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
Applicant is requested to provide line drawings of a better quality in which all lines and numbers are well defined, sufficiently dark and of uniform thickness. The current drawings are not acceptable because they contain several photographs with shadows underneath, with several features being undistinguishable because they are too dark.
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.
Specification
The specification is objected to because of the following reasons:
On p-31, line 4, change “715a” to –705a –, and “715b” to –705b – to match reference numbers shown in Fig 18
Appropriate correction is requested.
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 1-4, 12 and 17 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.
In claim 1 (line 16), the limitation “through openings in the second end plate and the third end plate” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite. It is not sufficiently clear if such openings are same or different from the openings in the second and third end plates as set forth on line 14 of the claim. Did the applicant intend this limitation to be “through the openings”?
In claim 12 (line 16), the limitation “through openings in the second end plate and the third end plate” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite. It is not sufficiently clear if such openings are same or different from the openings in the second and third end plates as set forth on line 14 of the claim. Did the applicant intend this limitation to be “through the openings”?
In claim 17, the limitation “extends over an opening in the first end plate” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite. It is not sufficiently clear if such opening in the first end plate is same or different from the opening in the preceding claim 5.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by WO 03106251 A1 (‘251)
WO ‘251 shows a mooring system [10] with first and second ends (see Fig 5 and Fig 6), comprising a first mooring component proximate the first end, and a second mooring component proximate the second end. The first mooring component comprises: a first end plate [22]; a second end plate [32] adjacent the first end plate; and a first compressive element [26], connected between the first end plate and the second end plate. The second mooring component comprising: a third end plate [32] adjacent a fourth end plate [20]; and a second compressive element [26] connected between the third end plate and the fourth end plate. A connecting element [14b] comprises first and second legs, which are considered to be first and second lengths [18, 18], respectively. Regarding claim 1, the connecting element is made of steel rods, which inherently possess some degree of flexibility. Therefore, although the connecting element is not made of a pliable material like a rope or cable, the connecting element is considered as being somewhat flexible. The first length of the flexible connecting element is connected to the first end plate at a first position, and to the fourth end plate at a second position, and passing through openings in the second end plate and the third end plate. The second length of the flexible connecting element is connected to the first end plate at a third position, and to the fourth end plate at a fourth position, and passing through openings in the second end plate and the third end plate, such that the first mooring component and the second mooring component are connected in series.
Re claim 2, as seen in Fig 5, the first length and the second length meet at a tapering first intersection point [16, 16a] at an upper or the first end.
Re claim 3, the first position, the second position, and the first intersection point define a first plane. The mooring system further comprising a second flexible connecting element [14a], wherein the second connecting element too is considered to be flexible for the same reason as describe above for the first connecting element. The second flexible connecting element comprises third and fourth legs, which are considered to be third and fourth lengths [18, 18], respectively. The third length is connected to the second end plate at the fifth position, and the fourth length is connected to the second end plate at a sixth position, wherein the third length and the fourth length meet at a tapering second intersection point (see the lowest point in Fig 6), such that the fifth position, the sixth position and the second intersection point define a second plane. The mooring component is arranged such that actuation of the first flexible connecting element and the second flexible connecting element, respectively away from each other, results in compression of the first compressive element.
Re claim 4, the first plane and the second plane offset by 90 degrees along a longitudinal axis, and therefore they are non-parallel.
Claims 5-9, 13, 15, 18, 20-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Leavell et al. (US 0,383,183 A).
Leavell et al. show a structure that is capable of being used as, and therefore broadly considered to be a mooring component (see Fig 3; and p-1, lines 45-57). The mooring component comprises first and second end plates [b2] each comprising an opening, and a compressive element [C] connected between the first and second end plates. A first connecting element passes through the opening in the second end plate, wherein the first connecting element comprises first and second legs [b3], which are considered to be the first and second lengths, respectively. The first length is connected to the first end plate at a first position, and the second length is connected to the first end plate at a second position, the first length and the second length meeting at a first intersection point (see Fig 5), such that the first position, the second position and the first intersection point define a first plane. A second connecting element passes through the opening in the first end plate, wherein the second connecting element comprises a third length connected to the second end plate at a third position, and a fourth length connected to the second end plate at a fourth position, wherein the third length and the fourth length meet at a second intersection point, such that the third position, the fourth position and the second intersection point define a second plane. The first plane and the second plane are non-parallel, wherein the mooring component is arranged such that actuation of the first connecting element and the second connecting element, respectively away from each other, results in compression of the compressive element.
Re claim 6, the first intersection point is closer than the second intersection point to the second end plate.
Re claim 7, the line of intersection of the first plane and the second plane is coincident with a central axis of the mooring component.
Re claim 8, the first plane and the second plane are mutually perpendicular (see Fig 3).
Re claim 9, the first length and the second length comprise at least one ring [b4] or link, in common between the first length and the second length.
Re claim 13, the first connecting element comprises at least one chain link or at least one ring [b4].
Re claim 15, a triangular plate [B] is connected to the first connecting element (Fig 4], wherein the triangular plate comprises three connection points.
Re claim 18, the first end plate comprises a substantially circular ring.
Re claim 20, the first compressive element comprises a coil spring, which is a single convolute.
Re claim 21, the first connecting element and the first compressive element are arranged such that there is no direct contact between the first connecting element and the first compressive element.
Re claim 23, the first connecting element is substantially rigid and Y-shaped.
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 10 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leavell et al. (US 0,383,183 A) in view of Clauson (US 5482258 A).
Leavell et al. show a structure broadly considered to be a mooring component and comprising first and second connecting elements passing through opening in opposing end plates, as described above.
Leavell et al. describe the connecting elements as rods, but fail to disclose such connecting elements as being flexible (claim 25). Leavell et al. also fail to disclose a mooring system that comprises at least two mooring components connected in series (claim 10)
Clausen shows a mooring component [16] comprising first and second connecting elements [26, 40] passing through opening in opposing end plates, wherein the connecting elements are flexible cables. Clausen also discloses a mooring system comprising at least two mooring components connected in series (see Fig 2; and col. 3, lines 38-45).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to construct the connecting elements of Leavell et al. as flexible cables, as taught by Clausen. Having such an arrangement would have provided a mooring component that was light-weight, inexpensive and easy to manufacture. It would have also been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the support/attachment system of Leavell et al. with at least two mooring components connected in series, as further taught by Clausen. Having such an arrangement would have enabled the system of Leavell et al. to support larger structures and withstand larger tension loads.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leavell et al. (US 0,383,183 A) in view of FR 2267487 A1 (‘487), as cited by the applicant.
Leavell et al. show a structure broadly considered to be a mooring component and comprising a first compressive element in the form of a coil spring, as described above.
Leavell et al. however fail to disclose the first compressive element as being formed from a polymer.
FR ‘487 show a mooring component comprising a first compressive element connected between end plates, wherein the compressive element is formed from a polymer.
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the compressive element of Leavell et al. from a polymer, as taught by FR ‘487. Having such a construction would have provided a mooring component that inexpensive, easy to manufacture, quiet during operation and resistant to rust.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 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 in the attached PTO Form 892, but not yet relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJAY VASUDEVA whose telephone number is (571)272-6689. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 am - 3:00 pm.
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.
/AJAY VASUDEVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights