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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and Group III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/16/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I: Claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 9/16/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/16/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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,
“where the substantial portion of the receding surface over which the vortex is generated comprises at least 10% of the receding surface” of claims 9
“where the substantial portion of the receding surface over which the vortex is generated comprises effectively all of the receding surface” of claims 10
must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. 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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “body” in line 8. For clarity of the claim, it should be “the body” since it is the second recitation of the limitation.
Claim 1 recites “receding edge” in line 19 and 41. For clarity of the claim, it should be “the receding edge” since it is the second recitation of the limitation.
Claim 1 recites “the inclination” in line 46. For clarity of the claim, it should be “an inclination” since it is the first recitation of the limitation.
Claim 5 recites “the driveshaft bore” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be “a driveshaft bore” since it is the first recitation of the limitation.
Claim 8 recites “a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material” in line 2. For clarity of the claim, it should be “ the highly flexible, resilient polymeric material” since it is the second recitation of the limitation.
Claim 8 recites “at least one lobe” in line 3. For clarity of the claim, it should be “the at least one lobe” since it is the second recitation of the limitation.
Claim 8 recites “the configuration” in line 4. For clarity of the claim, it should be “a configuration” since it is the first recitation of the limitation.
Claim 8 recites “thrust loads” in line 4. For clarity of the claim, it should be “the thrust loads” since it is the second recitation of the limitation.
Claim 28 recites “water” in line 2. It is unclear if this is the same water as in claim 28, line 1. Suggested correction: change to “the water”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-15 are 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 1 recites the term “substantially” in line 13, 16 and 30 and it is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 2-15 depend off of an indefinite claim, therefore, they are rendered indefinite.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-8, 11, and 13-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 8, 19-20, 27, 29, and 31 of U.S. Patent No. 12168937. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Instant application: 18/981799
US Patent No. 12168937
Claim 1: A device for inducing fluid flow relative to itself, comprising:
a body configured to be brought into contact with a fluid, the body possessing:
a fore end, an aft end, and an axis of rotation about which the body is configured to rotate, and
a central hub possessing torque acceptance means configured to accept and convey a torque from a torque generator to the body, and where the torque so conveyed manifests as a rotational velocity of the body of the device about the axis of rotation and driving every point on the surface of body with a rotational motion in a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation,
at least one monolithic cantilevered lobe extending radially away from the axis of rotation, the lobe possessing one proximal end affixed to the hub, and a distal end, with the lobe further possessing:
a receding surface substantially inclined with respect to the axis of rotation such that the receding surface recedes away from the fluid as the body rotates, and
a rump surface that encloses substantially the rest of the lobe, and
where the receding surface and the rump surface intersect, forming there a receding edge, and
where receding edge is bordered by an adjacent rump surface that:
from every point on the receding edge extends axially aft along the rump surface from the receding edge at least an axial thickness, and
from every point on the receding edge extends around the rump surface from the receding edge in the direction of rotational motion at least a transverse thickness, and
where, providing a fluid in contact with the body, the rotational velocity of the body about axis of rotation results in a counter-flow over the device, and the adjacent rump surface being so configured such that counter-flow over the adjacent rump surface,
has substantially no radial component, and
has a component in the direction opposite the direction of rotational motion, so that the counter-flow flows past the receding edge at an angle having little or no radial component and with a non-zero component in the direction opposite the rotational motion, and
where the receding surface, being pulled away from the fluid by the rotational velocity thus induces a low-pressure region directly over the receding surface such that the low-pressure region travels with the receding surface as the body rotates with respect to the fluid, and
where the low-pressure region, being directly adjacent to the counter- flow flowing past receding edge, thus generates a bound edge vortex over a substantial portion of the receding surface,
where the bound edge vortex rotates in the opposite direction as the rotational velocity, and where the bound edge vortex further reduces the fluid pressure over the receding surface, and
the inclination of the receding surface relative to the axis of rotation causes the vortex to have a substantial aft-directed axial component of fluid flow that generates forward thrust on the body of the device
Claim 1: A device for inducing fluid flow relative to itself, comprising:
a body configured to be brought into contact with a fluid, the body possessing:
a fore end, an aft end, and an axis of rotation about which the body is configured to rotate, and
a central hub possessing torque acceptance means configured to accept and convey a torque from a torque generator to the body, and where the torque so conveyed manifests as a rotational velocity of the body of the device about the axis of rotation and driving every point on the surface of the body with a rotational motion in a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation,
at least one monolithic cantilevered lobe extending radially away from the axis of rotation, the lobe possessing one proximal end affixed to the hub, and a distal end, with the lobe further possessing:
a receding surface inclined with respect to the axis of rotation such that the receding surface recedes away from the fluid as the body rotates, and
a rump surface that encloses the rest of the lobe, and
where the receding surface and the rump surface intersect, forming there a receding edge, and
where the receding edge is bordered by an adjacent rump surface that:
from every point on the receding edge extends axially aft along the rump surface from the receding edge at least an axial thickness, and
from every point on the receding edge extends around the rump surface from the receding edge in the direction of rotational motion at least a transverse thickness, and
where, providing a fluid in contact with the body, the rotational velocity of the body about axis of rotation results in a counter-flow over the device, and the adjacent rump surface being so configured such that counter-flow over the adjacent rump surface,
has no radial component, and
has a component in the direction opposite the direction of rotational motion, so that the counter-flow flows past the receding edge at an angle having little or no radial component and with a non-zero component in the direction opposite the rotational motion, and
where the receding surface, being pulled away from the fluid by the rotational velocity thus induces a low-pressure region directly over the receding surface such that the low-pressure region travels with the receding surface as the body rotates with respect to the fluid, and
where the low-pressure region, being directly adjacent to the counter- flow flowing past the receding edge, thus generates a bound edge vortex over a substantial portion of the receding surface,
where the bound edge vortex rotates in the opposite direction as the rotational velocity, and where the bound edge vortex further reduces the fluid pressure over the receding surface, and
an inclination of the receding surface relative to the axis of rotation causes the vortex to have a substantial aft-directed axial component of fluid flow that generates forward thrust on the body of the device
Claim 2: where the body possesses a plurality of lobes.
Claim 2: where the body possesses a plurality of lobes.
Claim 3: where the fluid is water or another liquid.
Claim 3: where the fluid is water or another liquid.
Claim 4: where the fluid is air or another gas.
Claim 4: where the fluid is air or another gas.
Claim 5: where the torque acceptance means is configured as the driveshaft bore for a motor.
Claim 5: where the torque acceptance means is configured as the driveshaft bore for a motor.
Claim 6: where a portion of each lobe is additionally configured partially as a lifting foil, so that the lobe can produce thrust via both a bound edge vortex and via lift.
Claim 8: where a portion of each lobe is additionally configured partially as a lifting foil, so that the lobe can produce thrust via both a bound edge vortex and via lift.
Claim 7: where the device is manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil from strains greater than 25%.
Claim 19: where the device is manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil from strains greater than 25%.
Claim 8: where the device manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil further comprises at least one lobe configured to both sustain thrust loads in water for propelling a boat and absorb impacts by deforming elastically to rebound back to the configuration sustaining thrust loads.
Claim 20: where the device manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil further comprises at least one lobe configured to both sustain thrust loads in water for propelling a boat and absorb impacts by deforming elastically to rebound back to the configuration sustaining thrust loads.
Claim 11: where the receding surface is planar.
Claim 1: Claim 11: where the receding surface is planar.
Claim 13: where the lobe is configured to possess blunt edges, and so is incapable of cutting objects that the device encounters in the fluid.
Claim 27: where the lobe is configured to possess blunt edges, and so is incapable of cutting objects that the device encounters in the fluid.
Claim 14: a plurality of bodies configured to rotate in mutual proximity.
Claim 29: a plurality of bodies configured to rotate in mutual proximity.
Claim 15: where the rotational velocity of the body is controlled in a non-constant, arbitrary fashion to produce transverse forces for steering.
Claim 31: where the rotational velocity of the body is controlled in a non-constant, arbitrary fashion to produce transverse forces for steering.
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.
Claims 16 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hilleman US 20020185050.
Regarding claim 1, Hilleman discloses: A device for inducing fluid flow relative to itself (Fig 2), comprising:
a body (body of 50 and 66) configured to be brought into contact with a fluid, the body possessing:
a fore end (End of device near 64), an aft end (End of device near 50), and an axis of rotation about which the body is configured to rotate (Fig 3: Axis of 68), and
a central hub (Fig 2: 112) possessing torque acceptance means configured to accept and convey a torque from a torque generator to the body (Par 62: 50 provides thrust for 66), and where the torque so conveyed manifests as a rotational velocity of the body of the device about the axis of rotation and driving every point on the surface of body with a rotational motion in a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation (Par 62: the hub is rotated to provide momentum in the water from the turbine),
at least one monolithic cantilevered lobe (32) extending radially away from the axis of rotation (32 extends away from the axis of rotation), the lobe possessing one proximal end affixed to the hub (32 attaches to 66 that is the proximal end), and a distal end (Tip of 32), with the lobe further possessing:
a receding surface (Surface of 32 that recedes away from the axis of rotation; as seen in the clip below) substantially inclined with respect to the axis of rotation such that the receding surface recedes away from the fluid as the body rotates (Surface of 32 that recedes away from the axis of rotation), and
a rump surface (Inner surface of 32 that; as seen in the clip below) that encloses substantially the rest of the lobe, and
where the receding surface and the rump surface intersect, forming there a receding edge (Edge of 32 that the receding surface and rump surface intersect; as seen in the clip below), and
where receding edge is bordered by an adjacent rump surface (Edge borders the adjacent rump surfaces) that:
from every point on the receding edge extends axially aft along the rump surface from the receding edge at least an axial thickness (The receding edge extends axially aft and along all of the rump surface), and
from every point on the receding edge extends around the rump surface from the receding edge in the direction of rotational motion at least a transverse thickness (The receding edges extends all around the rump surface at every point), and
where, providing a fluid in contact with the body (arrow lines in Fig 4), the rotational velocity of the body about axis of rotation results in a counter-flow over the device (Par 68), and the adjacent rump surface being so configured such that counter-flow over the adjacent rump surface (Par 68),
has substantially no radial component (Fig 4: Axial flow), and
has a component (Fig 1; Par 62: Shroud 56 over the blades that pushes fluid through) in the direction opposite the direction of rotational motion, so that the counter-flow flows past the receding edge at an angle having little or no radial component and with a non-zero component in the direction opposite the rotational motion (The water is pushed through the outlet providing flow in the direction of the axis of rotation), and
where the receding surface, being pulled away from the fluid by the rotational velocity thus induces a low-pressure region directly over the receding surface such that the low-pressure region travels with the receding surface as the body rotates with respect to the fluid, and where the low-pressure region, being directly adjacent to the counter- flow flowing past receding edge, thus generates a bound edge vortex over a substantial portion of the receding surface, where the bound edge vortex rotates in the opposite direction as the rotational velocity, and where the bound edge vortex further reduces the fluid pressure over the receding surface, and the inclination of the receding surface relative to the axis of rotation causes the vortex to have a substantial aft-directed axial component of fluid flow that generates forward thrust on the body of the device (Par 67-68: The pump jet provides pressure on the blades. The blades have a suction side and pressure side; where the low pressure side is the suction side and the high pressure side is the pressure side of the blades. The suction side being the receding surface and the pressure side being the rump surface. The flow generated would create the vortex for propulsion and the structure of Hilleman seems to perform these limitations above.)
PNG
media_image1.png
486
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Hilleman discloses:
where the body possesses a plurality of lobes (Fig 2: 2 Blades 32).
Regarding claim 3, Hilleman discloses:
where the fluid is water or another liquid (Par 69: Water flows through the jet).
Regarding claim 4, Hilleman discloses:
where the fluid is air or another gas (Par 63: The propeller blades creates a super cavity that has exhaust gas).
Regarding claim 5, Hilleman discloses:
where the torque acceptance means is configured as the driveshaft bore for a motor (Par 65 and 67: the propulsion is electric powered and brushless).
Regarding claim 6, Hilleman discloses:
where a portion of each lobe is additionally configured partially as a lifting foil, so that the lobe can produce thrust via both a bound edge vortex and via lift (Fig 67-68: two blades 32 produce a bound edge vortex and lift).
Regarding claim 12, Hilleman discloses:
where the receding surface is non-planar (Fig 2: Receding surface is curved and non-straight).
Regarding claim 13, Hilleman discloses:
where the lobe is configured to possess blunt edges, and so is incapable of cutting objects that the device encounters in the fluid (Fig 2: Surface 32 is rounded and curved inwards).
Regarding claim 14, Hilleman discloses:
further comprising a plurality of bodies configured to rotate in mutual proximity (Par 65: Twin submarine propulsors).
Regarding claim 15, Hilleman discloses:
where the rotational velocity of the body is controlled in a non-constant, arbitrary fashion to produce transverse forces for steering (Par 65: The super cavity created by the forces of the propulsor allows for turning/ steering with great maneuverability).
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 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilleman US 20020185050 in view of Matloff US 20170259183 and Bang Laboratories Inc.
Regarding claim 7, Hilleman discloses all of the above limitations. However, they are silent as to:
where the device is manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil from strains greater than 25%.
From the same field of endeavor, Matloff teaches:
a propeller (120),
where the device is manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material (Par 88: Propeller is made of a clear or transparent polymer; Par 203: The polymer is made from poly(methyl methacrylate)).
Bang Laboratories Inc teaches the material properties of the ploy(methyl methacrylate) where the elastic modulus is 3300MPa and the refractive indexes are between 1.481 and 1.502.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Hilleman’s blades to be transparent and made out of ploy(methyl methacrylate) as taught by Matloff. This is a highly flexible and resilient, polymetric, and refractive material as taught by Bang Laboratories so that the material can resist the flow through fluids and when the blades are in motion, they become invisible (Matloff: Par 197).
Regarding claim 8, Hilleman as modified by Matloff and Bang Laboratories in claim 7, where Matloff teaches:
where the device manufactured out of a highly flexible, resilient polymeric material capable of elastic recoil further comprises at least one lobe configured to both sustain thrust loads in water for propelling a boat and absorb impacts by deforming elastically to rebound back to the configuration sustaining thrust loads (Par 88: Propeller is made of a clear or transparent polymer; Par 203: The polymer is made from poly(methyl methacrylate)).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilleman US 20020185050.
Regarding claim 9 and 10, Hilleman discloses a receding surface and a vortex being generated from the receding surface on the propeller blades.
Hilleman is silent as to:
Claim 9: where the substantial portion of the receding surface over which the vortex is generated comprises at least 10% of the receding surface.
Claim 10: where the substantial portion of the receding surface over which the vortex is generated further comprises effectively all of the receding surface.
However, there is no criticality or unexpected results in Applicant’s disclosure for the claimed ranges. The courts have held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See MPEP 2144.05 II A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have to change the angle of the receding surface to have the vortex over generating over all of the receding surface to increase the speed and stealth properties as taught by Hilleman if through routine experimentation such a range was found to produce the most optimum vortex coverage (Par 30).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 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.
Claim 11 recites “where the receding surface is planar” and in combination with the structure of the rump surface, receding surface and receding edge as recited in claim 1 is considered allowable subject matter. The prior art found that could read onto the limitations describing the receding surface only had the surface non-planar and curved.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Harman WO 03056139 discloses a similar propeller that has a similar structure as in claim 1 of the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew J Marien whose telephone number is (469)295-9159. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am- 6:00 pm CST, Monday through Friday.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached on (571) 270-3508. 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.
/Andrew J Marien/Examiner, Art Unit 3745