Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/320,518

VERTICAL FARMING APPARATUS, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
May 19, 2023
Examiner
KLOECKER, KATHERINE ANNE
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
V-MAXX, LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 136 resolved
-8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
179
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
53.5%
+13.5% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 136 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 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 1-2, 4-5, 8-9 and 11-12 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. Claims 1 and 8 are rejected for lack of clarity in regards to the following limitation: “the ventilation system in combination with the enclosure defines a reversible airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically extending between the upper branch airways and the lower branch airways and passing the plurality of different levels of crop containers, the vertical airflow portion including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths.” This limitation states that the reversible airflow path includes a vertical airflow portion, but then later states that the vertical airflow portion includes each of the reversible vertical airflow paths. Firstly, the claim introduces “a reversible airflow path,” not a plurality, and therefore the limitation “including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths” lacks antecedent basis. Secondly, first the airflow path includes an airflow portion, while later the airflow portion includes the airflow paths, which is contradictory. Clarification and correction are required but no new matter may be added. Claims 2, 4-5, 9 and 11-12 are rejected by virtue of their dependency. 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williford (US 20050183327 A1) in view of Breza (WO 2020227820 A1) and Avila (US 20220039333 A1). Regarding claim 1, Williford discloses a vertical farming system promoting uniform crop airflow in an enclosure, the system comprising: a crop suspension system (see fig 2), including: crop containers (110); suspension extensions (140) connected to the crop containers; and an upper support (support 120) disposed at an upper side of the enclosure and connected to the suspension extensions (140, see fig 2 and 6), a ventilation system (vents, see para 0044); and the suspension extensions are arranged in a row extending in a second direction (crop carriers extending in a row, see fig 2); the suspension extensions comprise subgroups of different lengths relative to the upper support (see fig 2, supports of different lengths), defining a plurality of different levels of crop containers (see fig 2), a first subgroup of the crop containers that are connected to the upper support by a first subgroup of the suspension extensions having a first length, the first subgroup of crop containers being suspended at a first distance relative to the upper support (see shortest group of container and extensions); a second subgroup of the crop containers that are connected to the upper support by a second subgroup of the suspension extensions having a second length, the second subgroup of crop containers being suspended at a second distance relative to the upper support, the second distance being greater than the first distance (see second group with longer extensions). Williford fails to disclose the ventilation system including: a main upper airway disposed at the upper side of the enclosure and extending in a first direction; upper branch airways in fluid communication with the main upper airway, extending in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, and disposed at the upper side of the enclosure; a main lower airway disposed at a lower side of the enclosure and extending in the first direction; and lower branch airways in fluid communication with the main lower airway, extending in the second direction, and disposed at the lower side of the enclosure, wherein the suspension extensions are arranged in rows extending in the second direction, each row positioned between adjacent pairs of upper and lower branch airways, each pair including an upper branch airway and a lower branch airway, each row of the suspension extensions is vertically aligned with a corresponding reversible vertical airflow path extending between a corresponding upper branch airway and a corresponding lower branch airway, each reversible vertical airflow path is unobstructed along its entire height between the corresponding upper branch airway and the corresponding lower branch airway, the main upper airway and the upper branch airways are disposed above the plurality of different levels of the crop containers, the main lower airway and the lower branch airways are disposed beneath the plurality of different levels of crop containers, the ventilation system further includes a heater, an air conditioner, and a blower, the ventilation system in combination with the enclosure defines a reversible airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically extending between the upper branch airways and the lower branch airways and passing the plurality of different levels of crop containers, the vertical airflow portion including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths, and the blower is selectively in fluid communication with an external environment, thereby selectively providing a purge cycle of air from the external environment into the enclosure. Breza teaches a ventilation system including: a main upper airway (upper 1016, see fig 10A, see also 214 in fig 2) disposed at the upper side of the enclosure and extending in a first direction (extending vertically, see fig 10A); upper branch airways (1034) in fluid communication with the main upper airway, extending in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction (branch airway 1034 extending horizontally and perpendicular to main airways), and disposed at the upper side of the enclosure (see fig 10A); a main lower airway (lower portion of 1016) disposed at a lower side of the enclosure and extending in the first direction (extending vertically, see fig 10A); and lower branch airways (1032) in fluid communication with the main lower airway, extending in the second direction (branch airways 1032 extending horizontally, see fig 10A), and disposed at the lower side of the enclosure (see fig 10A), wherein the plant carriers are arranged in rows extending in the second direction (horizontal rows of plant holders, see fig 12), each row positioned between adjacent pairs of upper and lower branch airways (see upper and lower airways associated with each planting row, see fig 12), each pair including an upper branch airway and a lower branch airway (see fig 12), each row of the plant carriers is vertically aligned with a corresponding vertical airflow path extending between a corresponding upper branch airway and a corresponding lower branch airway (see figs 10-13, airflow path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051 with plants growing in a vertically aligned manner, as combined with the suspension extensions of Williford teaches this limitation), each vertical airflow path is unobstructed along its entire height between the corresponding upper branch airway and the corresponding lower branch airway (see figs 10-13, unobstructed path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051), the main upper airway and the upper branch airways are disposed above the plurality of different levels of the crop containers (see fig 2, upper airway above crops, Williford as modified by Breza would then have the upper airway above all the levels of crop containers), the main lower airway and the lower branch airways are disposed beneath the plurality of different levels of crop containers (see fig 2, lower airway below crops, Williford as modified by Breza would then have the lower airway below all the levels of crop containers), the ventilation system in combination with the enclosure defines a airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically extending between the upper branch airways and the lower branch airways and passing the plurality of different levels of crop containers (see figs 10-13, airflow path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051 with plants growing in a vertically aligned manner, as combined with the multi-level extensions of Williford teaches this limitation), and the blower is selectively in fluid communication with an external environment, thereby selectively providing a purge cycle of air from the external environment into the enclosure (venting to ambient air, see para 0031, using ambient air, see para 0026) 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 ventilation system with the ducts being placed above and below the crops and alternating in rows as taught by Breza with a reasonable expectation of success because the upper and lower airways ensure air is evenly circulated throughout the entirety of the plant growing chamber. Avila teaches wherein the ventilation system further includes a heater (heating chamber, see para 0038 and 0046-0048), an air conditioner (conditioning chamber, see para 0038 and 0046-0048), a blower (fans, see para 0029, 0038 and 0046-0048), with the enclosure defines a reversible airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically (reversible airflow, see para 0053), the vertical airflow portion including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths (vertical air flow, see para 0053). 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 ventilation system with the components of Avila with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow for proper heating and cooling, along with reversible air flow to ensure the climate is optimized based on specific plant needs. The modified reference teaches the claimed invention except a third subgroup of the crop containers that are connected to the user support by a third subgroup of the suspension extensions having a third length, the third subgroup of crop containers being suspended at a third distance relative to the upper support, the third distance being greater than the second distance. 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 supports of Williford to include a third set of supports at a different length with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow for variation in distance between the light and water sources for plants with differing needs and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 2, the modified reference teaches the system of claim 1, and Williford further discloses wherein the enclosure is a greenhouse (see abstract). Regarding claim 4, the modified reference teaches the system of claim 1, and Williford further discloses wherein the crop suspension system includes links connecting the crop containers to the suspension extensions (hook attachment structure, see para 0034). Regarding claim 5, the modified reference teaches the system of claim 1. The modified reference fails to teach wherein the crop suspension system includes lights. Breza teaches wherein the crop suspension system includes lights (1012). 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 system with the lights of Breza with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow changes in lighting based on plant needs to provide an optimal growing environment. Regarding claim 8, Williford discloses a method of installing a vertical farming system promoting uniform crop airflow in an enclosure, the method comprising: installing a crop suspension system in the enclosure by suspending crop containers (110, see fig 2) using suspension extensions (140) that are connected to the crop containers and an upper support (120) disposed at an upper side of the enclosure (see fig 2), and wherein the suspension extensions comprise subgroups of different lengths relative to the upper support (see fig 2), defining a plurality of different levels of crop containers (see fig 2), the installing of the crop suspension system includes: the suspension extensions are arranged in a row extending in a second direction (crop carriers extending in a row, see fig 2); suspending a first subgroup of the crop containers connected to the upper support by a first subgroup of the suspension extensions having a first length, at a first distance relative to the upper support, defining a first level of crop containers (see shortest group of container and extensions); suspending a second subgroup of the crop containers connected to the upper support by a second subgroup of the suspension extensions having a second length, the second subgroup of crop containers being suspended at a second distance relative to the upper support, defining a second level of crop containers, the second distance being greater than the first distance (see second group with longer extensions). Williford fails to disclose installing a ventilation system in the enclosure by disposing a main upper airway at the upper side of the enclosure, disposing upper branch airways in fluid communication with the main upper airway at the upper side of the enclosure, disposing a main lower airway at a lower side of the enclosure, and disposing lower branch airways in fluid communication with the main lower airway at the lower side of the enclosure, the main upper airway and the upper branch airways are disposed above the plurality of different levels of the crop containers, each row of the suspension extensions is vertically aligned with a corresponding reversible vertical airflow path extending between a corresponding upper branch airway and a corresponding lower branch airway, each reversible vertical airflow path is unobstructed along its entire height between the corresponding upper branch airway and the corresponding lower branch airway, the main lower airway and the lower branch airways are disposed beneath the plurality of different levels of crop containers, the ventilation system further includes a heater, an air conditioner, and a blower, the ventilation system in combination with the enclosure defines a reversable reversible airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically extending between the upper branch airways and the lower branch airways and passing the plurality of different levels of crop containers, the vertical airflow portion including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths, and the blower is selectively in fluid communication with an external environment, thereby selectively providing a purge cycle of air from the external environment into the enclosure. Breza teaches installing a ventilation system in the enclosure by disposing a main upper airway (upper 1016, see fig 10A, see also 214 in fig 2) extending in a first direction (extending vertically, see fig 10A) at the upper side of the enclosure, disposing upper branch airways (1034) in fluid communication with the main upper airway, the upper brand airways extending in a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction (branch airway 1034 extending horizontally and perpendicular to main airways), and disposed at the upper side of the enclosure (see fig 10A); disposing a main lower airway (lower portion of 1016) extending in the first direction (extending vertically, see fig 10A) at a lower side of the enclosure and disposing lower branch airways (1032) in fluid communication with the main lower airway, extending in the second direction (branch airways 1032 extending horizontally, see fig 10A), at the lower side of the enclosure (see fig 10A), wherein the plant carriers are arranged in rows extending in the second direction (horizontal rows of plant holders, see fig 12), each row positioned between adjacent pairs of upper and lower branch airways (see upper and lower airways associated with each planting row, see fig 12), each pair including an upper branch airway and a lower branch airway (see fig 12), the main upper airway and the upper branch airways are disposed above the plurality of different levels of the crop containers (see fig 2, upper airway above crops, Williford as modified by Breza would then have the upper airway above all the levels of crop containers), each row of the plant carriers is vertically aligned with a corresponding vertical airflow path extending between a corresponding upper branch airway and a corresponding lower branch airway (see figs 10-13, airflow path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051 with plants growing in a vertically aligned manner, as combined with the suspension extensions of Williford teaches this limitation), each vertical airflow path is unobstructed along its entire height between the corresponding upper branch airway and the corresponding lower branch airway (see figs 10-13, unobstructed path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051), the main lower airway and the lower branch airways are disposed beneath the plurality of different levels of crop containers (see fig 2, lower airway below crops, Williford as modified by Breza would then have the lower airway below all the levels of crop containers), the ventilation system in combination with the enclosure defines a airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically extending between the upper branch airways and the lower branch airways and passing the plurality of different levels of crop containers, (see figs 10-13, airflow path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051 with plants growing in a vertically aligned manner, as combined with the multi-level extensions of Williford teaches this limitation), and the blower is selectively in fluid communication with an external environment, thereby selectively providing a purge cycle of air from the external environment into the enclosure (venting to ambient air, see para 0031, using ambient air, see para 0026) 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 ventilation system with the ducts being placed above and below the crops and alternating in rows as taught by Breza with a reasonable expectation of success because the upper and lower airways ensure air is evenly circulated throughout the entirety of the plant growing chamber. Avila teaches wherein the ventilation system further includes a heater (heating chamber, see para 0038 and 0046-0048), an air conditioner (conditioning chamber, see para 0038 and 0046-0048), a blower (fans, see para 0029, 0038 and 0046-0048), with the enclosure defines a reversible airflow path including a vertical airflow portion where air flows vertically (reversible airflow, see para 0053), the vertical airflow portion including each of the reversible vertical airflow paths (vertical air flow see para 0053). 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 ventilation system with the components of Avila with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow for proper heating and cooling, along with reversible air flow to ensure the climate is optimized based on specific plant needs. The modified reference teaches the claimed invention except suspending a third subgroup of the crop containers connected to the upper support by a third subgroup of the suspension extensions having a third length at a third distance relative to the upper support, defining a third level of the crop containers, the third distance being greater than the second distance. 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 supports of Williford to include a third set of supports at a different length with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow for variation in distance between the light and water sources for plants with differing needs and since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St, Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 9, the modified reference teaches the method of claim 8, and Williford further discloses wherein the enclosure is a greenhouse (see abstract). Regarding claim 11, the modified reference teaches the method of claim 8, and Williford further discloses wherein the crop suspension system includes links connecting the crop containers to the suspension extensions (hook attachment structure, see para 0034). Regarding claim 12, the modified reference teaches the method of claim 8. The modified reference fails to teach wherein the crop suspension system includes lights. Breza teaches wherein the crop suspension system includes lights (1012). 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 method with the lights of Breza with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow changes in lighting based on plant needs to provide an optimal growing environment. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 02/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In regards to Applicant’s arguments concerning the alternating rows of plant carriers and the vertical airway path, figures 10-12 of Breza does indeed show plant carriers in rows, alternating with a pair of upper and lower branch airways as claimed. Additionally, Breza has an unobstructed airflow path between lower airway 1232 and upper airway 1236, see figs 10-12 and para 0051. The airflow is on either side of lights 1014 and therefore unobstructed. Further, Breza fig 12 shows full height air duct arrangement, as the air ducts are at the floor and ceiling levels. Therefore, the air path in regards to the plants of Breza in combination with the plant suspension extensions of Williford teach the limitations regarding the unobstructed airflow, and vertical alignment of the suspensions and the vertical air path. Applicant also argues that the top air duct of Breza is merely a return duct, not a “branch airway.” However, Applicant does not provide any special definition for branch airway, and therefore the term “branch airway” is broad and the upper duct of Breza satisfies this limitation. In regards to Applicant’s arguments over Avila, this reference does teach both vertical and reversible air flow, see para 0053. Additionally, it is well known in the prior art of record to have vertical reversible airflow for plants (see newly cited reference Sim). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The art noted in the References Cited document is relevant as it pertains to similar systems for plant cultivation. Specifically, Sim discloses reversible vertical airflow for planting systems. 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 KATHERINE ANNE KLOECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-5103. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00 -5:30 MST, F: 8:00 - 12:00 MST. 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. /K.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 19, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 06, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 25, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 24, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 24, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 21, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Feb 02, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582059
Bioreactor And Method For Culturing Seaweed
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582057
AUTOMATED PLANT GROWING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12543673
EPIPHYTIC SYSTEM AND EPIPHYTIC METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12527267
PRODUCTION FACILITY LAYOUT FOR AUTOMATED CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AGRICULTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12514181
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR PLANT POLLINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
43%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+35.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 136 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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