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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application file on 18 July 2024. Claims 1-16 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Drawings
The drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9 line 2-3 recites “...a hatch to open and close an upper surface of the luggage compartment...” and is confusing as written as it could be read a few different ways. The first way is read as: “a hatch” is the object being opened and closed. The second way is read “an upper surface of the luggage compartment” is open or closed by “a hatch”. The confusion is about which object is “open and close” as both objects in the sentence are known to have an open position and closed position. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Firstly, the claim language is NOT being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the Examiner interprets the following to be the corresponding structure found in the specification and figs. Reason for interpretation: without further clarification the claim language terms of “lower” and “upper” may be considered indefinite language rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The Applicant clearly provides reference characters to the structure and/or position/location therefore the Examiner provides this interpretation as to prevent introduction of new matter and amending the claim language where the following terms would be unrecognizable in view of the spec. and figs.
Claim 2 “a lower end” is lower end 26 (para. [0028] and fig. 6).
Claim 3 “an upper portion” is upper portion 242 (para. [0031] and fig. 6).
Claim 3 “a lower portion” is lower portion 241 (para. [0031] and fig. 6).
Claims 5-6 “an upper surface” is upper surface 2U (para. [0023] and fig. 6).
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 3, 7 and 9 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.
The term “larger” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “larger” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “larger” is modifying “tilt angle”. An angle requires a direction to know which way to measure which is larger (See at least: Examiner modified fig. 6 below, where fig. 6 and para. [0031] combined determines the Applicant is measuring from the vertical direction down to the sloped surface where “B” is a larger angle than “A” {Examiner notes: Measuring from the vertical direction up to the sloped surface would switch which sloped surface has the larger angle.}).
PNG
media_image1.png
751
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 7 recites the limitation "a footwell" in line 3. Claim 7, line 1-2, recites “a footwell”. It is not clear that “a footwell” of line 3 is the same or different than that of lines 1-2. For purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets Claim 7 line 3 to recite “the footwell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “higher” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “higher” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “higher” is modifying “position” where it is not clear the direction or view which is defining “higher”. For purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets “higher position” to be in “the vertical direction of the watercraft body” (See at least: claim 2) or “in the side view of the watercraft body” (See at least: claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-2, 4-8 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Spade et al. (US 8485115 B2). See figs. from the prior art below.
PNG
media_image2.png
833
1357
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Spade et al. discloses a personal watercraft (watercraft 10; See at least: fig. 1), comprising: a watercraft body (hull 12, deck 14, seam 16; See at least: figs. 1 and 4) including a hull (hull 12; See at least: fig. 1), a deck (deck 14; See at least: fig. 1), and a gunnel line (seam 16; See at least: fig. 4) being a joint (seam 16; See at least: fig. 4) between the hull and the deck; and a front bumper unit (bow bumper 18a, bow sponsons 100; See at least: fig. 1) attached to a front (bow 56; See at least: fig. 1) of the watercraft body, wherein the front bumper unit has a front end (“F”; See at least: fig. 2 modified by Examiner, below) located above and forward of the gunnel line in a side view (See at least: fig. 2) of the watercraft body.
PNG
media_image3.png
600
806
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit has a sloping surface (“S”; See at least: fig. 2 modified by Examiner) sloping horizontally outward from the watercraft body relative to a vertical direction (“V”; See at least: fig. 2 modified by Examiner) of the watercraft body as advancing upward from a lower end (“E”; See at least: fig. 2 modified by Examiner) of the sloping surface.
Regarding claim 4, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses further comprising: a steering handlebar (steering assembly including a helm assembly 60; See at least: fig. 1) attached to the watercraft body, wherein the front bumper unit includes a side bumper (bow sponsons 100; See at least: figs. 1-3) located forward of the steering handlebar and covering a side portion (See at least: fig. 3) of the deck in a width direction (See at least: fig. 3 where the view shows a width) of the watercraft body.
Regarding claim 5, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit includes: an upper surface (“U”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner, below) covering an area (“A” See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) including a front end (“D”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the deck; and a first guide surface (“G1”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) provided to the upper surface to guide water fallen onto the upper surface outward in a width direction (“W”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the watercraft body.
PNG
media_image4.png
598
1511
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit includes: a front bumper (bow bumper 18a; See at least: Fig. 1-3) including the front end and an upper surface (“U”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) covering an area (“A” See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) including a front end of the deck (“D”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner); and a deck cover (See at least: figs. 2-3 where port and starboard portions of bow bumper 18a are viewed as covering deck 14 and both generally viewed in fig. 3 as leading a rear of bow bumper 18a) leading to a rear (“R”; See at least: See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the upper surface of the front bumper and covering the area of the deck.
Regarding claim 7, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the watercraft body includes a footwell (footrests; See at least: fig. 1 in view of para. 3 lines 10-14 “The watercraft 10 has a pair of generally upwardly extending walls located on either side of the watercraft 10 known as gunwales or gunnels 42. The gunnels 42 help to prevent the entry of water in the footrests (not shown) of the watercraft 10, provide lateral support for the rider's feet...”) to put feet of an occupant thereon, and the deck cover is located in front of a footwell (See at least fig. 1 where bow bumper 18a is forward the gunnels 42).
Regarding claim 8, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the deck cover includes a second guide surface (“G2”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) to guide water fallen onto an upper surface of the deck (“U”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) cover outward in a width direction (“W”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the watercraft body.
Regarding claim 11, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit includes an aggregation of divisional segments (bow bumper 18a, bow sponsons 100; See at least: fig. 3 where there are three total segments, one bow bumper 18a and two bow sponsons 100) arranged in a width direction (“W”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the watercraft body.
Regarding claim 12, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses further comprising: a reinforcement member (inner member 102; See at least: fig. 4 with col. 7 lines 56-59 “...To connect the bow sponson 100 to the bow 56, a plurality of fasteners 120 (only one of which is shown) are fastened into the bow 56 and the inner member 102 of the bow sponson 100...”) attached to the watercraft body to support the front bumper unit (See at least: fig. 4 where outer deflector 104 is part of bow sponsons 100).
Regarding claim 13, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit includes an aggregation of divisional segments (bow bumper 18a, bow sponsons 100, outer deflector 104; See at least: fig. 3 where there are three total segments, one bow bumper 18a and two bow sponsons 100 and fig. 4-5 where each sponson 100 includes inner member 102 and outer deflector 104) arranged in a width direction (“W”; See at least: fig. 2 in view of 3 modified by Examiner) of the watercraft body, and the reinforcement member includes divisional support segments (inner member 102; See at least: fig. 3 where there is a port and starboard inner member 102) that support the divisional segments individually (See at least: figs. 3-4 where inner member 102 supports an outer deflector 104).
Regarding claim 14, Spade et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. Additionally, Spade et al. discloses wherein the watercraft body includes a fixing part (a plurality of fasteners 120; See at least: fig. 4 reproduced below) that fixes the reinforcement member and the front bumper unit at the joint between the hull and the deck (See at least: fig. 4).
PNG
media_image5.png
559
604
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Maeda et al. (JP 2004017802 A). See figs. from the prior art below.
PNG
media_image6.png
486
1284
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Maeda et al. discloses a personal watercraft (personal watercraft 10; See at least: figs. 1-2), comprising: a watercraft body (hull 12, deck 11, gunnel 16; See at least: figs. 1-2 and 6) including a hull (hull 12; See at least: fig. 2), a deck (deck 11; See at least: fig. 2), and a gunnel line (gunnel 16; See at least: fig. 6) being a joint (gunnel 16; See at least: fig. 6) between the hull and the deck; and a front bumper unit (front bumper 30; See at least: fig. 3) attached to a front (See at least: figs. 1-2) of the watercraft body, wherein the front bumper unit has a front end (See at least: fig. 2) located above and forward of the gunnel line in a side view (See at least: fig. 2) of the watercraft body.
Regarding claim 2, Maeda et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Maeda et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit has a sloping surface (“U” and “L”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5, below) sloping horizontally outward from the watercraft body relative to a vertical direction (“V”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5) of the watercraft body as advancing upward from a lower end (“E”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5) of the sloping surface.
PNG
media_image7.png
770
936
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Maeda et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 2 as noted above. Additionally, Maeda et al. discloses wherein the sloping surface has an upper portion (“U”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5) which is at a larger tilt angle (“B”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5) than a lower portion (“L”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 5 where angle “B” is larger than angle “A”) of the sloping surface relative to the vertical direction.
Claims 1, 10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Araki et al. (US 11319034 B1). See figs. from the prior art below.
PNG
media_image8.png
556
1694
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
654
1393
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Araki et al. discloses a personal watercraft (personal watercraft 1; See at least: fig. 1), comprising: a watercraft body (hull 11, deck 12, “region where the hull 11 and the deck 12 are connected” ; See at least: figs. 1-2 and col. 3 lines 17-18) including a hull (hull 11; See at least: figs. 1-2), a deck (deck 12; See at least: figs. 1-2), and a gunnel line (“region where the hull 11 and the deck 12 are connected”; See at least: col. 3 lines 17-18) being a joint (“connected”; See at least: See at least: col. 3 lines 17-18) between the hull and the deck; and a front bumper unit (front bumper 13; See at least: figs. 1-4) attached to a front (; See at least: figs. 1-3) of the watercraft body, wherein the front bumper unit has a front end (See at least: fig. 1) located above and forward of the gunnel line in a side view (See at least: fig. 1) of the watercraft body.
Regarding claim 10, Araki et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Araki et al. discloses further comprising: a steering handlebar (bar-shaped handle 7; See at least: figs. 1-2) attached to the watercraft body; an accessory mounting part (speakers 21, mirrors (unlabeled), meter device 22 or meter cover 23; See at least: figs. 1-2) located between the steering handlebar and the front bumper unit (See at least: fig. 2); and an accessory cover (meter cover 23 and unlabeled covers for both speakers 21 and mirrors; See at least: figs. 1-2) that covers the accessory mounting part, wherein the watercraft body includes a footwell (foot rest 12b; See at least: fig. 2) to put feet of an occupant thereon, and the accessory cover includes a third guide surface (“G3”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 2, below) located in front of the footwell to guide water fallen onto the accessory cover outward in a width direction (“W”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 2) of the watercraft body.
PNG
media_image10.png
579
886
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Araki et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Araki et al. discloses wherein the front bumper unit includes a design light (light unit 25; See at least: figs. 1-2) located above and rearward of the front end.
Regarding claim 16, Araki et al. discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Additionally, Araki et al. discloses further comprising: a filler (light passageway P; See at least: fig. 4 and col. 3 lines 53-63 “...light passageway P is formed such that fluids such as air and water can spontaneously enter the light passageway P from outside the watercraft body 2 (in particular, from outside the front bumper 13). A fluid entering the light passageway P from outside the watercraft body 2 collides with the light unit 25. The front bumper 13 includes a flow-regulating structure 33 that regulates the flow of a fluid entering the light passageway P from outside the watercraft body 2 (in particular, from outside the front bumper 13) and moving toward the light unit 25 through the light passageway P...” where the light passage way is interpreted as “a filler” as it allows fluid to flow and fill the space of the passage way) between an upper surface of the deck ( “U”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 4, below) and an inner surface (“I”; See at least: Examiner modified fig. 4) of the front bumper unit.
PNG
media_image11.png
803
613
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 9, in combination with the other structures required by the base claim and intervening claims, the prior art fails to disclose, teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed configuration’s element “…the deck cover has a rear edge portion at a higher position than a front edge portion of the hatch.” The closest prior art of Spade et al. does not disclose the position as claimed by the Applicant. The Examiner considered modifying the prior art of Spade et al.’s hood 58 with the prior art of Araki et al.’s hatch cover 24 to provide a lower position however the combination was not clear that any portion of Spade et al.’s bow bumper 18a would be positioned vertically higher (when viewed with a side view) that any portion of Araki et al.’s hatch cover 24.
PNG
media_image2.png
833
1357
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
556
1694
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Additional Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure and may be found in the accompanying PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
Dery St-Cyr et al. (US 11267533 B1) teaches a front bumper portion 17B (See at least: fig. 1). This is applicable to at least claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC ANTHONY STARCK whose telephone number is (571)272-6651. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (EST).
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.
/ERIC ANTHONY STARCK/Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
Prosecution Insights