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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on August 28, 2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 14, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(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 1, 3, 5, 8 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Otis et al. (US 4,190,013).
Otis et al. discloses the same aquatic support vessel as claimed, as shown in Figures 1-13, which is comprised of a floating storage facility in the form of a platform, defined as Part #10, with flotation means, defined as Parts #20a-b, a boat storage rack, defined as Part #251, that is configured to stow one or more boats, each defined as Part B, and a gantry crane with a crane support bridge, defined as Part #254, and an extendable column, defined as Parts #272 and 274, that is configured for lifting one or more boats out of said storage rack, as shown in Figure 12, and placing said one or more boats into said storage rack in a vertically stacked configuration, as shown in Figures 12-13. An inventory control system in the form of an operator identifies a number of said one or more boats that are contained within said storage rack, as shown in Figures 12-13, and a location of said one or more boats within said storage rack, as shown in Figures 12-13. Said storage rack can also be configured to stow spare components for said one or more boats, and to stow components that have been removed from said one or more boats, as shown in Figure 1. A retrieval system with a retrieval platform, defined as Part #88 and 90, is deployable over a side of said floating storage facility, as shown in Figures 1 and 6, to a position that is at least partially below a water surface to enable said one or more boats to navigate onto said retrieval platform. Said gantry crane provides a constant lift force mechanism for raising said retrieval platform and a boat from a surrounding body of water, as shown in Figure 1. Said retrieval platform is movable between a first position that is oriented parallel with a side of said floating storage facility, as shown in Figure 1, and a second position that is oriented parallel with said water surface, as shown in Figure 12.
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 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otis et al.
Otis et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a gantry crane with first and second extendable columns.
The use of a gantry crane having multiple extendable columns instead of a single extendable column would be considered by one of ordinary skill in the art to be an obvious multiplication of parts for the purpose of providing a gantry crane with additional lifting means for moving a plurality of boats simultaneously.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize a gantry crane with first and second extendable columns, in combination with the floating storage facility as disclosed by Otis et al. for the purpose of providing a floating storage facility with lifting means for moving a plurality of boats simultaneously.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otis et al. in view of Enk, Sr. (US 9,956,445).
Otis et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a floating storage facility with a fire control system.
Enk, Sr. discloses a fire suppression system, as shown in Figures 1-11, which is comprised of a system, defined as Part #10, with at least one nozzle, defined as Part #20, for use in storage facilities, as described in lines 24-31 of column 6.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize a fire suppression system for a storage facility, as taught by Enk, Sr., in combination with the floating storage facility as disclosed by Otis et al. for the purpose of providing a floating storage facility with means to suppress a fire in order to prevent damage to said facility.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otis et al. in view of Kawai et al. (US 7,410,395).
Otis et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a floating storage facility with a charging system that is configured to charge one or more batteries of one or more boats, and a communication system that is configured to communicate with one or more boats.
Kawai et al. discloses a parent boat, as shown in Figures 1-6, with a plurality of docking portions or storage racks, as shown in Figure 2, for a one or more child boats, each defined as Part #3, a generating device, defined as Part #20, for recharging a battery, defined as Part #30, of said one or more child boats, and a communication network, defined as Part #6, that can be configured to connect with a communication network, defined as Part #7, of said one or more child boats in order to identify one of said one or more child boats, as shown Figure 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize a charging system and a communication system between a parent boat and one or more child boats, as taught by Kawai et al., in combination with the floating storage facility as disclosed by Otis et al. for the purpose of providing a floating storage facility with means to charge and communicate with one or more boats on a storage rack in order to facilitate maintenance of said one or more boats on said storage rack.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otis et al. in view of Soreau et al. (US 8,967,067).
Otis et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a floating storage facility having a retrieval system with one or more bollards to facilitate navigation of a boat into a desired position with respect to a retrieval platform.
Soreau et al. discloses a system for launching and recovering marine vehicles, as shown in Figures 1-7d, which is comprised of a ship, defined as Part #10, with an articulated ramp, defined as Part #11, a fairlead, defined as Part #13, a towing cable, defined as Part #14, a winch, defined as Part #16, and vertical protection elements, each defined as Part #131, for guiding a marine vehicle, defined as Part #15, to a desired position with respect to said articulated ramp, as shown in Figures 1 and 1a.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize one or more protection elements or bollards to guide a marine vehicle into a desired position on a retrieval platform, as taught by Soreau et al., in combination with the floating storage facility as disclosed by Otis et al. for the purpose of providing a floating storage facility with means to guide a boat into a desired position on a retrieval platform in order to facilitate lifting and stowing said boat onto a storage rack.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otis et al. in view of Holmes (US 7,036,448).
Otis et al., as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of one or more cushioned bollards that are deployable over a side of a floating storage facility.
Holmes discloses a dock bumper, as shown in Figures 1-7, which is comprised of one or more bumpers or bollards, each defined as Part #10, with an elongated bumper cushion, defined as Part #14, having an inner surface, defined as Part #16, an outer surface, defined as Part #18, cushion sides, defined as Part #20, and cushion end walls, defined as Part #22, and an outer cover, defined as Part #30, that envelops said bumper cushion. Securement straps, defined as Part #50, are provided to allow said one or more bumpers or bollards to be deployed over a side of a dock structure, as shown in Figure 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art, to utilize one or more cushioned bollards with a dock structure, as taught by Holmes, in combination with the floating storage facility as disclosed by Otis et al. for the purpose of providing a floating storage facility with means to facilitate docking of a boat with a side of said facility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 9-11 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARS A OLSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-6685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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.
June 5, 2026
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
Prosecution Insights