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 .
US 2010/0320759 A1 is considered the closest prior at, which discloses optimum transference of energy from a wave energy conversion (WEC) 440 it is useful to consider a segment of a plurality (a fleet) of vessels for purposes of analysis. It is further assumed that vessels be allowed the freedom to rotate about their roll and pitch axes as typified in FIG. 8B. The wave action creates motion between the vessels and is converted to hydraulic, and then, electrical energy from a regulated generator. The significance of this assembly to a discussion of resonance control is to explain how stiffness is controlled from electrical inputs to the inter-vessel coupling assembly.
However, Lightfoot does not discloses a vessel comprising three rotation chambers, disclosing coupling a WEC to such a vessel by positioning a WEC within a footprint defined by flotation chambers.
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 1-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,391,344 and unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,275,502 in view of Lightfoot (US 2010/032079). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the following reasons:
The subject matter claimed in the in the patented claims are fully disclosed and covered in the above patented claims. The instant application and the US patent numbers 12,391,344 and 12,275,502 are claiming common subject matter as follows: a method of forming an energy product, the method comprising: coupling a vessel to a wave energy conversion (WEC) device adjacent to an upper surface of a body of water, the vessel comprising a support structure, a first floatation chamber coupled to the support structure, a second floatation chamber coupled to the support structure, the second floatation chamber laterally spaced apart from and fluidly coupled to the first floatation chamber, a third floatation chamber coupled to the support structure, the third floatation chamber laterally spaced apart from the first floatation chamber and from the second floatation chamber, the coupling comprising positioning the WEC within a footprint defined by the first floatation chamber, the second floatation chamber, and the third floatation chamber; transferring hydrogen from the WEC to the vessel; and while the vessel is floating on the body of water, converting the hydrogen into [[an]] the energy product on the vessel.
The difference between the patented claims and the present claims are: plurality of cables and end effector to the WEC device to form a connection between the vessel and the WEC device. However Lightfoot in the same filed of endeavor teaches in some examples, the discharge port can include or can be connected to a cable 102 that extends from the watercraft 120 to the marine vessel 110. In some examples, the cable 102 can be coupled to the mechanical linking system [0035]. Lightfoot designated vessels subsequently re-attach themselves for the transit phase in a primary longitudinal direction consistent with the normal navigational mode but including an additional row(s) to be attached in a transverse coupling formation that would permit energy conversion end-route and thus recover significant quantities of fuel expended for propulsion [0087].
Predictable Use of Known Elements
A PHOSITA prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention in maritime or robotic engineering would view the addition of cables and an end effector as a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
provide a secure, centralized attachment point for complex payloads. Combining them to couple a WEC to a vessel is a straightforward application of robotic manipulation to a larger scale maritime task as suggested by Lightfoot.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAFAR F PARSA whose telephone number is (571)272-0643. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM-6:30PM.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at 571-270-5241. 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.
/JAFAR F PARSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692