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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I and Species II, Fig. 3 in the reply filed on 08/03/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/03/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/25/2025 and 05/28/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 10 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.
The term “substantially” in claim 10 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Van Emden US 2014/0339109 A1, herein after referred to as Van Emden.
Regarding claim 1 Van Emden discloses a divider for positioning between a bottom surfboard and a top surfboard (10 cover can be placed where the user desires paragraph [0052], Figs. 1-10), the divider comprising:
a divider base (16 surfboard shaped body/27 bottom, Figs. 1-10) for placing between a first and a second surfboard, the divider base being a flexible sheet (Figs. 1-10, paragraph [0093]); and a surfboard nose support (22 flaps including 38 nose flaps) attached to the divider base (Fig. 2), the surfboard nose support being a padded support (paragraph [0029], and paragraph [0060] lines 5-6) for providing protection for a nose region of at least one of the top and bottom surfboards.
Regarding claim 2 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1 and further discloses wherein a position of the surfboard nose support (22/38) is adjustable in a longitudinal direction (paragraph [0059] lines 1-3 and the base can be folded along fold lines which will adjust the location of the nose support).
Regarding claim 3 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 2 and further discloses wherein the nose support (22/38) is adjusted by rolling the nose support in a flexible region of the divider base (folded along the fold lines 48 and Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1 and further discloses wherein the divider (10) has a plurality of padded supports (22) attached to the divider base (16/27) and each of the padded supports are located between the bottom and the top surfboard (Figs. 5-6, the user can place boards on top or the bottom or both of the divider).
Regarding claim 5 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1 and further comprising a mid-surfboard support (22 between the nose and tail of the divider, Figs. 1-2) for providing support for a mid-section of the top surfboard.
Regarding claim 6 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 5 and further discloses wherein the mid-surfboard support (22 between the nose and tail portion) is at least one longitudinally extended pad attached to the divider base (Figs. 1-2 and paragraph [0060] lines 5-6).
Regarding claim 7 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 5 and further discloses wherein the mid-surfboard support is two longitudinally extended pads located either side of a central longitudinal line of the divider (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 8 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1 and further comprising: a tail surfboard support (22/32 tail flap, Figs. 1-2), the tail surfboard support being a padded support for providing protection for a tail region of at least one of the first and the second surfboards (Figs. 1-10 and paragraph [0060] lines 5-6).
Regarding claim 9 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1, wherein the divider has a plurality of padded supports (22), including the nose support (22/22), the divider holding a first of the plurality of padded supports in a predetermined position relative to a second of the plurality of padded supports in a longitudinal direction along the divider (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 10 Van Emden discloses the divider according to claim 1 and further discloses wherein the divider is substantially located between the bottom and the top surfboard (when the divider is placed between more than one surfboard it will be between the top of one and the bottom of the other, further this is directed towards the intended use of the divider, and Van Emden discloses all the claimed structural limitations).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lauren Kmet whose telephone number is (313)446-4834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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.
/L KMET/Examiner, Art Unit 3735
/Anthony D Stashick/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Prosecution Insights