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 § 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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lindbo et al US 2018/0237221.
Regarding claim 1, Lindbo discloses a stackable lighting module comprising a load-bearing frame (10) comprising a first support member (sidewall) and a second support member (sidewall) held in a spaced apart and parallel configuration by a cross-member (62), and a light source module (60) attached to the cross-member, wherein the light source module is disposed to provide light to a growth module when the growth module is positioned adjacent to the stackable lighting module (Lindbo is capable of performing this functional limitation); whereby the load-bearing frame is configured to enable the stackable lighting module to occupy a cuboidal volume (Lindbo, Figure 10) within which the light source module is supported, and wherein the load-bearing frame comprises upper and lower load-transferring edge surfaces (Lindbo, Figure 9).
Regarding claim 2, Lindbo further discloses the light source module comprises electrical connectors (40) along upper and lower edges of the light source module, the connectors arranged such that, when a plurality of stackable lighting modules are arranged in a stack (Lindbo, ¶0042), the connector of a first light source module will engage the connector of a vertically adjacent light source module (Lindbo, ¶0043).
Regarding claim 3, Lindbo further discloses the stackable lighting module is a functional component of a vertical farming system (Lindbo, ¶0070).
Regarding claim 4, Lindo further discloses the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses (Lindbo, Figure 8c, ¶0044) arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism of a module handling vehicle of a vertical farming facility.
Regarding claim 5, Lindbo further discloses the first support member and second support member are each side support members (Lindbo, Figure 8b).
Regarding claim 6, Lindbo further discloses the side support members comprises a vertical guide (Lindbo, Figure 8b).
Regarding claim 7, Lindbo further discloses the cross member being a growth board, said growth board comprising a component of growth modules of a vertical farming system (Lindbo, Figure 8b shows the stackable module stacked in a vertical farming system).
Regarding claim 8, Lindbo further discloses the stackable module is arranged to be stackable upon a second load bearing frame that spacer module (the module of Lindbo is capable of performing this functional language), and the spacer module having a corresponding connector (40) (as best understood) in connection with the power grid, and thereby supplying electrical power to a stack of lighting modules.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Lindbo fails to disclose the light module being disposed to provide light to a growth module when the growth module is positioned adjacent to the stackable light module, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The growth module is broadly claimed as “adjacent to the stackable lighting module”, not in a particular location or relation to the lighting module. The structure of the lights 62 of Lindbo attached to the cross member 60 is capable of performing the broad functional language of the claim.
The lighting means 62 of Lindbo is contained within the cuboidal volume comprised of the sidewalls 10, shown in Figures 6A and 6B.
Different Figures of the Lindbo are used to demonstrate different arrangements and aspects of the invention. However, different embodiments are not conflated by the examiner to create new embodiments. Figure 8a is used to visually show a stack of the containers 10, which is disclosed throughout the specification such as by the abstract and ¶0049 of Lindbo. Different figures of Lindbo are used to illustrate broad limitations of the instant invention such as “vertical guide” and “side support member”.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the cross-member providing significant structural support between the sidewalls) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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
Prosecution Insights