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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: #316, #318, #321, #340, #390, #395. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the rotation mechanism must be shown or the feature canceled from claims 16-19. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 13-15 and 16-19 are unclear to the examiner.
Regarding claims 13-15: The claimed features of a third fin or four fins are not adequately supported. The description (paragraphs 219-221) and Figures 19a-19d
Vaguely exemplify multiple fins 310 that are attached to the base 330, however it would be unreasonable to consider the base 330 shown schematically in Figures 19a-19d as the same base 330 shown in Figure 18A that is configured to be attached to the divers back via straps. Moreover, the description does not teach the functional interrelations between the base 330 shown in the figures 19a-19d and the rest of the claimed elements: the fins, the thrusters, the straps.
Regarding claims 16-19: The claimed feature of the rotation mechanism is not shown in the drawings and the specification does not provide adequate support for the claimed features in association with the other features of the system. Claim 6 comprises the feature of a plurality of fins secured to the securing member. The manner of securing appears to be by connecting the fin 310 (and unit 325) to the base using the base connector 326 formed by a channel 327. It is unclear to the examiner how the rotation unit is capable of rotating the fin about any of the claimed respective rotation axis individually or about two or three of the rotation axes as claimed in claims 18 and 19.
Appropriate clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inroon, WO 2020231349 (disclosed by applicant) in view of Mines, WO 2022018719 (disclosed by applicant). Inroon discloses a wearable swimming and diving propulsion apparatus (abstract) comprising a securing member (see Fig. 2, including frame, shoulder straps, waist strap and leg straps for securing the device to the torso and back of the diver, having a central axis), at least one motor (powered by a rechargeable battery), and least one thruster (see Fig. 6 showing a plurality of thrusters each comprising a propeller, each thruster having a longitudinal axis and one thruster symmetrically arranged on each side of and parallel to the central axis. The propeller rotates about the longitudinal axis of the thruster, Fig. 9).
Inroon does not explicitly disclose at least one fin, however Fig 9 appears to show a fin/strut to attach the propeller cage to the thruster and attaching a fin to a thruster is common in the art. Regardless, Mines discloses a motorized thruster body 12 which includes an integrated fin unit 16, depending on the orientation of the thruster the vectors between the two fins can be arranged at 180 degrees or parallel to the plane of the securing member.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the thrusters of Inroon with alternative thrusters comprising a fin unit as disclosed by Mines. Doing so uses an alternative thruster design to aid in directional control and stability.
Claims 13-15 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inroon, in view of Mines, in further view of Chih et al., US 5105753 (disclosed by applicant). Inroon as modified by Mines discloses the invention set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose the fin arrangements recited in claims 13-15. Inroon does disclose a propeller shroud (See Fig. 9). Chih discloses a propeller shroud #4 and further discloses in Column 5, lines 52-54: “If desired the shroud 4 may be provided with a plurality of elongated stabilizing fins form on the outer surface thereof.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Inroon as modified by Mines with a propeller shroud having a plurality of elongated fins as disclosed by Chih. The precise number or angular arrangement of the fins to be easily configured by an artisan to achieve the hydrodynamic flow and performance characteristics desired.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 3635188, US 3995578, US 4938722, US 5024178, US 6823813 and US 7654215 each disclose an underwater propulsion device attached to a swimmer or diver by straps, comprising a motor, propeller and securing member.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D WIEST whose telephone number is (571)270-5974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00 - 3:00.
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.
/ANTHONY D WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights