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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 2 has been amended to include a method step of eliminating the residual condensation from the greenhouse. The specification appears to be silent to the elimination of condensation from the greenhouse. The specification only discloses eliminating humidity from the system, not the elimination of condensation from the greenhouse. As such, the method step directed to the elimination of condensation is considered new matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Assaf et al., US Patent 5,392,611 (Assaf) in view of Yamanoi et al., US 2023/0056663 (Yamanoi) and further in view of Hilberg et al., US 2023/0134154 (Hilberg).
Assaf discloses a method for managing operating conditions in a greenhouse (20), comprising: disposing one or more cryogenic liquid/air exchangers (21, column 6, lines 44-48) in the greenhouse (as clearly illustrated in Figure 5); during all or some of the day (column 7, lines 1-4), injecting liquid into the all or some of the exchangers to exchange heat between the air inside the greenhouse and cold walls of the one or more exchangers, and thus lower the temperature inside the greenhouse and condense all or some of the residual humidity of an internal atmosphere on the cold walls of the one or more exchangers (column 6, lines 44-48: A suitable latent heat converter for carrying out the present invention is a heat pump that presents a cold surface to the air in the greenhouse affecting condensation of water vapor in the air).
However, Assaf discloses the use of brine water as the injecting liquid and not CO₂. Yamonio teaches within the analogous art of heat exchangers that brine and CO₂ are known equivalents for use in heat exchanger systems (reference paragraph [187]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use CO₂ in the greenhouse of Assaf for the liquid in the heat exchanger as CO₂ and brine are known equivalents and amounts to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Assaf further does not positively disclose the use of artificial lighting. However, Hilberg teaches within the same field of endeavor that it is notoriously well known that greenhouses which control temperature and humidity may also require multiple artificial light sources ([0003]) and that it is further known to utilize artificial lighting during low light conditions to augment natural lighting (reference [0034]) to optimize plant growth. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to
use artificial lighting as taught by Hilberg in the greenhouse as disclosed by Assaf to augment natural light in the greenhouse so as to ensure optimum plant growth.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the combination of Assaf, Yamanoi and Hilberg fail to render claim 2 obvious as Yamonoi teaches using carbon dioxide in a heat exchanger and would teach away for its intended purpose. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Yamanoi teaches brine water and carbon dioxide are both known liquids that are utilized in heat exchangers for the condensation of water vapor in the air. The applicant’s invention is directed to the disposition of a liquid/air exchanger in a greenhouse to exchange heat between the air inside and the cold walls of the exchanger. The applicant’s arguments directed to the hygroscopic process vs. a vaporization process are more specific than defined in the claims. Further, the arguments directed to the air exchangers are suitable for liquid to gas phase transition are not found within the specification. Yamonio teaches that both brine water and carbon dioxide are known equivalents for use in heat exchangers and as such, it is maintained that one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize carbon dioxide in conjunction with the teaching of a heat exchanger of Assaf as these two liquids were known equivalents utilized in heat exchangers.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY BERONA whose telephone number is (571)272-6909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-5pm.
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.
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.
KIMBERLY BERONA
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights