top or upper deck, as shown in Figure 1. An extension of said linear actuators or telescopic support legs raises said top or upper deck to a first position with respect to said topside or lower deck, as shown in Figure 1, and a retraction of said linear actuators or telescopic support legs lowers said top or upper deck to a second position with respect to said topside or lower deck, as shown in Figure 2. Said linear actuators or telescopic support legs include a first column, defined as Part #60, a second column, defined as Part #62, that is laterally spaced from said first column and positioned toward a rearward end of said boat, a third column, defined as Part #56, and a fourth column, defined as Part #58, that is laterally spaced from said third column and positioned forward of said first and second columns, where said first and second columns are spaced apart in a longitudinal direction from said third and fourth columns, as shown in Figure 1. Said first, second, third and fourth columns are configured to be perpendicular to said top or upper deck when said top or upper deck is in said first and second positions, as shown in Figures 4-5. Each of said linear actuators or telescopic support legs is further comprised of a fixed lower portion, defined as Part #94, and a movable upper portion, defined as Part #86, as shown in Figure 4. Said top or upper deck is movable relative to said fixed lower portion of each of said linear actuators or telescopic support legs by means of extending or retracting each of said linear actuators or telescopic support legs, as shown in Figures 4-5.
Baylor also discloses the same method of operating a telescoping upper deck for a boat as claimed, as shown in Figures 1-6, which is comprised of the steps of receiving by means of a control system or controller, defined as Part #116, an instruction to move a top or upper deck, defined as Part #28, of a boat, defined as Part #10, from a first position, as shown in Figure 2, in which said top or upper deck is a first height above a topside or lower deck, as shown in Figure 4, and a second position, as shown in Figure 1, in which said top or upper deck is a second height above said topside or lower deck, as shown in Figure 5, and sending signals from said control system or controller to a plurality of linear actuators or telescopic support legs, defined as Parts #56, 58, 60 and 62, that are positioned within first, second, third and fourth columns, where said signals cause movement of said top or upper deck from said first position to said second position, as shown in Figures 4-5, based on the instruction received by said control system or controller.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 9-18 are 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. James (US 6,988,461) discloses a telescoping boat tower apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARS A OLSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-6685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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.
December 19, 2025
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615