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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “seat…configured to be adjusted” (Claim 8) “leg…configured to be adjusted” (claim 18 No configuration is shown or depicted. It’s mentioned in the spec but without reference to the drawings.) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 7-10, 12, 13, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Lee (US 20140026807 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses a watercraft, comprising: a hull (Element 104); a seat comprising: at least one front leg (Element 300 Front); and at least one rear leg (Element 300 rear, best seen in height change between Fig. 3 and Fig. 4.); and a deck comprising: a first lower pocket (Element 304 front) configured to receive the at least one front leg of the seat; a second lower pocket (suggested by position rear leg, Fig. 4. Also Claim 4.) configured to receive the at least one rear leg of the seat, wherein, when the at least one front leg of the seat is positioned in the first lower pocket and the at least one rear leg of the seat is positioned in the second lower pocket, the seat is in a first position; and at least one tower (under element 302) positioned higher than the first and second lower pockets, wherein the at least one tower comprises: a first upper pocket (Element 302 front) configured to receive the least one front leg of the seat; and a second upper pocket (under rear leg, Fig 3. ) configured to receive the at least one rear leg of the seat, wherein, when the at least one front leg of the seat is positioned in the first upper pocket and the at least one rear leg of the seat is positioned in the second upper pocket, the seat is in a second position that is higher than the first position. (See Fig. 3, 4))
Regarding Claim 7, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein the seat further comprises a frame comprised of tubing that forms the at least one front leg, the at least one rear leg, a seat back of the seat, or a combination thereof. (See Fig. 3)
Regarding Claim 8, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein the seat is configured to be adjusted in a plurality of directions. (up and down are directions. The azimuth also changes with the azimuth of the kayak.)
Regarding Claim 9, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein the at least one front leg and the at least one rear leg are configured to be lifted out of the first lower pocket and the second lower pocket respectively. (See Fig. 3, Fig. 4.)
Regarding Claim 10, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein the at least one tower extends vertically and away from a top surface of the deck. (Best seen Fig. 3.)
Regarding Claim 12, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein the at least one front leg and the at least one rear leg are connected via a frame of the seat. (Best seen Fig. 3.)
Regarding Claim 13, Lee discloses a watercraft of claim 1, wherein a width of the first upper pocket and a width of the second upper pocket gradually increase in size from a base of the first upper pocket and a base of the second upper pocket respectively. (Suggested by the rounded shape of the insert, also visible in 304 Fig. 3.)
Regarding Claim 19, Lee discloses a method for adjusting a seat on a watercraft, comprising: positioning at least one leg of a seat of the watercraft into at least one lower pocket of a deck of the watercraft so that the seat is in a first position on the watercraft, wherein at least one kiss-off is positioned underneath the at least one lower pocket to provide structural support for the at least one lower pocket when the at least one leg of the seat is positioned into the at least one lower pocket and a weight is applied to the seat; removing the at least one leg of the seat of the watercraft from the at least one lower pocket of the deck of the watercraft; and positioning the at least one leg of the seat of the watercraft into at least one upper pocket of at least one tower of the deck of the watercraft so that the seat is in a second position on the watercraft, wherein the second position is higher than the first position. (See Fig. 3, Fig. 4.)
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.
Claims 2, 11, 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Boyer (US 20180001973 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Lee discloses the watercraft of claim 1, wherein the seat further comprises: a seat bottom; and a seat back connected to the seat bottom (See Fig. 3), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the seat back is connected to the seat bottom via at least one adjustable strap configured to adjust a position of the seat back with respect to the seat bottom.
Boyer discloses the seat back is connected to the seat bottom via at least one adjustable strap configured to adjust a position of the seat back with respect to the seat bottom. (See strap in Fig. 4. depicted with a buckle.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to substitute the seat of Lee with the adjustable seat of Boyer which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Lee is to increase comfort using a known type of seat suitable for kayaks.
Regarding Claim 11, Lee in view of Boyer discloses the watercraft of claim 1, wherein a seat back of the seat is configured to collapse downwards towards a seat bottom of the seat. (a folding seat is depicted in Fig. 4.)
Regarding Claim 16, Lee in view of Boyer discloses the watercraft of claim 15, wherein the seat further comprises a frame connecting the at least one leg, the seat bottom, and the seat back. (See Lee Fig. 3.)
Regarding Claim 20, Lee in view of Boyer discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising: adjusting a seat back of the seat relative to a seat bottom of the seat by utilizing an adjustable strap of the seat. (The straps of the folding seat of Boyer implicitly suggest moving it back.)
Claims 3-5, 14, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of McDonough (US 20080035047 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Lee discloses watercraft of claim 1, where the deck is depressed towards the bottom of the hull (Fig. 3.) but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: a first kiss-off extending vertically upwards from a bottom wall of the hull towards a bottom surface of the first lower pocket such that the first kiss-off is positioned underneath the first lower pocket; and a second kiss-off extending vertically upwards from the bottom wall of the hull towards a bottom surface of the second lower pocket such that the second kiss-off is positioned underneath the second lower pocket.
McDonough discloses or structural integrity, kiss-off molding techniques may be used to bridge between adjacent surfaces of watercraft (paragraph 15.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to use a kiss-off on Lee where the deck is depressed towards the bottom of the hull such that a first kiss-off extending vertically upwards from a bottom wall of the hull towards a bottom surface of the first lower pocket such that the first kiss-off is positioned underneath the first lower pocket; and a second kiss-off extending vertically upwards from the bottom wall of the hull towards a bottom surface of the second lower pocket such that the second kiss-off is positioned underneath the second lower pocket which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Lee is to provide for structural integrity between adjacent surfaces.
Regarding Claim 4, Lee in view of McDonough discloses the watercraft of claim 3, wherein the first kiss-off is configured to provide structural support for the first lower pocket such that when the at least one front leg is positioned in the first lower pocket and a weight is applied to the seat, a force associated with the weight is distributed by the first kiss-off to provide the structural support for the first lower pocket. (This is the functional result of a kiss-off. See MPEP 2114.)
Regarding Claim 5, Lee in view of McDonough discloses the watercraft of claim 4, wherein the second kiss-off is configured to provide structural support for the second lower pocket such that when the at least one rear leg is positioned in the second lower pocket and the weight is applied to the seat, the force associated with the weight is distributed by the second kiss-off to provide the structural support for the second lower pocket. (This is the functional result of a kiss-off. See MPEP 2114.)
Regarding Claim 14 Lee in view of McDonough discloses the limitations of 4 and is rejected on the same grounds.
Regarding Claim 17 Lee in view of McDonough discloses the watercraft of claim 14, wherein the at least one lower pocket and the at least one tower are molded into the deck, the hull, or a combination thereof. (See Lee paragraph 14.)
Regarding Claim 18 Lee in view of McDonough discloses the watercraft of claim 14, wherein a leg position of the at least one leg while in the at least one upper pocket or the at least one lower pocket is configured to be adjusted. (See Lee Fig. 3, Fig. 4.)
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of McDonough (US 20080035047 A1) and further in view of Boyer (US 20180001973 A1)
Regarding Claim 15 Lee in view of McDonough discloses the watercraft of claim 14, wherein the seat further comprises: a seat bottom; and a seat back connected to the seat bottom but does not explicitly disclose at least one adjustable strap configured to adjust a position of the seat back relative to the seat bottom.
Boyer discloses the seat back is connected to the seat bottom via at least one adjustable strap configured to adjust a position of the seat back with respect to the seat bottom. (See strap in Fig. 4. depicted with a buckle.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to substitute the seat of Lee with the adjustable seat of Boyer which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Lee is to increase comfort using a known type of seat suitable for kayaks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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. Christensen (US 20100034584 A1) discloses the use of kiss-offs for structural support.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW POLAY whose telephone number is (408)918-9746. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 Pacific.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 5712726684. 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.
/ANDREW POLAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615 21 March 2026