DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
Claims 47 and 49 are pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 4, filed 19 August 2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 47 and 49 under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Koshiyama et al. (JP 4110831 B2) in view of Brown et al. (US 2020/0305419 A1) and Devisetty et al. (US 2013/0053244 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 47 and 49 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office action is persuasive and, therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 47 and 49 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 47, the compound name Indole should not be capitalized; and Claim 49, the status identifier “Previously Presented” should not be part of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 47 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaiswal (WO 03/075638 A2) in view of Brown (US 2020/0305419 A1) and Devisetty et al. (US 2013/0053244 A1).
Regarding instant claim 47, Jaiswal teaches methods for preserving plants comprising inserting roots and/or stems into media containing plant hormones ([0034]). The media can be in the form of a gel and comprise indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) and gibberellic acid (GA3), wherein the media can include IAA in an amount ranging from about 0 to about 20 mg/L and GA3 in an amount ranging from about 0 to about 5 mg/L ([0037]-[0040], [0051]-[0053]). Jaiswal teaches that the agar gel can be repeatedly melted and solidified for pouring or addition of other media components ([0040]). Thus, the gel has a viscosity of greater than one hundred thousand centipoise. See also Claims 1, 6-7, 14-16, 34, 41-43, 57-58, 64-66, 91, 95, 97.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant claims to prepare a media according to Jaiswal comprising a gel and a mixture of IAA and GA3, wherein the concentrations of IAA and GA3 are approximately equal, such as both being in an amount ranging from about 0 to about 5 mg/L.
Jaiswal does not explicitly disclose grinding the gibberellic acid to a particle size of less than 10 µm, as instantly claimed.
However, Brown teaches agricultural co-formulations comprising at least one plant growth regulator, or at least one plant growth regulator and an additional biologically active ingredient, in a comminuted form having an average particle size in the range of 1-12 um (Abstract). Brown teaches that it is essential that the plant growth regulator and/or the active ingredient be finely divided via, for example, comminution or other means for the purposes of ensuring that the dispersion concentrate is maintained in a substantially stable form ([0028]).
Devisetty et al. teach that composition comprise abscisic acid alone or in combination with a second plant growth regulator (Abstract), and may further contain an insecticide, a fungicide, nutrients (fertilizers) or other adjuvants ([0029], [0031], [0051], [0110], [(0135]). Devisetty et al. further teach in a suspension concentrate, the S-(+)-abscisic acid is in a suspended state as microparticles. In some embodiments, the majority (Dv90 or 90%) of the micro S-(+)-abscisic acid particles should be less than 10 micrometers in diameter (e.g., from about 10 to about 0.01 micrometers). Preferably, the median volume diameter of the particles should be from about 2 to about 5 micrometers ([0022]).
It would have been prima facie obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to prepare the compositions according to Jaiswal comprising IAA and GA3, wherein the plant hormones are ground to less than 10 µm. Such would have been obvious because Brown teaches agrochemical formulations comprising 1-12 µm plant growth regulators; and Devisetty et al. teach plant growth regulator compositions, wherein the plant growth regulator, abscisic acid, has a majority of the particles (Dv90 or 90%) less than 10 um in diameter, preferably from about 2 to about 5 µm.
Regarding instant claim 49, Jaiswal teaches applying the media to the roots and stems of the plant ([0002], [0013], [0018]-[0020, [0034]-[0035], [0037]; Claims 1, 30, 52, 74).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to insert both the roots and stem into the media according to Jaiswal.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nathan W Schlientz whose telephone number is (571)272-9924. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM, 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, Sue Liu can be reached on (571) 272-5539. 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.
/N.W.S/Examiner, Art Unit 1616
/Mina Haghighatian/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1616