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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the trawl doors, the air compressor, and the cooling machine must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
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 9 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.
With regard to claim 9, the claim depends upon a claim that requires a cooling agent. The claim then states cooling agent is “replaced”. It is unclear if the claim requires cooling agent to be added and then removed. The metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blum et al. (2002/0009338).
With regard to claim 1, Blum discloses a system (e.g. fig. 3) comprising a bubble curtain (310; para 0031) configurable to manipulate a temperature of a seawater surface to be of approximately equal a defined target temperature of the seawater surface (abstract), wherein a pipe (304) of the bubble curtain is positioned at an adjustable depth below the seawater surface (fig. 3; para 0036), such that an average temperature of respective seawater layers of a sea water column located between a respective one of the adjustable positions of the pipe and the sea water surface be approximately equal the defined target temperature (abstract) and is upwelled and mixed by bubbles released through holes arranged in respective walls of the pipe (fig. 3), wherein the bubbles are ascending and entraining water from the respective seawater layers of the sea water column (fig. 3).
With regard to claim 3, Blum further discloses the depth position of the pipe is modified with a distance from a position above the pipe wherein bubbles are formed (fig. 3; para 0036).
With regard to claim 4, Blum further discloses the bubble curtain comprises at least two pipes arranged in parallel with a defined distance between them (para 0042).
With regard to claim 6, Blum further discloses the pipe is arranged with means for controlling a position of a submerged pipe to be located above a seabed surface with a defined distance from the seabed surface, or below a sea water surface (para 0036).
With regard to claim 10, Blum further discloses a ship (1208) is configured to deploy a bubble curtain at a position defined by a meteorological institution (fig. 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.
Claim(s) 2 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (2002/0009338) in view of Asker (2016/0021834).
With regard to claim 2, Blum discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding a temperature profile of a water column is established by measuring respective temperatures of seawater layers of the sea water column and iterating different combinations of temperatures of the respective sweater layers as a function of respective depth positions of the pipe until an average temperature of the column is approximately equal the defined target temperature.
Asker discloses a system utilizing a temperature profile of a water column is established by measuring respective temperatures of seawater layers of the sea water column and iterating different combinations of temperatures of the respective sweater layers as a function of respective depth positions of the pipe until an average temperature of the column is approximately equal the defined target temperature (para 0017).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Blum and utilize a temperature profile of the water column as taught in Asker, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide data to ensure the surface water temperature gets to the desired value.
With regard to claims 11-12, Blum further discloses a compressor feeding compressed air to the pipe (para 0044) however is silent regarding at least one temperature sensor is configured to be deployed in an induced water surface current from the bubble curtain a measured temperature from the at least one temperature sensor is used to modify a pressure of a compressor feeding compressed air to the pipe.
Asker discloses a system utilizing at least one temperature sensor is configured to be deployed in an induced water surface current to control the system (para 0017).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Blum and utilize a temperature profile of the water column as taught in Asker, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide data to ensure the surface water temperature gets to the desired value.
With regard to claim 13, Blum, as modified, discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Blum further discloses a cold liquid may be supplied to the location of the system by pumping the liquid from another nearby location (paras 0034-0037).
Blum fails to explicitly state the liquid is water. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to utilize water as such liquid is readily available and inexpensive.
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (2002/0009338).
With regard to claim 5, Blum discloses the invention substantially as claimed as well as the pipe comprises a plurality of holes in respective walls of the pipe (fig. 3; para 0036) however fails to explicitly state the number of holes is limited to form a total summed hole area opening-surface being less than a cross sectional area of the pipe. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the total area of the openings be any desired size to include less that the cross-sectional area of the pipe based on the design conditions at hand and an artisan of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
With regard to claim 14, Blum discloses the invention substantially however fails to explicitly state the target temperature is 26.5°C. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have any desired target temperature to include 26.5°C based on the design conditions at hand and an artisan of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blum et al. (2002/0009338) in view of Clark (4,039,439).
With regard to claim 7, Blum discloses the invention substantially as claimed however is silent regarding the means for controlling the position is at least a float arranged with an adjustable bouncy enabling a shift of position of the pipe upwards or downwards relative to a seawater surface, or the means are trawl doors.
Clark discloses a system for creating a bubble curtain wherein means for controlling the position is at least a float (28) arranged with an adjustable bouncy enabling a shift of position of the pipe upwards or downwards relative to a seawater surface (col. 9, lines 27-32).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Blum and utilize float as taught in Clark, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide means to readily adjust the pipe’s location depending upon the conditions of the body of water as taught by Clark (col. 9, lines 27-32).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim is 8 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.
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: the cited prior art, either alone or in any reasonable combination, fails to teach or suggest all the limitations of the dependent claim(s). Systems to create bubble curtains are known such as those taught by Blum et al. (2002/0009338) and Comstock (2020/0317303). However, the cited prior art lacks an inner tubing surrounded by an outer tubing wherein the inner tubing receives compressed air from an external located compressor while a space in between the first and second tubing receives a cooling agent from a cooling machine as required by the independent claim(s) and it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the prior art to achieve applicant’s invention without the benefit of hindsight and applicant’s own disclosure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN F FIORELLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7012. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/BENJAMIN F FIORELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
BF
04/17/2026
Prosecution Insights