Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/316,859

STACKABLE MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 12, 2023
Examiner
HAYES, KRISTEN C
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
AutoStore Technology A/S
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
885 granted / 1292 resolved
+16.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1325
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1292 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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. Claims 7, 8, 17 and 18 are 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. The discloses of the invention recites that there is one functional component and does not disclose a plurality, more than one, or a mixture of functional components. Claims 7, 8, 17, and 18 claim functional components in addition to the functional component of claim 16. Previous claim iterations claimed the functional component in the independent claim being “one of” a listed set of elements, with dependent claims parsing out different individual functional components. These components are not disclosed as being combined. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 16-18, 2, 4-6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bilge US 10,893,647. Regarding claims 16, 2, 4, and 8 Bilge discloses at least two stackable watering modules (Bilge, Figures 2 and 12) in a stack, each stackable module comprising: a functional component of a vertical farming system, a load-bearing frame comprising a first side support member (18) and a second side support member (20) held in a spaced apart and parallel configuration by a cross-member (42), the cross-member forming a part of the functional component, wherein the load-bearing frame defines a cuboidal volume (Bilge, Figure 2), the stackable module occupying the cuboidal volume, wherein the functional component is supported within the cuboidal volume (Bilge, Figure 2), wherein the load-bearing frame comprises upper and lower load-transferring edge surfaces (at 24, 26), wherein the functional component comprises a water tank (Bilge, column 4: lines 65-67), and wherein the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses (34) arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism of a module handling vehicle of a vertical farming facility. Regarding claim 5, Bilge further disclsoes each of the side support members comprising a vertical guide (38). Regarding claim 6, Bilge further disclsoes the cross member comrpsing frame for supporting a water tank (Bilge, column 4: lines 65-67). Regarding claim 17, Bilge further disclsoes the functional component comprising a lighting source (350) for illuminating growing plants (as best understood). Regarding claim 18, Bilge further dsiclsoes the functional component comprising a ventilation (at 32) source (as best understood) for ventilating plants from a side of the stack. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) rejected under Cosmann 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. Booker-Ugunde US 20210212270 disclsoes two modules having aload bearing frame, first and second support members, a cross-member, and a funcitioanl component of a water tank. However Booker-Ugunde does not disclose multiple modules in a stack, and discloses a photovolactic cell on an upper surface of the modules, teaching against stacking. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTEN C HAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-7881. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-6pm. 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, Michener Joshua can be reached at 571.272.1467. 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. /KRISTEN C HAYES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 6 earlier events
Dec 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Mar 10, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 22, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Jun 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 29, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12729548
FOLDING RAIL ASSEMBLY, COMBINATION OF FOLDING RAIL ASSEMBLY AND STANDARD, SCAFFOLDING SYSTEM, AND METHOD
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12721283
PLANT GROWING SYSTEM, PLANT CARRIER AND METHOD OF GROWING VERTICALLY GROWN PLANTS
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12721289
PRODUCTION UNIT FOR GROWING OR PROPAGATING ORGANISMS
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12714041
APPARATUS FOR GROWING PLANTS
3y 2m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12708107
PROCESS AND FACILITY FOR REGULATION THE AMOUNT OF OXYGEN SUPPLIED TO ANIMAL DRINKING WATER
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+21.5%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1292 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month