DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/08/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 are amended.
Claims 6 and 21 are canceled.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are remaining in the application.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The following newly recited claim limitations are not found in nor described in the Specification as are newly recited in the claims: first pressure vessel disposed proximate to the proximal end (or the pressure vessel disposed proximate to at least one of: the proximal end of the vehicle body, or the distal end of the vehicle body), second pressure vessel disposed proximate to the distal end, removable power source, payload bay distinct from the first pressure vessel and the second pressure vessel, the removable power source configured to be removed or swapped to adjust an operation of the underwater vehicle. Claim limitations should be consistent with features as found in and as described in the Specification. In addition, terminology and/or nomenclature should be consistent throughout the disclosure, which includes the Abstract, Specification and Claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: US 10611447 B2 (Gasparoni et al.), in view of D2: US 6502657 B2 (Kerrebrock et al). Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15 and D1 discloses: An underwater vehicle [102] comprising: a vehicle body enclosed by a fairing (hull), the vehicle body extending between a proximal end and a distal end and defining an interior; a power distribution system housed in the interior of the vehicle body; a first power system [312] of the power distribution system, the first power system [312] disposed in a first pressure vessel in the interior; and a second power system [312] of the power distribution system, the second power system [312] disposed in a second pressure vessel in the interior. First and second power systems are energy reserves (which can be more than one battery) [312] which can be housed in one or more watertight containers [309] (considered a payload bay) preferably made of titanium and capable of tolerating high pressures (see col. 7, lines 15-18); therefore, more than one energy reserves (battery [312]) can be provided in more than one pressure vessel [309] including at least one energy reserve [312] in each of more than one pressure vessel [309], as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. A power source (battery or energy reserve) [312] is housed in payload bays (one or more watertight containers) [309] of the interior (see col. 7, lines 15-16). The particular location chosen for each pressure vessel, and first and second power systems, would have been a matter of preference to facilitate balance and equipment arrangement, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art, especially since D2 discloses a modular transformable vehicle (which can be an underwater vehicle or submersible) which in turn can have multiple modules as desired, and can include at least one or more payload bays to carry items as desired, can includes at least one removable power source (battery), has at least one frame (chassis), can operate at a desired depth and can carry a desired ballast among other things, as further desired for multiple functionality and operation; see Figs. 1-36 and corresponding written description. Each pressure vessel of multiple pressure vessels for D1 would have been considered isolated (separated) from each other, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art; in addition, D2 discloses multiple modules for its device which can be a submersible, each module can be considered a pressure vessel if designed to operate at depth and resistant to pressure for integrity, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The power distribution system of D1 provides power to a propulsion system [302, 310]. Using a known electrical distribution bus, or busbar, to distribute electrical power to multiple circuits and devices for the underwater vehicle for any of the first and second power system would have been a matter of preference to facilitate distribution of power, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art; especially since D2 discloses such a bus [3612]. The particular assignment of the power distribution system to any of a plurality of energy source(s) would have been a matter of preference to suit powering needs, similarly, the particular voltage assigned to each power system would have been considered a matter of preference to effectively power selected systems, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art; especially since D2 discloses a power management system [3602] which controls power distribution for the device, and which includes one or more batteries and means for conversion of the battery output to different voltage levels [3602a]. D1 does not explicitly disclose a frame; however, providing a frame or similar structure (such as a chassis) to support any of the internal components and the fairing (hull) would have been considered obvious to facilitate positioning and arrangement of equipment and components withing the underwater vehicle, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art; especially since D2 discloses such a frame in a chassis assembly [114]. Therefore, it would have been considered 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 to provide such features to facilitate sufficient and/or redundant power and energy reserves, and to facilitate functionality/operation for the underwater vehicle as desired, with a reasonable expectation of success, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The rejection combines known features to achieve expected results; no unknown features or unexpected results are achieved for the claimed subject matter.
Response to Arguments and Interview Request
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been fully considered but are essentially moot due to applicant’s amended claims and the resulting new and/or modified grounds of rejection presented in this Final Office Action. It is also noted that applicant argues for amended claims. Regarding your request for an additional interview with the filed RCE, please be advised that you must separately request such an interview following this Office Action. Such an additional interview would be granted; however, you would first need to submit an agenda and draft proposal that you would need to fax to me at the following RightFax number: 571-273-7947. Alternatively, you can email it as an attachment, since you have Internet Communications Authorized in the Application file. Once I receive your agenda and proposal, I will contact you to discuss your agenda and proposal either at the proposed day/time or a mutually beneficial day/time. Please also keep your submittal brief (i.e., limited to major issues, such as any Dwg/Spec Objections and Claim rejections, with focus on the independent claims) since I only have one hour to consider your agenda and proposal, and then conduct the interview. The interview will be generally limited to your agenda and draft proposal submitted for the interview. Please also refrain from arguments since such is best conducted formally on the record and not by telephone to allow sufficient time for analysis; such would also be considered outside the scope of such an interview. I may also have other interviews to attend to so it may be a few days before I can get back to you once I receive your submission. The interview will be by telephone only. Thank you for your assistance/cooperation in this regard.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL V VENNE whose telephone number is (571) 272-7947. The examiner can normally be reached between M-F, 7am-3:30pm Flex. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Samuel J. Morano can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
11. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Daniel V Venne/
Senior Examiner, Art Unit 3615
04/22/2026