DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendments to the drawings and specification are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: it appears “that” in line 9 should read --such that--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15, 17, 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ramsdell et al. (US Pat. No. 12,071,204 B1). Note: Claims 15-21 encompass subject matter not disclosed in parent US App. No. 17/747,401, such that the effective filing date of claims 15-21 is 12 July 2024. Therefore, Ramsdell qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
In regards to claim 15, Ramsdell teaches a water sports equipment storage rack, comprising: a seat (108) configured to receive a first portion of a water sport device (2000); an engagement member (102) that is configured to linearly move between a first position where the engagement member is spaced from a second portion of the water sport device and a second position where the engagement member abuts the second portion of the water sports device thereby securing the water sport device within the water sports equipment storage rack; an elastically deformable cover (128) that engages at least one of a portion of the seat and a portion of the engagement member thereby securing the elastically deformable cover to the at least one of the seat and the portion of the engagement member (i.e.; the pad is disposed thereon; Col 6, Lines 3-8, 59-63) that the elastically deformable cover abuts at least one of the first portion of the water sport device and the second portion of the water sport device when the engagement member is in the second position (e.g.; see pad 128 at the second portion in Fig. 16A).
In regards to claim 17, Ramsdell teaches the elastically deformable cover is on the seat and the engagement member (Col 5, Lines 45-49; Col 6, Lines 3-8, 59-63). The claim is a product by process claim and the storage rack does not depend on the process of making it. The product-by-process limitation "overmolded onto" would not be expected to impart distinctive structural characteristics to the rack. Therefore, the claimed rack is not a different and unobvious rack from the rack of Ramsdell. See MPEP 2113.
In regards to claim 19, Ramsdell teaches an arm (132) and hook portion (108) that cooperate to define the first seat, where the arm extends between the hook portion and the engagement member (112); and where the elastically deformable cover (128) is on at least one of the portion of the seat, the portion of the engagement member and a portion of the arm such that the elastically deformable cover abuts at least on one of the first portion of the water sport device and the second portion of the water sport device when the engagement member is in the second position (e.g.; see pad 128 at the second portion in Fig. 16A). Note: “overmolded onto” is a product-by-process claim (see MPEP 2113).
In regards to claim 21, Ramsdell teaches an arm (132) and hook portion (108) that cooperate to define the first seat, where the arm extends between the hook portion and the engagement member (112); and where the elastically deformable cover is on the seat, engagement member and the arm (Col 5, Lines 45-49; Col 6, Lines 3-8, 59-63) such that the elastically deformable cover abuts at least one of the first portion of the water sport device and the second portion of the water sport device when the engagement member is in the second position (e.g.; see pad 128 at the second portion in Fig. 16A). Note: “overmolded onto” is a product-by-process claim (see MPEP 2113).
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsdell et al. (US Pat. No. 12,071,204 B1) in view of Stuckey et al. (US Pat. No. 12,116,089 B1). Note: Claims 1-7 encompass subject matter not disclosed in parent US App. No. 17/747,401, such that the effective filing date of claims 1-7 is 12 July 2024. Therefore, Ramsdell and Stuckey qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103.
In regards to claim 1, Ramsdell teaches a water sports equipment storage rack, comprising: a first seat (108) and second seat (110) laterally spaced from one another and each configured to receive a first portion of a water sport device (2000); a first engagement member (102, 112) configured to linearly move in an outward direction away from the seat and in an inward direction toward the seat between an extended position and a retracted position and to rotatably move about a pivot axis (284, Fig. 16B) between an open position where the engagement member is spaced from a second portion of the first water sport device thereby securing the first water sport device within the water sports equipment storage rack; and a first drive mechanism (114) configured to at least one of linearly move the first engagement member between the extended and retracted positions and rotatably move the first engagement member between the open and closed positions (Col 5, Lines 56-67; Col 6, Lines 1-2).
Ramsdell does not teach the first engagement member directly aligned with the first seat and a second engagement member directly aligned with the second seat. Stuckey teaches a first engagement member (130a) directly aligned with a first seat (150) and a second engagement member (130c) directly aligned with a second seat (150). See direct alignments along dotted lines below.
PNG
media_image1.png
548
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Ramsdell’s rack such that the first engagement member directly aligned with the first seat and a second engagement member is directly aligned with the second seat. The motivation would be for the purpose of securing additional portions of the sports board as taught by Stuckey (Col 7, Lines 33-35).
In regards to claim 2, in modifying Ramsdell, Stuckey teaches a first arm (Stuckey: 110) and a first hook portion (Stuckey: 156) that cooperate to define the first seat; and a second arm (Stuckey: 110) and a second hook portion (Stuckey: 156) that cooperate to define the second seat.
In regards to claim 3, modified Ramsdell teaches the first arm, the first hook and the engagement member cooperate to define an upwardly disposed first opening (i.e.; a U-shape) configured to receive the first water sport device (Ramsdell: 2000) when the first engagement member is in the open position.
In regards to claim 4, modified Ramsdell teaches a third seat (Ramsdell: 108) and a fourth seat (Ramsdell: 110) laterally spaced from one another and each configured to receive a first portion of a second water sport device; an third engagement member (Ramsdell: 104, 112) configured to linearly move in an outward direction away from the third and fourth seats and in an inward direction toward the third and fourth seats between an extended position and a retracted position and to rotatably move about a pivot axis between an open position where the third engagement member is spaced from a second portion of the second water sport device and a closed position where the third engagement member abut the second portion of the second water sport device thereby securing the second water sport device within the water sports equipment storage rack (Ramsdell: Col 5, Lines 56-67; Col 6, Lines 1-2).
Ramsdell does not teach the third engagement member aligned with the third seat and a fourth engagement member aligned with the fourth seat. Stuckey teaches a third engagement member (130b) aligned with a first seat (150) and a second engagement member (130d) aligned with a second seat (150).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Ramsdell’s rack such that the third engagement member is aligned with the third seat and a fourth engagement member is aligned with the fourth seat. The motivation would be for the purpose of securing additional portions of the sports board as taught by Stuckey (Col 7, Lines 33-35).
In regards to claim 5, in modifying Ramsdell, Stuckey teaches the third seat (Stuckey: 150) is vertically aligned with the first seat (Stuckey: 150) and the fourth seat (Stuckey: 150) is vertically aligned with the second seat (Stuckey: 150) (see Fig. 2 of Stuckey).
In regards to claim 6, modified Ramsdell teaches the drive mechanism (Ramsdell: 114) is configured to linearly move the first engagement member between the extended and retracted positions and rotatably move the first engagement member between the open and closed positions ((Ramsdell: Col 5, Lines 56-67; Col 6, Lines 1-2).
In regards to claim 7, modified Ramsdell teaches the first water sport device includes a wakeboard (e.g.; see Background in Ramsdell).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsdell et al. (US Pat. No. 12,071,204 B1) in view of Evans et al. (US Pat. No. 4,863,082).
In regards to claim 16, Ramsdell does not teach the elastically deformable cover comprises foam. Evans teaches a foam elastically deformable cover (38)(Col 3, Lines 56-59).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Ramsdell’s cover to be foam. The motivation would be for the purpose of selecting from a variety of materials suitable as a protective liner as taught by Evans (Col 3, Lines 56-59).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12, 14, 22 and 24-27 are allowed. Claims 18 and 20 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 8, Ramsdell teaches the limitations of the claim, including the engagement member (112) movable along a linear path and rotatable about an axis perpendicular to the linear path between a first position and second position, and locked and unlocked positions. However, the lock member (118, 134) does not disengage from the engagement member because the cable (134) is attached to the engagement member in both the first and second positions.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record does not teach modifying Ramsdell such that at least one of the seat and the engagement member includes a plurality of reliefs, and wherein the elastically deformable cover is molded to the plurality of reliefs. In regards to claim 20, the prior art of record does not teach modifying Ramsdell such that at least one of the seat, the engagement member and the arm includes a plurality of reliefs, and wherein the elastically deformable cover is molded to the plurality of reliefs.
In regards to claim 22, Hellweg (US Pat. No. 10,870,468 B1) teaches a water sports equipment storage rack, comprising: a receiver (205) configured to receive a water sport device (210) therein; an engagement member (110, 212) movable between a first position where the engagement member is spaced from the water sport device and a second position where the engagement member abuts the water sport device thereby preventing the water sport device from being removed from within the receiver; and a drive mechanism (505, 405, 810) configured to move the engagement member between the first and second positions. The prior art or record does not teach modifying Hellweg such that the drive mechanism includes an electric motor; and a controller configured to activate the electric motor to move the engagement member between the first and second positions, wherein the controller is configured to deactivate the electric motor in response to an increase in current draw by the electric motor when the engagement member reaches at least one of the first position and the second position.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 14 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues Stuckey does not teach the first engagement member directly aligned with the first seat and a second engagement member directly aligned with the second seat. Examiner disagrees, because the figures illustrate the direct alignment as indicated in the dotted aligns in the annotated figure above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 15-17, 19 and 21 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. Examiner now relies on the teachings of Ramsdell as addressed in the claim rejections above.
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 STANTON L KRYCINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-5:00PM ET.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571)272-8227. 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.
/Stanton L Krycinski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights