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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/17/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Note that claim 1 filed on 10/17/2025 appears to include additional claim text with required markings with respect to the text of original previously presented claim 1. More specifically, the claim includes additional text which was already deleted in a previous version. In the interests of efficiency, the claims have been examined below; however, please note that any future amendment included in a response to this Detailed Action must set forth the claims with correct annotations as explained in 37 C.F.R. 1.121(c).
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.
Claims 1-11 and 15 are 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 1 recites the limitation "the rectangular greenhouse" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This is the first reference to the shape of the greenhouse in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “another part of the mixed feed air… in a space for conditioned air that is separate from the mixing space is increased in temperature” which is misrepresentative of the invention in which the air is increased in temperature -- as it is entering the space for conditioned air --, not within the space for conditioned air itself (see Fig. 1).
Claims 2-11 and 15 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 1-4, 7-9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rearden et al. (US 2022/0304251) in view of Lefers et al. (WO 2020/026039), Looije et al. (US 2016/0157440), and Lansu (WO 2021/091372).
Regarding claim 1, Rearden et al. discloses a process (200) to grow plants in a growing space (102) of a greenhouse (100), with the greenhouse including a separate mixing space (256) that is separated from the growing space, the process comprising: supplying conditioned cooled air to the growing space of the greenhouse (Fig. 11, “treated air”), wherein:(a) ambient air (through (210) and air from the growing space (air through ((242)/(272)) are collected and mixed in the mixing space to obtain a mixed feed air (mixed in (256)), (b) cooled air is obtained (through running through (220)), and (c) another part of the mixed feed air that is not cooled in a space for conditioned air that is separate from the mixing space is increased in temperature ((220) can heat, cool, or a combination) and then mixed with the cooled air to obtain the conditioned air (the mixed cooled and heated air is mixed in (258)) and the conditioned air is discharged to the growing space via multiple parallel positioned ventilation conduits (250), wherein the greenhouse has a roof (216), a floor (see Fig. 11), two end walls and two side walls (Figs. 1 and 11, at least wall (214) is shown), wherein the mixing space is defined by part of the roof of the greenhouse (roof (216) of greenhouse), an end wall or a side wall (wall (214)), and a vertical partition wall (222) spaced apart from the end wall or side wall and running substantially parallel to the end wall or side wall and the floor or a substantially horizontal and elevated partition floor spaced apart from the floor (Fig. 11), and wherein the air from the growing space enters the mixing space via one or more openings in the partition wall (through opening (236) in (222)).
Rearden et al. does not explicitly disclose the cooled air is obtained by directly contacting part of the mixed feed air against water in one or more cooling pads where water flows downwardly via an open structure and in which open structure the part of the mixed feed air directly contacts the water to obtain cooled air, evaporated water, and non-evaporated water, with part of the non-evaporated water being used as irrigation water for the plants in the growing space and part of the non-evaporated water being reused in the one or more cooling pads, the part of the mixed feed air that is increased in temperature has not been cooled first (just that the air in total can be heated and cooled), the greenhouse is rectangular, wherein the ambient air enters the mixing space via one or more openings in the roof.
Lefers et al., like Rearden et al., teaches a process to grow plants in a growing space of a greenhouse (Figs. 5-9, paragraph [0038], wherein the plants grow would be considered a growing space), and further teaches the cooled air is obtained by directly contacting part of the mixed feed air against water in one or more cooling pads (302)(402) where water flows downwardly via an open structure (Fig. 5, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], from (406) to top of (402), step 608) and in which open structure the part of the mixed feed air directly contacts the water to obtain cooled air evaporated water, and non-evaporated water (Fig. 5, paragraphs [0038]-[0039], from (406) to top of (402), step 608, air stream AA), with part of the non-evaporated water being used as irrigation water for the plants in the growing space (through tanks S1 and S2 into tank T, then into (510) for irrigation of the plants (P)) and part of the non-evaporated water being reused in the one or more cooling pads (see paragraph [0039]), and wherein the greenhouse is rectangular (Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. to include one or more cooling pads as taught by Lefers et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve the collection of irrigation water, and the reuse of the additional water back into the cooling pads for extended use.
Looije et al., like Rearden et al. modified by Lefers et al., teaches a process to grow plants in a growing space of a greenhouse wherein cooled air is obtained by directly contacting part of a feed air against water in one or more cooling pads (through (50)) and another part of the feed air that is not directly contacted to the water in the one or more cooling pads (through (50)) as it is entering a space for conditioned air that is separate from the mixing space is increased in temperature (increase by (16) as shown in Fig. 5) and then mixed with the cooled air to obtain the conditioned air (Fig. 5, area (7) has the cooled and heated air mixed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al. to decrease and increase the temperature of a portion of the feed air with two discrete heat exchangers, as is taught by Looije et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide more freedom and options to control and condition the incoming air going to the growing space (Looije et al.: paragraph [0061]). Please note in the combination, the mixing space is taught by Rearden et al.
Lansu, like Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al. and Looije et al., teaches a process to grow plants in a growing space of a greenhouse, and further teaches the ambient air enters the mixing space via one or more openings in the roof ((40), abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al. and Looije et al. to move the location of the ambient air access as taught by Lansu, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a direct access for the ambient air to enter the mixing space without affecting change in environment of the mixing space itself (as it does in Fig.11 of Rearden et al. by having the ambient air directly enter from the side wall).
Regarding claim 2, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 1, and teaches (references to Lefers et al.) wherein more than 5% of the non- evaporated water is supplied (Fig. 5, paragraph [0039]) to one or more water reservoirs (S1, S2, T) and irrigation water is supplied from the one or more water reservoirs to the plants (first and second storage tanks (S1, S2) are water reservoirs that supply water to tank (T) for the plant irrigation).
Regarding claim 3, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 2, and teaches (references to Lefers et al.) wherein between 20% and 50% of the non- evaporated water is supplied to the one or more water reservoirs (Fig. 5, paragraph [0039]) to one or more water reservoirs (S1, S2, T).
Regarding claim 4, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 3, and teaches (references to Lefers et al.) wherein make-up water is supplied from the one or more reservoirs and/or from a source of fresh water to the one or more cooling pads to compensate at least in part for the evaporating water and for the part of the non-evaporated water that is used as irrigation water (Fig. 5, paragraph [0039] notes fresh water is supplied to the one or more cooling pads ((302), (402)).
Regarding claim 7, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 1, and teaches (references to Lefers et al.) wherein more than 5% of the non- evaporated water is supplied (Fig. 5, paragraph [0039]) to one or more water reservoirs (S1, S2, T) and irrigation water is supplied from the one or more water reservoirs to the plants (first and second storage tanks (S1, S2) are water reservoirs that supply water to tank (T) for the plant irrigation), wherein the cooling pads (302)(402) have a horizontal length and the one or more water reservoirs (S1, S2, T) has a total volume (Figs. 2B, 5, paragraph [0026] notes that the size of the reservoir is larger than the length of the cooling pad, i.e. oversized).
Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al. and Lansu does not explicitly teach a total volume of the one or more water reservoirs is more than 0.4 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to provide a total volume of the one or more water reservoirs that is greater than 0.4 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads based on the Figures of Lefers et al. (Fig. 5 shows S1, S2, T would have a total volume that is greater than 0.4 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads).
Regarding claim 8, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 7, and teaches (references to Lefers et al.) wherein the total volume of the one or more water reservoirs (S1, S2, T) is more than 0.5 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads (302)(402).
As mentioned above in the rejection for claim 7, Lefers et al. does not explicitly note the total volume of the one or more water reservoirs is more than 0.5 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to provide a total volume of the one or more water reservoirs is more than 0.5 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads based on the Figures of Lefers et al. (Fig. 5 shows S1, S2, T would have a total volume that is greater than 0.5 m3 per meter horizontal length of the one or more cooling pads).
Regarding claim 9, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 2, as discussed above, however, does not explicitly teach wherein a volume of water as supplied in a period of 7 days to the plants as irrigation water from the one or more water reservoirs is greater than the volume of non-evaporated water supplied to the one or more water reservoirs in the same period of days. However, as paragraph [0035] of Lefers et al. notes, a controller system (520) controls the pumps that move the water to irrigate the plants, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to allow the volume of water supplied in a period of 7 days to the plants as irrigation water from the one or more water reservoirs is greater than the volume of non-evaporated water supplied to the one or more water reservoirs in the same period of days based on the initial volumes in the one or more water reservoirs prior to the initiation of the process to make sure the one or more reservoirs do not overflow.
Regarding claim 15, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 1, and teaches wherein the mixing space is a continuous space running along an end wall or a side wall of the greenhouse (Rearden et al.: Fig. 1), which is rectangular (Lefers et al.: Fig. 9).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rearden et al. (US 2022/0304251) in view of Lefers et al. (WO 2020/026039), Looije et al. (US 2016/0157440), and Lansu (WO 2021/091372) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Joe (JOE, Michelle,. Signs that your plants may be struggling with incorrect EC. The art of growing blog, [online], [retrieved on 2024-09-12]. Retrieved from the Internet <URL: https://blog.bluelab.com/signs-of-incorrect-ec-plants>).
Regarding claim 5, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 4, as discussed above, however, does not explicitly teach wherein the electrical conductivity (EC) of the water in the one or more water reservoirs is below 0.1 S/m.
Joe teaches details about the process of growing plants, signs of decreased plant health, and ways to improve growth which include that EC is an essential measurement of food or nutrients available to plants, and that preferred EC ranges can be as low as 0.03 S/m (see chart on pgs. 4-5, w/ 1 mS/cm = 1 EC as scale).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to provide an EC range that is below 0.1 S/m as taught by Joe, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a preferred EC for a particular plant based on desired plant type.
Regarding claim 6, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., Lansu, and Joe teaches the process of claim 5, and teaches (references to Joe) wherein the electrical conductivity (EC) of the water in the one or more water reservoirs is between 0.01 and 0.1 S/m (see chart on pgs. 4-5, w/ 1 mS/cm = 1 EC as scale showing a range that can be between 0.01 and 0.1 S/m based on the plant being cultivated).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rearden et al. (US 2022/0304251) in view of Lefers et al. (WO 2020/026039), Looije et al. (US 2016/0157440), and Lansu (WO 2021/091372) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Kang et al. (KR 20200094292).
Regarding claim 10, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 2, as discussed above, however, does not explicitly teach wherein a volume of water in the one or more reservoirs is maintained within a lower and upper limit by supplying fresh water to the one or more reservoirs.
Kang et al. teaches an apparatus for growing vegetation wherein a volume of water in the one or more reservoirs is maintained within a lower and upper limit by supplying fresh water to the one or more reservoirs (paragraph [0032] of the machine translation notes that water level sensors detect water levels and a supply pump is provided for resupplying fresh water).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to include a lower and upper limit to the volume as taught by Kang et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide the right amount of water to the system at all times.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rearden et al. (US 2022/0304251) in view of Lefers et al. (WO 2020/026039), Looije et al. (US 2016/0157440), and Lansu (WO 2021/091372) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fu (US 2023/0180687).
Regarding claim 11, Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu teaches the process of claim 1, as discussed above, however, does not explicitly teach wherein the irrigation water is first subjected an UV treatment, filtration, membrane filtration, and/or thermal treatment before being supplied to the plants.
Fu teaches a plant growing system wherein the irrigation water is first subjected to filtration before being supplied to the plants (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of Rearden et al. as modified by Lefers et al., Looije et al., and Lansu to include a filtration of the water prior to supplying to the plants as taught by Fu, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to avoid contaminants in the water that might hurt or destroy the plants being cultured.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Van Den Berg (WO 2020/060402), Vanderplaetse (WO 2007/079774), Lefsrud et al. (US 9854751), Gordon et al. (US 11778958), Kurimoto (US 4265300), Mittelmark (US 9010019), Veltkamp (US 2012/0260689), Zimmerman et al. (US 11596113), Park (KR 101578187), Aragata (JP H07174435), Wang et al. (CN 108157027), and Lee (KR 102085542) teach greenhouses with climate control systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate 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, Peter M Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643