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 .
The following correspondence is a Final Office Action for application no. 18/742,687 for a JACKPLATE SYSTEM WITH PRECISION ADJUSTMENT AND OPTIMIZATION, filed on 6/13/2024. This correspondence is in response to applicant's reply filed on 1/29/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (U.S. Pat. 12,312,058) in view of Schmidt et al. (U.S. Pat. 12,409,689).
Regarding claim 14, Wood teaches a method (Fig. 5), the method comprising: positioning an outboard motor (36) into a travelling position by raising or lowering the jack plate (18) to the desired position (Fig. 2); holding a trailering button (92), the trailering button being mounted to the jack plate (Fig. 2); positioning the outboard motor into a trailering position (motor can be adjusted to various heights as desired); and returning the outboard motor to the travelling position (motor can be adjusted to various heights as desired) by pressing the trailering button, but does not teach the step of loading a boat onto a trailer or storing the travelling position to a memory by holding the trailering button, and that the button is operable by a user standing on the ground adjacent a trailered boat.
Schmidt, however, teaches the step of loading a boat onto a trailer (Figs. 40, 40B) in order to transport a boat over solid surfaces such as concrete, over soft surfaces such as sandy beaches and dirt roads, and within shallow muddy waters along beaches and coastal areas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable degree to success, to construct the step of loading a boat onto a trailer in order to transport the boat from one location to another.
In addition, Wood teaches the use of the trailering button for controlling the jack plate, wherein the trailering button activates the electrical lift jack and communicates with a controller 106 and its integral memory 108 in order to raise and lower the outboard motor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, with a reasonable expectation of success for storing the travelling position to a memory by holding the trailering button since the button communities with the controller and memory, and further, for a user to operate the button while standing on the ground adjacent a trailered boat since the button is easily accessible and users may not always be located in the boat when they need to adjust the height of the motor.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (U.S. Pat. 12,312,058) in view of Schmidt et al. (U.S. Pat. 12,409,689) in further view of Lo et al. (U.S. Pat. 10,795,466).
Regarding claims 15-16, Wood and Schmidt teach the method of claim 14, but do not teach that the travelling position is stored to memory by holding the trailering button for more than 2 seconds or that the outboard motor is returned to the travelling position by pressing the trailering button for fewer than 2 seconds. Lo, however teaches programmable buttons (120) that enable a user to associate a first action with a normal press and a second action with a long press (e.g., a press where the button is depressed for a minimum amount of time, such as fifty milliseconds, one second, or two seconds), in order to quickly activate the desired program. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable degree to success, wherein the travelling position is stored to memory by holding the trailering button for more than 2 seconds or that the outboard motor is returned to the travelling position by pressing the trailering button for fewer than 2 seconds in order to easily and quickly activate the trailering button to move the outboard motor to different positions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 17-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 14-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKEISHA J. SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-5781. The examiner can normally be reached Normal hours: M/Th 7-4; T 9-5; W 7-3; F 7-4.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/NKEISHA SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632 May 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights