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 17 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 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 17 is drafted in purely functional terms (“processor configured to combine”) and a person of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to recognize the claimed invention in the specification. The specification is devoid of any description of a “system” or “processor”. There is no disclosure of the physical architecture of the system, the interface between the processor and the mechanical components required to physical perform the “combine” step, or sensors or feedback loops required for a processor to regulate the materials.
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 1-16 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.
In regard to claim 1, the limitation “a first additional source” renders the claim indefinite. The term “additional source” is not defined by the claim and it is not clear what material or type of material can be considered an additional source (e.g. an additional nutrient source, an addition source of micronutrients, an additional non-nutritive component). For the purposes of examination and compact prosecution the limitation “first additional source” is interpreted as a “second source of micronutrients”.
In regard to claims 3 and 6-9, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance:
claim 3 recites the broad recitation “biomass ash”, and the claim also recites “wood ash”;
claim 6 recites the broad recitation “blood meal”, and the claim also recites “porcine blood meal”;
claim 7 recites the broad recitation “nitrate”, and the claim also recites “calcium nitrate” and “cal-nitro”;
claim 8 recites the broad recitation “bone meal”, and the claim also recites “fishbone meal”;
claim 9 recites the broad recitation “super phosphate”, and the claim also recites “triple super phosphate”;
which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claims are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In regard to claim 13, the claim recites the “first additional source” which is a physical material and then further describes the material as a source of application. This renders the claim illogical and one of skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination and to promote compact prosecution, the claim is interpreted as:
13. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of farm application by at least one of : broadcasting, banding, foliar application, drip irrigation, seed treatment, side-dressing, or control release.
In regard to claim 14, the claim recites “converting the fertilizer into soil”. This renders the claim indefinite because, in a typical sense, fertilizer does not “convert” into soil as understood by one of skill in the art. Soil is a complex mixture of minerals, organic matter, and natural organisms. The converting step lacks a clear boundary. For the purposes of examination and to promote compact prosecution, the claim is interpreted as:
14. The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of applying the fertilizer to soil.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Earp-Thomas (US Patent No. 1,515,016).
In regard to claims 1-5, 8, 10 and 15, Earp-Thomas teaches a method for forming fertilizer and the fertilizer formed (e.g. a medium) [pg. 3, line 112] by the method comprising the steps of:
combining (e.g. mixing) [pg. 3, lines 107-108] a first source of micronutrients, wherein the first source of micronutrients is a biomass ash in the form of wood ash, which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand is inherently derived from the combustion of wood feedstock (e.g. hard wood ashes) [pg. 3, line 123], a first nitrogen source (e.g. peat humus), a first phosphorus source, wherein the first phosphorus source is bone meal or phosphate rock [pg. 3, lines 118-119], a first potassium source, wherein the first potassium source is greensand (e.g. greensand marl) [pg. 3, line 115]; and a first additional source (e.g. sulphur flour) [pg. 3, line 124].
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haas (US Patent No. 318,371).
In regard to claims 1, 3, 6, 8, 12 and 15 Haas teaches a method for forming fertilizer and the fertilizer formed (e.g. fertilizer of superior quality) [lines 9-10] by the method comprising the steps of:
combining (e.g. grinding into a homogenous compound) [lines 22-23] a first source of micronutrients, wherein the first source of micronutrients is oyster shells [line 14], a first nitrogen source, wherein the nitrogen source is cottonseed meal [line 18] a first phosphorus source, wherein the first phosphorus source is phosphate rock [line 34]; and a first additional source, wherein the first additional source is biosolds (e.g. ground tobacco stems) [line 17].
Claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eltink et al. (US Patent No. 6,312,493),
In regard to claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11 and 15 Eltink et al. teach a method for forming fertilizer and the fertilizer formed (e.g. incorporating compounds into a basic composition prepared with the components listed in Table 6) [col. 16, lines 60-67; Example 4; Table 6] by the method comprising the steps of:
combining (e.g. in basic composition) [col. 17, Table 6] a first source of micronutrients, wherein the first source of micronutrients is zinc sulfate [col. 17, line 27], a first nitrogen source, wherein the nitrogen source is ammonium sulfate [col. 17, line 13] a first phosphorus source, wherein the first phosphorus source is monoammonium phosphate [col 17, line 14]; and a first additional source, wherein the first additional source is calcium nitrate [col. 17, line 19].
Claims 1, 3 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boote et al. (US Patent No. 6,372,008).
In regard to claims 1, 3 and 15, Boote et al. teach a method for forming fertilizer and the fertilizer formed by the method comprising the steps of:
combining (e.g. starting materials are combined in a mixing device) [col. 3, lines 15-20] a first source of micronutrients, wherein the first source of micronutrients is zinc sulfate [col. 3, line 17]; and a first additional source, wherein the first additional source is ferrous sulfate [col. 3, line 16].
In regard to claim 13-14 and 16, Boote et al. disclose application of the formed fertilizer granules by applying directly to the soil or applied to the soil as a foliar application [col. 2, lines 40-51].
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rosengren et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2016/0113191).
In regard to claim 17, Rosengren et al. teach a system comprising a processor (e.g. controller, whether it is computer 118 or within another processor) [0143] configured to combine at least two of the following to form fertilizer: a nitrogen source, a phosphorus source, a potassium source, a source of micronutrients, and an additional source (e.g. customize a blended combination of products using data from the nitrogen level, potassium level, phosphorus level) [0120-0122].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer A Smith whose telephone number is (571)270-3599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am-6pm 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, Amber R Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/JENNIFER A SMITH/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731 February 25, 2026