"Ultimate Occupancy" occurred when Marriott sold, during the construction phases of certain resorts, Weeks of a certain view/building type that were not yet available for occupancy. Prior to the completion of the resorts' build-out, owners who purchased with an UO provision in their deeds were allowed to stay in a finished unit/building type that was different from their actual purchase. Once build-out throughout the entire resort was complete, occupancy for owners with UO deeds reverted back to the original purchase. Because Marriott must comply with inventory controls when selling, various deeds for Weeks at these resorts may reflect a unit number that is not physically located in the view/building type that was purchased. As well, those Weeks are classified as, for example, "oceanside/gardenview" wherever the view/building type is noted.
Fleshing out the example, Marriott sold SurfWatch Weeks in stages with the oceanside and oceanvista buildings completed prior to the gardenview buildings. For the period of several years when gardenview units were not available for occupancy, buyers could still purchase a Week with "ultimate gardenview occupancy" but were guaranteed usage for the interim in an oceanvista or oceanside unit. Since the build-out has been completed, all Owners using their own Weeks are now placed in the actual unit type that they purchased.
The other resort where it occurred is OceanWatch but I'm not sure of the order of build-out for that resort. There, the four view types are gardenview, oceanside, oceanview and oceanfront. (Sort of interesting that these are the two newest South Carolina Marriott resorts, and the only two where I'm aware UO was used.)
Our Marriott rep clearly explained the UO provision to us when we purchased, and the language in the docs isn't difficult to understand once you know about the possibility. But I can see why it would cause confusion on the resale market, especially when the seller may be somebody working on the Owner's behalf who doesn't know UO could exist.