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
Claims 18,21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 07/03/2024.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 07/03/2024 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the only difference between the Species is the shape, which is not a limiting factor. This is found persuasive and the restriction requirement between the two Species has been withdrawn however the restriction between the inventions still contain a search burden.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters which are not enclosed within parentheses. Claim 5 must be corrected.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim elements are introduced as snap fit (male) and snap fit (female). These should be revised to be -male snap fit- and -female snap fit- respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
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 3,6-7,10-11,13-14,16,20 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 3 recites the limitation "the four sidewalls" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether this is in reference to the sidewall in claim 1 or different elements.
The term “stronger” in claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stronger” 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 7 recites the limitation "the gutters" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There are no gutters in claim 1 only a test port, which will be interpreted as the gutter in claim 7. Applicant should properly introduce the element if the limitation is meant to be in reference to different structure.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the substrate”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant should properly introduce the structure of the substrate by revising the claim to read -a substrate-
The term “stronger” in claim 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stronger” 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 13 recites the limitation "the compact bottom”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant should properly introduce the structure of the substrate by revising the claim to read -a compact bottom-.
The term “stronger” in claim 14 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stronger” 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 16 is indefinite as there is only one configuration described in the claim and it is unclear what the alternative is.
Claim 20 recites the limitations "the plurality of recesses” and “the detachable porous based plate”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant should properly introduce the structure of the recesses and reference the base plate of claim 1 properly.
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 1-2, 4-13, 15-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RooTrimmer (See NPL attached, hereinafter Roo) in view of Catalano (US 20230067983 A1) and Riesterer (US 20090031629 A1).
Regarding claim 1: Roo discloses a hybrid plant container assembly comprising: at least one sidewall characterized by a plurality of hollow pins (Fig. on page 1), a porous base plate (base seen on Figs in pages 1,4) characterized by a plurality of apertures, and at least one downwardly extended porous hollow cup (see Figs.); mounted on, a reservoir tank; for growing horticultural plants.
Roo fails to teach a collection tank configured underneath the hollow pins with at least opening inside the collection tank, a reservoir tank characterized by a test port configured to a sidewall of the reservoir tank.
Catalano teaches a collection tank (protrusion 130) configured with at least one opening (125, para 52) and a reservoir tank (Catalano Fig. 5A, bottom 110 can server as reservoir).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the receptacle as disclosed by Roo with the protrusion as taught by Catalano with a reasonable expectation of success because providing a water collecting protrusion would achieve the predictable result of minimizing water loss thus further optimizing the apparatus.
Riesterer teaches a test port (44) configured to a sidewall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the plant container as disclosed by modified Roo with the port as taught by Riesterer with a reasonable expectation of success because providing an opening in the sidewall would achieve the predictable result of allowing a user to test the water conditions within the apparatus and make the necessary adjustments to achieve desired conditions.
Regarding claim 2: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the plant container may alternatively configure with perpetually connected sidewalls to the reservoir tank with the detachable porous base plate or; alternatively, the sidewalls may be detachable from the reservoir tank or the sidewall (Roo sidewalls are fastened together via screws thus they can be detached, meeting this limitation).
Regarding claim 4: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the sidewall further comprising: an upper edge, a lower edge, the exterior surface, an interior surface, the side edges characterized by any suitable interlocking components, or a beveled side edge configured to the right and left sides of the sidewall (Roo, See Page 4 which discusses the sheets/sidewalls being interlockable).
Regarding claim 5: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the sidewall further comprising: the plurality of hollow pins characterized by an oblique cut, and a vertical cut on an aperture configured on the independent far end, with a gutter configured to the posterior end of an aperture on the interior surface of the sidewall, and at least one connection leg characterized by a slot opening, or; alternatively, the given cuts may not necessarily be as characterized, which may take any other shapes as well, and the hollow pins may be extended outwardly straight, tapering, or as a downwardly extended bend at the end (Roo, See Figs. Pages 1,4 As the sidewall contains hollow pins).
Regarding claim 6: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the sidewall further comprising: a basic locking mechanism configured to each corner or on side edges of the sidewall, or any other alternatives that may comprise snap fits, latches, clamps, slot locks, slide locks, thread locks, joints, etc., or a combination of generally available locking mechanisms configured to assemble the sidewalls, porous base plate and the reservoir tank (Catalano bottom 110) without limiting to the scope of the present invention or; alternatively, a plurality of inwardly opened connection slot openings, configured on each corner of the exterior surface of the sidewall, characterized by an angular wall, wherein at least one slot opening made from said angular wall through the beveled connection edge, on each connection slot for stronger connectivity between sidewalls or; alternatively, a basic snap fit locking mechanism may configure to each side edge of the sidewall with at least one snap fit (male) device in one side edge, while the corresponding snap fit (female) device configured to the corresponding side edge for stronger assembly of the sidewalls (sidewalls and baseplate of Roo are interlocked together via the use of screws, see page 4).
Regarding claim 7: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches each of the gutters (Catalano protrusion 130) may inwardly extend towards the substrate inside the upper chamber that may be of any shape with the objective of collecting water from the substrate material while creating air pockets underneath the gutters for air pruning of roots (the intended features are not taught due to the use of the word “may”).
Regarding claim 8: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the plant container may comprise at least one collection tank with an open top, and perpetually connected walls or, at least one wall that may take any shape or configuration to form an empty space with the object of collecting the draining water, underneath the hollow pins, and in close proximity to the lower end of the sidewall, and the collection tank may configure on the sidewall or, alternatively on the reservoir tank perpetually or, detachably connected with at least one opening configured to facilitate the transfer of collected water back to the reservoir tank (due to the use of the word “may”, these limitations are not required by the structure and therefore taught by the prior art).
Regarding claim 9: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the porous base plate comprising: the porous hollow cup configured with a cup wall (Roo, See figures on pages 1,4), a porous bottom (Catalano 220) with a plurality of apertures, and the cup wall may include a plurality of openings (Catalano vents 225) for further penetration of roots towards the water through the sides of the cup wall in addition to the porous bottom. (Catalano Figs. 2A,2B)
Regarding claim 10: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 8 as shown above, and further teaches the porous base plate comprising: the porous hollow cup may alternatively act as a self-watering embodiment due to the capillary action of the water through the substrate filled inside the porous hollow cup (this intended use is not required as it is not positively recited, therefore the modified reference teaches the claim).
Regarding claim 11: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the porous base plate further comprising: a basic connectivity mechanism configured for stronger and easy assembly (Roo page 4 shows Figs. Where base is assembled with the sidewall) that may connect the upper chamber to the reservoir tank, which may configure with any assisting components, or by any other means, not limiting to the scope of the present invention or; alternatively, a plurality of slot openings on each corner for receiving connection legs during assembly, with a solid surface around the porous area and a periphery wall around the porous base plate for stronger assembly (due to the use of the word “may”, the elements recited are not required by the structure).
Regarding claim 12: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the reservoir tank (Catalano bottom 110, Fig. 5A) further comprising: an open top, at least one sidewall, a compact bottom (Catalano Fig. 5A), and the test port (Riesterer apertures 44 can act as test port) for water testing with a basic locking mechanism configured to the open top edge of the reservoir tank for the ease of assembly with the upper chamber of the plant container or (Catalano Figs. 5A-5B); alternatively, the reservoir tank may comprise of a perpetually attached or threaded sidewall and the collection tank, wherein the porous base plate may be detachable with a generally available locking mechanism (this alternative is not required by the structure).
Regarding claim 13: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the reservoir tank (Catalano bottom 110, Fig. 5A) further comprising: at least one sidewall, the compact bottom, the test port (Riesterer 44) for water testing, a drain off nipple (Riesterer 40), and an overflow nipple (Riesterer 40) with an aperture on each nipple to be connected to external collection lines for removal of excess water (Riesterer apertures covered by caps 40 in Figs. However this limitation is able to be met, para 29).
Regarding claim 15: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the reservoir tank further comprising: the test port may configure on the outer perimeter of the top edge to use for manual, automated, or remote monitoring as appropriate with externally mounted devices, which may comprise of an open top, at least one wall forming sides, and a compact bottom, with a slot opening through the reservoir tank sidewall configured on the lower end of the test port to keep the water connectivity uninterrupted (Due to the use of the word “may” these limitations are not required by the structure, therefore the prior art teaches this claim).
Regarding claim 16: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 15 as shown above, and further teaches the reservoir tank further comprising: alternatively or in addition, one or more sensors or any other appropriate devices may configure to mount on the test port that may connect to a computer system for automated or remote monitoring, which may measure data including: water or aqueous nutrient solutions oxygen availability, nutrient levels/electrical conductivity, pH level, temperature, barometric pressure, light levels, humidity, carbon dioxide levels, a liquid level in the water storage and store the data on the computing system, wherein the computing system monitors the sensors, and communicates the stored data to a computing device and generate alerts (This is read to be an optional limitation due to the use of the word “alternatively”, as such it is not required by the claims and are read by the prior art).
Regarding claim 17: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the reservoir tank further comprising: a fair of handles, which may embed to the corresponding opposite walls of the reservoir tank, or alternatively to the sidewall as appropriate, for convenient handling of the plant container, which may be embedded, externally attached, or a simple slot open with any shape that is generally available for the use, or that may be configured in the future without any limitation and particularly based on the manufacturing and usage preferences (page 6 of Roo shows the use of handles on the sidewalls, under the title “1 Gallon air Pruning Container Installation Tutorial”).
Regarding claim 19: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches the container assembly may mainly be made of recycled plastic materials for sustainability, but virgin plastic, wood, clay, ceramic, forms, etc., or any other appropriate material, may substitute as appropriate (Roo pages 1-2 list a plastic material).
Regarding claim 20: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches alternatively configured with at least one upwardly extended sidewall characterized by the plurality of recesses (Roo, areas between protrusions can be considered recesses), the plurality of apertures (Roo, See Figs.), and the collection tank (Catalano 130) configured underneath the recesses with at least one opening (Catalano 125) inside the collection tank; perpetually or detachably mounted on, the reservoir tank characterized by the test port (Riesterer 44), configured to the sidewall of the reservoir tank; and, the detachable porous base plate (Roo page 4 shows assembly which suggests disassembly is possible) characterized by the plurality of apertures (Roo figures), and at least one downwardly extended porous hollow cup; for growing horticultural plants.
Claims 3,14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roo, Catalano, and Riesterer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US 20090183429 A1).
Regarding claim 3: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Roo as modified fails to teach the four sidewalls, each configured with two connection legs, perpendicularly mounted, which may characterize by a second beveled side edge corresponding to and connected to a first beveled side edge of an adjacent sidewall on top of the porous base plate; configured to mount on top of the reservoir tank for growing horticultural plants.
However, Kim teaches the four sidewalls (10), each configured with two connection legs, perpendicularly mounted (sides of 10, Fig. 3), which may characterize by a second beveled side edge corresponding to and connected to a first beveled side edge of an adjacent sidewall on top of the porous base plate; configured to mount on top of the reservoir tank for growing horticultural plants (due to the word “may”, the elements are not required by the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the sidewall as disclosed by modified Roo with the connections as taught by Kim with a reasonable expectation of success because providing means for securement decreases the likelihood that the apparatus becomes disassembled undesirably, further improving securement and durability of the plant pot.
Regarding claim 14: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Roo as modified fails to teach the reservoir tank further comprising: a plurality of snap fit devices configured with an opening to interlock with the upper chamber of the pot, a plurality of slot openings close to the edge of the open top may configure for connectivity with sidewall connection leg or; alternatively, any basic locking mechanism configured in conjunction with sidewalls, porous base plate, and the reservoir tank for stronger assembly.
However, Kim teaches the reservoir tank further comprising: a plurality of snap fit devices configured with an opening to interlock with the upper chamber of the pot, a plurality of slot openings close to the edge of the open top may configure for connectivity with sidewall connection leg or; alternatively, any basic locking mechanism configured in conjunction with sidewalls, porous base plate, and the reservoir tank for stronger assembly (providing fixing sidewalls 10 and fixing units 36 would allow for assembly).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the reservoir as disclosed by modified Roo with the interlocking components as taught by Kim with a reasonable expectation of success because providing means for interlocking would further improve the stability of the system decreasing the likelihood that the apparatus is disassembled undesirably.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art not relied upon are within applicant’s related field of plant pots.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGAR REYES whose telephone number is (571)272-5318. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 EST.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/E.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642