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 .
The present application is a continuation of Application No. 18/222,071, which is now U.S. Patent No. 12,258,110, which is a continuation of Application No. 17/405,797, which is now U.S. Patent No. 11,738,841, which is a continuation of Application No. 16/889,272, which is now U.S. Patent No. 11,208,188.
A preliminary amendment was filed by the applicant on October 16, 2025.
Claims 1-18 have been cancelled.
Claims 19-23 have been added.
Drawings
The drawings were received on February 21, 2025. These drawings are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 16, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 19-23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,258,110. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 19-23 are generic to all that is recited in claims 1-5 of US 12,258,110. In other words, claims 1-5 of US 12,258,110 fully encompass the subject matter of claims 19-23, and therefore anticipate claims 19-23. Since claims 19-23 are anticipated by claims 19-23 of US 12,258,110, claims 19-23 are not patentably distinct from claims 1-5 of US 12,258,110, regardless of any additional subject matter present in claims 1-5 of US 12,258,110.
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 20 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.
Claim 20 does not end with a period “.” at the end of line 2, and is thus considered to be incomplete and indefinite.
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 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 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Curtis (US 7,950,340) in view of Alexander, Jr. et al. (US 6,142,841).
Curtis discloses a pontoon boat, as shown in Figures 1-2, which is comprised of a plurality of pontoons including a port side pontoon, defined as Part #8, a center pontoon, defined as Part #6, which is disposed along a longitudinal centerline of said boat, and a starboard side pontoon, defined as Part #8, as shown in Figure 2, and a deck, defined as Part #4, which defines an outer perimeter and is supported by said plurality of pontoons, as shown in Figure 2. Said plurality of pontoons define a port side envelope between said port side pontoon and said center pontoon, and a starboard side envelope between said starboard side pontoon and said center pontoon. An outboard motor, defined as Part #9, is also positioned at a stern of said boat, as shown in Figure 1.
Curtis, as set forth above, discloses all of the features claimed except for the use of a thruster system including a first thruster that is positioned on a bow portion side of a lateral centerline of a boat, and a second thruster that is positioned on a stern portion of the lateral centerline of said boat.
Alexander, Jr. et al. discloses a waterjet docking system for a marine vessel, as shown in Figures 3-14, which is comprised of a marine vessel with a hull, defined as Part #40, having a longitudinal centerline, defined as Part #50, a first thruster, defined as Part #81 or 82, that is positioned on a bow portion side of a lateral centerline of said marine vessel, and a second thruster, defined as Part #83 or 84, that is positioned on a stern portion of said lateral centerline of said marine vessel, as shown in Figures 4-5. Said first and second thrusters include a movable portion, defined as Part #102, within a controller, defined as Part #90, that can be positioned between a first position and a second position, as shown in Figures 6-8, where at least one of said first and second thrusters is capable of directing water to cause a desired movement of said marine vessel in a second position, and is incapable of directing water to cause said desired movement in a first position.
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 waterjet docking system for a marine vessel, as taught by Alexander, Jr. et al., in combination with the pontoon boat as disclosed by Curtis for the purpose of providing a pontoon boat with means to improve directional and rotational control in order to facilitate docking of said boat.
Claims 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Curtis in view of Alexander, Jr. et al., and further in view of Dashew et al. (US 4,056,073).
Curtis in combination with Alexander, Jr. et al. shows all of the features claimed except for the use of a thruster unit including a movable portion that is movable between first, second and third positions.
Dashew et al. discloses a boat, as shown in Figures 1-10, with a thruster unit, as shown in Figure 3, having a thruster nozzle, defined as Part #36, with a nozzle end, defined as Part #36n, that is supported by a hull, defined as Part #12, of said boat, said thruster unit being further comprised of a deflector or movable portion, defined as Part #170, that is disposed on an exterior of said hull, as shown in Figure 3, where said deflector or movable portion is movable between a first closed position, defined as Part #170b, a second open position, defined as Part #170a, and a third open position, defined as Part #170. In said first closed position, said deflector or movable portion sealingly covers said thruster nozzle end so that said thruster unit is incapable of directing water around an exterior of said hull to cause a desired movement of said boat. In said second open position, said deflector or movable portion configures said thruster unit to provide forward thrust to said boat. In said third open position, said deflector or movable portion configures said thruster unit to provide sideward thrust to said boat that is angled relative to said forward thrust.
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 thruster unit which includes an exterior deflector or movable portion that is movable between a first closed position, a second open position and a third open position, as taught by Dashew et al., in combination with the pontoon boat as disclosed by Curtis and the teachings of Alexander, Jr. et al. for the purpose of providing a pontoon boat with a thruster unit to provide improved directional and rotational control of said boat so as to facilitate docking of said boat.
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.
October 14, 2026
/LARS A OLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615B
