DETAILED ACTION
This is a first action on the merits of application 18783694.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claim 20 is 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.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "a control force". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It shood say “ the control force” since it depends on claim 1.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a as being anticipated by Moen US 20170341712.
Claim 1, Moen discloses a foil [4, fig. 24] which is configured to articulate based on one or more control inputs [0311] to generate a control force, the foil having a lower surface [45], an upper surface [47] and a maximum foil thickness [located at 44]; the foil is configured to attach to the vessel [1] in a fixed position such that a lowest point of the lower surface [42, fig. 4] is positioned less than three times the maximum thickness [seen from drawings] below a keel [fig. 16a the keel runs from bow to stern] of the vessel [1] in an area adjacent to the foil [4]. [0206-0240]
Claim 2, Moen discloses wherein the lowest point is positioned less than three times the maximum thickness above the keel of the vessel in the area adjacent the foil [4]. See fig. 24
Claim 3, Moen discloses wherein the foil [4] is configured to be mounted in the fixed position at least partially in a recess of the hull, the recess [60, fig. 24] located in a forward portion [bow 3, fig. 24] of the vessel [1].
Claim 4, Moen discloses wherein the recess [60] is in the keel and the lowest point of the lower surface is even with an extended keel line at the recess [trailing edge of the foil flap in fig. 27b] and a flap of the foil is configured to rotate at least partially into the recess. See from fig. 27b to fig. 24b how it can rotate.
Claim 6, Moen discloses wherein the foil articulates by a flap of the foil rotating to generate the control force. [0311] fig. 27b.
Claim 7, Moen discloses wherein port and starboard sides of the foil share a common center plane. See fig. 24c
Claim 20, Moen discloses wherein the foil includes a flap which is articulated based on one or more control inputs to cause the flap to rotate to generate a control force. [see para [0311] - the flap is able to rotate both upwards and downwards via control inputs from a remote controller to generate a control force as the vessel traverses’ water, fig. 24, 27B].
Claim 8, Moen discloses a foil (4, fig. 12) having a flap (see para [0311] - the foil has trailing edge flaps controlled via control inputs of a remote controller, fig. 27B) which is configured to articulate relative to the foil based on one or more control inputs (see para [0311] - the foil has trailing edge flaps controlled via control inputs of a remote controller, fig. 27B); the foil configured to mount to a bow area (3, fig. 12) of the vessel in a fixed position (fixed via keel support structure 65, fig. 12) such that a chord line of the foil (the chord line is shown to extend from the front tip near the indication of 41 to the trailing edge near the indication of 42 in fig. 12) is positioned at a non-zero angle (as shown in fig. 12, 15) relative to a running trim of the vessel (see para [0283] - the running trim of the vessel is shown as being neutral wherein the bottom of the vessel is parallel to the water surface 5, fig. 15).
Claim 9, Moen discloses wherein the non-zero angle is at least 3 degrees. [as shown in fig. 12, 15].
Claim 10, Moen discloses wherein the foil has a substantially symmetrical cross section [as shown in fig. 12, the port and starboard sides of the foil are symmetrical and thus the horizontal cross section of the foil is symmetrical].
Claim 11, Moen discloses wherein port and starboard sides of the foil share a common center plane [as shown in fig. 12, the port and starboard sides of the foil are symmetrical and thus share a common horizontal center plane].
Claim 12, Moen discloses wherein the foil is configured to attach to the vessel such that a lowest point [42, fig. 12] of a lower surface of the foil [at the indication of 45 in fig. 12] is positioned less than three times the maximum thickness below a keel of the vessel [see the keel of the vessel prior to installation of the foil wherein the keel runs from bow to stern in fig. 16A] in an area adjacent to the foil [as shown in fig. 12].
Claim 13, Moen discloses wherein the lowest point is positioned less than three times the maximum thickness above the keel of the vessel in the area adjacent the foil [as shown in fig. 12].
Claim 14, Moen discloses wherein the running trim is determined based on a predefined speed and weight distribution [as shown in Fig. 12, 15, the running trim is determined based on a predefined speed and weight distribution] in ideal conditions [as shown in fig. 15].
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moen et al. and further in view of SOMMERLATT US 20200407026.
Claim 5, Moen discloses the aforementioned limitations of claim 1 he does not disclose the foil includes a mounting area comprising holes therethrough and bolts are configured to pass through the holes and into holes in keel support structure of the vessel. He does disclose the foil includes a mounting area (see the area mounted to keel support structure 65, fig. 23). Sommerlatt discloses a foil (8, 10, 11, fig. 1) comprising holes therethrough (see the holes in 8 receiving the bolts at the indication of 12 in fig. 2) and bolts (see the bolts in fig. 2) are configured to pass through the holes (as shown in fig. 2) and into holes (see the holes in 13 receiving the bolts, fig. 1-2) in a support structure (support structure 2, 13, fig. 1-2). Thus, it 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 to have modified Moen with Sommerlatt’s configuration for the purpose of facilitating the repair and replacement of the foil.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: prior art does not disclose foil sections which extend outwards on port and starboard sides of the vessel at the bow and the vessel comprising a lowest point of the vessel which lowest point of the vessel is a point on the vessel other than on the foil sections; a lowest point of the foil sections is no more than three times the maximum foil thickness below the lowest point of the vessel.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOVON E HAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-3115. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-6pm M-F.
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.
/JOVON E HAYES/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights