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 29, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 29, 2023 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 5-6 and 9-16 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 5 recites the limitation "the oar shaft" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the internal circumferential surface" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the rope wrap" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential method steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: no steps are disclosed for the method of manufacturing an oar scrubber as claimed in claims 9-16.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the oar shaft" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the internal circumferential surface" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the rope wrap" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pray (US 742,490) in view of Horan et al. (US 7,708,610).
Pray discloses an oar lock, as shown in Figures 1-5, which includes a clamping ring, defined as Parts #12 or 13, that is formed in two sections, defined as Parts #20 and 21, that are hinged together with a pin, defined as Part #22, and securable together by means of a screw, defined as Part #16, around an oar shaft, defined as Part #11.
Pray, as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a shock cord retention strap.
Horan et al. discloses a rowing oar system, as shown in Figures 2a-21, which includes the use of a release pin tether or cord, defined as Part #16, that is secured in a manner that is known in the art to a section of said rowing oar system to prevent the loss of said release pin, as shown in Figure 9.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize a tether or cord to secure a member to a rowing oar system, as taught by Horan et al., in combination with the oar lock clamping ring as disclosed by Pray for the purpose of providing means for securing a clamping ring to an oar shaft and an oar lock in order to prevent the loss of said clamping ring.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 7-8 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.
Claims 5-6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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. Prade (US 9,180,948) discloses a paddle device which includes a clamp and a rope.
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, MARC JIMENEZ can be reached at 571-272-4530. 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.
February 26, 2026
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615B