Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/566,155

UNDERWATER VESSEL

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 01, 2023
Examiner
BURGESS, MARC R
Art Unit
3615
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
BAE Systems PLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
164 granted / 477 resolved
-17.6% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
69 currently pending
Career history
546
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.8%
+8.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 477 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. In this case, claim 15 only recites that “the underwater vessel is a submarine,” when by definition, all underwater vessels are submarines. Therefore claim 15 contains no further limitations. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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 1-11, 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Korganoff US 3,302,602. Regarding claim 1, Korganoff discloses an underwater vessel comprising: a body 1; a thruster 26 operable to produce thrust, wherein the thruster is deployable from the body; and an actuator assembly connected to the thruster and operable to deploy the thruster, wherein the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster in a configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component when the thruster is operated. PNG media_image1.png 317 612 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure 1- Korganoff Figure 11 Regarding claim 2, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 26 by rotation about an axis 24. Regarding claim 3, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the thruster 26 is stowable in the body 1 (see Korganoff figure 11). Regarding claim 4, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 3. Korganoff also discloses that the actuator assembly is operable to stow the thruster 26 (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 8). Regarding claim 5, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the configuration is a first configuration, and the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 26 in a second configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a horizontal component when the thruster is operated (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 8). Regarding claim 6, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Korganoff also discloses that the actuator assembly is operable to move the thruster 26 from the first configuration to the second configuration (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 8). Regarding claim 7, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Korganoff also discloses that the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster by rotation about a first axis 24, and the actuator assembly is operable to move the thruster 26 from the first configuration to second configuration by rotation about a second axis 67 (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 8). Regarding claim 8, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Korganoff also discloses that the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 26 in the second configuration in the event of failure of a primary propulsion system of the submarine, thereby to provide a secondary propulsion system (primary propulsion being propellers 38 and 39). Note that the actuation system can deploy the thrusters whenever it is desired. Regarding claim 9, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses a control system arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 based on an operating condition of the vessel. Note that whatever commands operation of the thruster is considered a control system, and the operating condition can be anything from powered on, stationary, to moving in any direction. Regarding claim 10, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Korganoff also discloses that the control system is arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”). Regarding claim 11, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Korganoff also discloses that the control system is arranged to: control the actuator assembly to deploy the thruster in the first configuration; and control operation of the thruster based on the operating condition of the vessel, to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”). Regarding claim 13, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the thruster 26 is one of a plurality of thrusters. Regarding claim 14, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 13. Korganoff also discloses that the thrusters 26 are independently operable. Note that this is true regardless of the control system. Regarding claim 15, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the underwater vessel is a submarine. Regarding claim 16, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Korganoff also discloses that the thruster 26 is stowable completely within the body 1. Regarding claim 18, Korganoff discloses an underwater vessel comprising: a body 1; a thruster 26 operable to produce thrust, wherein the thruster is deployable from the body; and an actuator assembly connected to the thruster and operable to move the thruster between a stowed position within the body to a deployed position outside the body, deploy the thruster in a first deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component when the thruster is operated, and deploy the thruster in a second deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a horizontal component when the thruster is operated (column 6, line 59-column 7, line 8). Regarding claim 19, Korganoff discloses the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 18. Korganoff also discloses that the control system is arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”); and provide a secondary propulsion system for the vessel (primary propulsion being propellers 38 and 39). Regarding claim 20, Korganoff discloses an underwater vessel comprising: a body 1; first and second thrusters 26 each independently operable to produce thrust, wherein the first and second thrusters are deployable from the body; and a first actuator assembly connected to the first thruster and operable to move the first thruster between stowed and deployed positions, rotate the first thruster about a first axis so the first thruster can provide vertical thrust, and rotate the first thruster about a second axis so the first thruster can provide horizontal thrust; and a second actuator assembly connected to the second thruster and operable to move the second thruster between stowed and deployed positions, rotate the second thruster about a first axis so the second thruster can provide vertical thrust, and rotate the second thruster about a second axis so the second thruster can provide horizontal thrust. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veronesi US 5,257,952 in view of Taylor US 4,831,297. Regarding claim 1, Veronesi discloses an underwater vessel comprising: a body 3; a thruster 26 operable to produce thrust, wherein the thruster is deployable from the body; and an actuator assembly 60, 80 connected to the thruster and operable to deploy the thruster, wherein the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster in a configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust when the thruster is operated. PNG media_image2.png 362 700 media_image2.png Greyscale Figure 2- Veronesi Figures 5A and 5B Veronesi does not teach that the thrust has a vertical component when the thruster is operated. Taylor teaches an underwater vessel comprising: a body M; a thruster 10 operable to produce thrust; and an actuator assembly connected to the thruster and operable to deploy the thruster, wherein the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster in a configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component when the thruster is operated (column 5, lines 37-41). PNG media_image3.png 151 421 media_image3.png Greyscale Figure 3- Taylor Figures 10 and 12 It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vessel of Veronesi with multiple thrusters, including some mounted on the side that are oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component as taught by Taylor in order to increase the maneuverability and precision of the vessel. Regarding claim 2, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also teaches that the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 26 by rotation about an axis 43, 45. Regarding claim 3, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also discloses that the thruster 26 is stowable in the body 13. Regarding claim 4, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 3. Veronesi also teaches that the actuator assembly 60 is operable to stow the thruster 26. Regarding claim 5, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Taylor also teaches that the configuration is a first configuration, and the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 10 in a second configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a horizontal component when the thruster is operated (column 5, lines 37-41). Regarding claim 6, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Veronesi and Taylor also teach that the actuator assembly 80 is operable to move the thruster 26 from the first configuration to the second configuration. Regarding claim 7, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Veronesi and Taylor also teach that the actuator assembly 60 is operable to deploy the thruster 26 by rotation about a first axis 43, 45, and the actuator assembly 80 is operable to move the thruster from the first configuration to second configuration by rotation about a second axis. Regarding claim 8, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 5. Veronesi also teaches that the actuator assembly is operable to deploy the thruster 26 in the second configuration in the event of failure of a primary propulsion 9 system of the submarine, thereby to provide a secondary propulsion system (column 1, lines 10-14). Regarding claim 9, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also teaches a control system arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 based on an operating condition of the vessel. Note that whatever commands operation of the thruster is considered a control system, and the operating condition can be anything from powered on, stationary, to moving in any direction. Regarding claim 10, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Veronesi also teaches that the control system is arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”). Regarding claim 11, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 9. Veronesi also teaches that the control system is arranged to: control the actuator assembly 60 to deploy the thruster 26 in the first configuration; and [AltContent: textbox (Figure 4- Taylor Figure 3)] PNG media_image4.png 261 300 media_image4.png Greyscale control operation of the thruster based on the operating condition of the vessel, to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”). Regarding claim 12, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also teaches that the thruster 26 comprises a rim driven thruster (column 5, lines 10-17). Alternatively, Taylor also teaches that the thruster 10 comprises a rim driven thruster (column 3, lines 44-57). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vessel of Veronesi with rim-driven thrusters as taught by Taylor in order to reduce mechanical complexity and simplify maintenance. Regarding claim 13, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also teaches that the thruster 26 is one of a plurality of thrusters (see Veronesi figure 8). Alternatively, Taylor also teaches that the thruster 10 is one of a plurality of thrusters (see Veronesi figure 8). As stated above, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vessel of Veronesi with multiple thrusters, including some mounted on the side that are oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component as taught by Taylor in order to increase the maneuverability and precision of the vessel. Regarding claim 14, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 13. Veronesi and Taylor also teach that the thrusters 26 are independently operable. Note that this is true regardless of the control system. Regarding claim 15, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi and Taylor teach that the underwater vessel is a submarine. Regarding claim 16, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Veronesi also teaches that the thruster 26 is stowable completely within the body 3. Regarding claim 17, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Neither Veronesi nor Taylor explicitly teach that the thruster is one of four thrusters, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add 4 (or more) thrusters in order to increase redundancy, power and/or maneuverability of the vessel, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 18, Veronesi teaches an underwater vessel comprising: a body 3; a thruster 26 operable to produce thrust, wherein the thruster is deployable from the body; and an actuator assembly 60, 80 connected to the thruster and operable to move the thruster between a stowed position within the body (figure 5A) to a deployed position outside the body (figure 5B), deploy the thruster in a first deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a lateral component when the thruster is operated, and deploy the thruster in a second deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a longitudinal component when the thruster is operated. Veronesi does not teach that the thrust can have a vertical or horizontal component when the thruster is operated. Taylor teaches an underwater vessel comprising: a body M; a thruster 10 operable to produce thrust; and an actuator assembly connected to the thruster and operable to move the thruster, and an actuator assembly connected to the thruster and operable to deploy the thruster in a first deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical component when the thruster is operated, and deploy the thruster in a second deployed configuration in which the thruster is oriented to produce a thrust having a horizontal component when the thruster is operated (column 5, lines 37-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vessel of Veronesi with multiple thrusters, including some mounted on the side that are oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical or horizontal component as taught by Taylor in order to increase the maneuverability and precision of the vessel. Regarding claim 19, Veronesi and Taylor teach the invention as claimed as detailed above with respect to claim 18. Veronesi also teaches that the control system is arranged to control operation of the thruster 26 to maintain a substantially constant operating condition (such as “on,” “enabled” or “powered”); and provide a secondary propulsion system for the vessel (column 1, lines 10-14). Regarding claim 20, Veronesi teaches an underwater vessel comprising: a body 3; first and second thrusters 26 each independently operable to produce thrust, wherein the first and second thrusters are deployable from the body; and a first actuator assembly 60, 80 connected to the first thruster and operable to move the first thruster between stowed (figure 5A) and deployed (figure 5B) positions, rotate the first thruster about a first axis so the first thruster can provide lateral thrust, and rotate the first thruster about a second axis so the first thruster can provide longitudinal thrust; and a second actuator assembly connected to the second thruster and operable to move the second thruster between stowed (figure 5A)and (figure 5B) deployed positions, rotate the second thruster about a first axis so the second thruster can provide lateral thrust, and rotate the second thruster about a second axis so the second thruster can provide longitudinal thrust. Veronesi does not teach that the thrust can have a vertical or horizontal component when the thruster is operated. Taylor teaches an underwater vessel comprising: a body M; first and second thrusters 10 each independently operable to produce thrust; and a first actuator assembly connected to the first thruster and operable to rotate the first thruster about a first axis so the first thruster can provide vertical thrust, and rotate the first thruster about a second axis so the first thruster can provide horizontal thrust; and a second actuator assembly connected to the second thruster and operable to rotate the second thruster about a first axis so the second thruster can provide vertical thrust, and rotate the second thruster about a second axis so the second thruster can provide horizontal thrust (column 5, lines 37-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the vessel of Veronesi with multiple thrusters, including some mounted on the side that are oriented to produce a thrust having a vertical or horizontal component as taught by Taylor in order to increase the maneuverability and precision of the vessel. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Adams US 5,505,155 teaches a submarine with deployable thrusters that pivot to provide horizontal or vertical propulsion. Kent US 3,521,589, Lee US 9,193,424 and Schubert US 3,598,074 teach submersible vehicles with pivoting thrusters. Alsager US 3,030,910, Fontanille US 5,152,240 and Fontanille US 7,146,921 teach deployable thrusters for submersible vehicles. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marc Burgess whose telephone number is (571)272-9385. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 08:30-15:00. 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 517 272-4530. 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. /MARC BURGESS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12454342
ADAPTABLE THROTTLE UNITS FOR MARINE DRIVES AND METHODS FOR INSTALLING THEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent 12356953
INTELLIGENT CAT LITTER BOX
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 15, 2025
Patent 11524761
STRINGER-FRAME INTERSECTION OF AIRCRAFT BODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 13, 2022
Patent 11240999
FISHING ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 08, 2022
Patent 11130565
ELECTRIC TORQUE ARM HELICOPTER WITH AUTOROTATION SAFETY LANDING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 28, 2021
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
34%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+21.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 477 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month