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 .
A Response to a Restriction Requirement was filed by applicant on 07/02/2026.
Claims 12-14 are amended.
No claims are added or canceled.
Claims 1-14 are remaining in the application (see paragraph 6 below).
Election/Restrictions
In response to the restriction requirement mailed on 05/27/2026, applicant has elected the invention of Group I drawn to claims 1-11, with traverse. Applicant traverses on the grounds there would be no serious search and examination burden; nevertheless, applicant amended claims 12-14 corresponding to the prior invention of Group II so that such claims now depend from claim 1 of the invention of Group I. In view of the foregoing, the previous restriction requirement is withdrawn and the remaining claims 1-14 are hereby examined on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, regards as the invention.
Claims 1-14 are unclear as to whether they are apparatus or method claims because they recite “in use”; however, the claims merely recite a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. As best understood by the examiner, claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: JP 2009023397 A (Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co Ltd), cited by applicant, in view of D2: CN 1031679 A (Macor Marine Systems International GmbH), also cited by applicant. Regarding claim 1, D1 discloses a cargo hatch for ships, and specifically discloses (see paras. 10-38 and Figs. 1-10): comprising: a hatch coaming [4] surrounding a hatch opening, the hatch opening having a main axis extending in a vertical direction; a hatch cover [5] configured to be removably positioned on the hatch surround coaming such that the hatch cover reversibly closes at least part of the hatch opening: a first sealing system comprising a gasket [5f] and a compression bar [4f], and configured to provide a seal between the hatch surround and the hatch cover in use (while closed); wherein the hatch comprises side surfaces facing in a direction substantially perpendicular to the major axis of the hatch opening. D1 does not specifically disclose that the hatch is for a bulk carrier and includes a second sealing system comprising an expandable seal and configured to provide a seal between the hatch coaming and the hatch cover in use (while closed). However, D2 discloses sealing of a cargo ship hatch cover, and in particular discloses (see pgs. 5-6 and Figs. 1-2) providing a second sealing system comprising an expandable element [12] (considered equivalent to an expandable seal) configured to provide a seal between the hatch coaming and the hatch cover in a closed state. In addition, providing such a hatch on a conventional bulk carrier would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. The location of the expandable seal on a side surface of the hatch surround panel, near the top of the hatch coaming, such that in the expanded state the expandable seal abuts the hatch cover to form a seal in the closed state would have been considered obvious as a matter of preference to arrange it in order to achieve a more reliable seal, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims 2 and 3, D2 also discloses that the expandable element [12] is a reversibly expandable seal and the expandable seal is an inflatable seal. Regarding claim 4, D1 discloses that the side surface is an outer side surface facing away from the hatch opening (see Fig. 10). Regarding claims 5 and 6, D1 discloses that the hatch comprises a skirt extending from a bottom surface of the hatch towards the hatch opening so as to overlap the hatch surround panel in the closed state, the skirt being located outside of the batch surround panel. Regarding claim 7, D2 discloses that the second sealing system comprises a skirt such that, in the expanded state, the expandable element [12] abuts the feature [17] to provide a seal between the hatch coaming and the hatch cover. The abutment of the expandable seal against the skirt to provide a seal between the hatch surround and the hatch cover is considered a conventional variation/equivalence of the claimed arrangement, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claims 8 and 9, D1 discloses that the hatch is configured to be removably positioned on the hatch coaming such that the hatch reversibly closes the entire hatch opening. Regarding claims 10 and 11, D1 discloses a vessel and specifically discloses (see paras. 10-38 and Figs. 1-10) comprising one or more cargo hatches. A hull, in particular a bulk vessel, is a conventional choice for use of such a hatch sealing arrangement, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. Regarding claim 11, D1 in view of D2 discloses a cargo hatch for a ship, and specifically discloses (see description paras. 10-38 and Figs. 1-10) removably positioning a hatch cover [5] on a hatch coaming [4] of the cargo hatch as claimed including the all of the features indicated previously. Therefore, providing such features would have been considered obvious to facilitate better bulk vessel hatch sealing, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. In view of the foregoing, it would have been considered obvious 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 provide the forementioned features to facilitate improved hatch sealing 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.
As best understood by the examiner, claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1: JP 2009023397 A (Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding Co Ltd), cited by applicant, in view of D2: CN 1031679 A (Macor Marine Systems International GmbH), also cited by applicant, in further view of D3: JP H11139383 A (Okamoto Industries Inc.), also cited by applicant. Regarding claims 12-14, D1 in view of D2 discloses all claimed features as indicated previously, except the specific method of closing the cargo hatch as recited. However, D3 discloses a device for closing a ship hatch gap, and specifically discloses (see paras. 12-35 and Figs. 1-13) removably positioning a hatch cover on a hatch coaming of a cargo hatch including the steps of moving the hatch cover over the hatch opening in a direction substantially parallel to a center line of the bulk vessel, and lowering the hatch cover such that the hatch cover is positioned on the hatch coaming. In addition, D3 discloses collapsing the expandable seal, removing the second seal; moving the hatch cover away from the hatch coaming such that the hatch opening is accessible. Therefore, providing such method steps would have been considered obvious to facilitate better bulk vessel hatch sealing, as would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art. In view of the foregoing, it would have been considered obvious 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 provide the forementioned features to facilitate improved hatch sealing 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.
Conclusion
13. The prior art cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
The prior art references disclose various hatch covers and seals for hatches on cargo vessels.
14. 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, Marc Q Jimenez, who can be reached at phone number (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 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).
15. 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
07/22/2026
Prosecution Insights