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 . Claims 1-23 are pending and examined below. This action is in response to the claims filed 12/22/23.
Examiner’s Note
Throughout the claims, elements such as “at least one”, “and/or” require only one of the following to be present to disclose the elements as claimed.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Such claim elements include the following:
image recognition device, disclosed in the Specification ¶7 as a camera
gripping means, disclosed in Specification ¶19 as “may be tweezers, a suction cup or the like, is fastened to a robot arm, which is freely movable three-dimensionally”
processing means, disclosed in Specification ¶48 as a tool
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 3 and 21-22 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 3 and 21-22, the phrases "or the like" and “namely” render the claims indefinite because the claims include elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "or the like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claims unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01.
The omitted elements are: “the neural network”.
Regarding claims 12-14, claim 12 recites the usage of “a neural network or an algorithm” whereas claims 13 and 14, both dependent upon claim 12, recite only “the neural network”. Due to the original claim requiring “a neural network or an algorithm” only one is required to disclose the elements as claimed. Dependent claims dependent upon elements not required in the preceding claims fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Therefore, if the prior art discloses the preceding claim utilizing the element not relied upon in the dependent claims (an algorithm) the omit the essential element of a neural network being introduced and required.
Due to the indefinite nature of the claims, the recitation of “the neural network” in claims 13 and 14 are interpreted as the same as claimed in claim 12, “a neural network or an algorithm”.
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 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.
(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.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Von Rundstedt et al. (US 2019/0183078).
Regarding claim 1, Von Rundstedt discloses a device and method for propagating plants including an apparatus for processing at least one plant, having at least one conveyor device for transporting the plant (¶10),
at least one image recognition device (¶28 -image recognition unit),
at least one gripping means for the targeted depositing of the at least one plant on the conveyor device (¶28-29 – gripper corresponding to the recited gripping means), and
at least one processing means for processing the plant lying on the conveyor device (¶28-29 – laser corresponding to the recited processing means).
Regarding claim 2, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the image recognition device has at least one camera for recording a 2D or 3D image of the plant (¶28 - image recognition unit 22 is preferably a CCD camera), and
wherein the image recognition device has a neural network or an algorithm, by which the plant as well as individual components and features of the plant can be recognized (¶28 - image recognition unit 22 is preferably a CCD camera, which is connected to the electronic control system and recognizes specific shapes corresponding to the recited algorithms to recognize plant components and features) and,
on the basis of the recognized patterns and features of the plant, the plant can be deposited in a targeted manner on the conveyor device by the gripping means and can be processed by the processing means (¶28-30 – image recognition unit recognizes shapes and patterns in the plant material for proper handling).
Regarding claim 3, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing means has at least one tool, namely scissors, a scalpel, a hot wire, a laser beam, a plasma jet, a water jet, tweezers, pliers, a spatula or the like, wherein the tool is selectively movable three-dimensionally (¶9, ¶18, and ¶35 - the plant is automatically cut by a blade, a laser beam, a waterjet, or a plasma beam into clones of the plant which are used to make multiple precise cuts on the plants once inside the enclosure corresponding to the recited selectively movable in 3D).
Regarding claim 4, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the conveyor device is a belt conveyor, wherein the material of the conveyor device reflects electromagnetic radiation and/or is permeable for a fluid (¶18 and ¶36-38 – the conveyor/belt is positioned in the sterile room and is designed to be sterilized with electromagnetic radiation corresponding to the recited reflects electromagnetic radiation and the use of a waterjet cutter implicitly discloses permeable conveyor).
Regarding claim 5, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing means is movable at the same time relative to the conveyor device, wherein the relative speed of the tool to the plant during the processing of the plant is 0 m/s (¶18 – both the conveyor and the laser are movable at the same time where the laser is movable such that it can follow the cutting lines on the plants therefore disclosing that the processing means and the conveyor device are movable such that the relative speed of the tool to the plant is 0 m/s).
Regarding claim 6, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing means is a laser, the focus of which can be concentrated on the plant transported on the conveyor device (¶18 - The laser, which can be a CO2 laser, for example, is mounted so it is movable in such a way that it can follow the cutting lines computed by the image recognition unit exactly and can thus cut multiple clones out of the plant).
Regarding claim 7, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein a plurality of processing means are arranged on the conveyor device in order to carry out successive processing steps on the plant and/or to simultaneously process a plurality of plants in parallel (¶8, ¶35, and Fig. 1 – laser making multiple cuts on each individual plant successively corresponding to the recited successive processing steps).
Regarding claim 8, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein at least one further gripping means is arranged at one end of the conveying device in order to grasp the processed plant or a component of the plant in a targeted manner and to supply same to a further processing step and/or to sort the processed plant or a component of the plant (¶6-8, ¶30, and Fig. 1 – individual clones corresponding to the recited processed plant or component of the plant is picked up via a second gripper corresponding to the recited at least one further gripping means for further processing).
Regarding claim 9, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the apparatus has a sterile or non-sterile processing space in which the at least one conveyor device, the at least one image recognition device, the at least one gripping means and the at least one processing means are arranged, wherein the sterile processing space has at least one introduction lock and at least one discharge lock (¶23-25 and Fig. 1 – sterile atmosphere in the room with airlock type access corresponding to the recited the sterile processing space has at least one introduction lock and at least one discharge lock where the conveyors, grippers, and lasers are inside the sterile room).
Regarding claim 10, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein a plurality of parallel conveyor devices, which can be operated at the same or different speeds, each transport at least one plant, which can be individually processed by a plurality of processing means (¶23-30 and Fig. 1 – multiple conveyor devices are disclosed in parallel processes to transport and process a plurality of plants).
Regarding claim 11, Von Rundstedt further discloses a method for processing at least one plant (Abstract),
wherein the at least one plant is detected by an image recognition device in order to recognize patterns and features of the plant (¶28 - image recognition unit), and
wherein the plant is deposited by a gripping means in a targeted manner on a conveyor device for transporting the plant (¶28-29 – gripper corresponding to the recited gripping means) and
is processed lying on the conveyor device by at least one processing means (¶28-29 – cutter/arms/conveyors all corresponding to the recited processing means).
Regarding claim 12, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein images of the plant are recorded by at least one camera of the image recognition device (¶28 - image recognition unit 22 is preferably a CCD camera), and
a neural network or an algorithm on the basis of the images is used to determine positions on the plant at which processing by the processing means can be carried out particularly efficiently (¶28 - image recognition unit 22 is preferably a CCD camera, which is connected to the electronic control system and recognizes specific shapes corresponding to the recited algorithms to recognize plant components and features),
wherein the plant is held by the gripping means during the recording of the images or is already lying on the conveyor device (¶9 and ¶28-30 – image recognition unit recognizes shapes and patterns in the plant material for proper handling while the plant is hanging on the first gripper).
Regarding claim 13, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the plant is deposited on the conveyor device by the gripping means, depending on the position determined by the neural network, specifically in such a way that the plant can be processed directly and optimally by the processing means (¶28 – image recognition unit identifies optimal cutting lines/positioning on the conveyor/gripper. Due to the preceding requiring “a neural network or an algorithm” the claimed neural network is interpreted as the same).
Regarding claim 14, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein a plurality of plants are deposited by the gripping means next to one another on the conveyor device, depending on the position determined by the neural network, specifically in such a way that the plurality of plants can be processed directly and optimally in one process step by the processing means (¶32-38 - a plurality of the plants are transferred from one conveyor to another conveyor via the gripper depending on the position determined by the image recognition unit to be optimally cut before being loaded and removed to prepare a new batch corresponding to the recited optimally processing in one process step by the processing means. Due to the preceding requiring “a neural network or an algorithm” the claimed neural network is interpreted as the same).
Regarding claim 15, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the conveyor device is assigned two, three or more processing means and a plant which is transported on the conveyor device is processed successively by the processing means (¶32-38 – plants are successively introduced into the clean room and then processed successively over multiple conveyors/arms/cutters).
Regarding claim 16, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the conveyor device is assigned two, three or more processing means and a plurality of plants are processed simultaneously by the processing means (¶32-38 – plants are successively introduced into the clean room and then processed successively over multiple conveyors/arms/cutters while other plants are simultaneously moved through the process).
Regarding claim 17, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing means for processing the plant, is at least partially moved at the same time with the plant, which is lying on the conveyor device (¶18 – both the conveyor and the laser are movable at the same time where the laser is movable such that it can follow the cutting lines on the plants on the conveyor device).
Regarding claim 18, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein a focus of a laser which is used as a processing means is moved with the plant, which is lying on the conveyor device, such that the maximum radiation intensity is directed onto the plant (¶28-30 – laser is directed to make pinpoint accurate cuts on the plant corresponding to the recited maximum radiation intensity directed onto the plant).
Regarding claim 19, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the conveyor device is operated continuously or periodically or cyclically, wherein the conveyor device is briefly stopped during the periodic or cyclic operation of the conveyor device for processing the plant (¶35-38 – the procedure is continued until the container 12 no longer has plants 13. The empty container 12 is then transported away by the conveyor element 18 and transferred out of the room 11 through the access 15. At the same moment, a new container 12 is transferred inward through the access 15 into the room 11 and a container moves into the position in which the individual plants 13 can again be grasped by the gripper 20 corresponding to the recited continuous operations. Given that the system operates continuously in the exemplary disclosure, requirements during periodic or cyclic operation are not required. However, when the continuous process does stop, the system stops corresponding to the recited periodic/cyclic operation).
Regarding claim 20, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein a plurality of plants on a plurality of parallel conveyor devices are processed in parallel and simultaneously by a plurality of processing means or a plurality of plants on a plurality of parallel conveyor devices are processed successively by a processing means (¶23-30 and Fig. 1 – multiple conveyor devices are disclosed in parallel processes to transport and process a plurality of plants).
Regarding claim 21, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing of the plant involves cutting the plant, cloning, sampling, meristemization, micrografting, selective processing of the plant tissue, growth stimulation, irradiation of the plant for bioactivation and/or pathogen elimination, disruption of the dormancy by perforating a seed coat, processing and treatment of seeds, seed coats, embryos, zygotes, proembryos, processing and treatment of plant organs for in vitro culture, such as meristem, axillary buds, root tips, leaf and peduncle pieces, adventitious shoots, callus cultures, solitary cells, microspores, ovaries, anthers, pollen, fruits and microcuttings, treatments against bacteria and fungal spores and/or a sorting process or the like (¶18 - The laser, which can be a CO2 laser, for example, is mounted so it is movable in such a way that it can follow the cutting lines computed by the image recognition unit exactly and can thus cut multiple clones out of the plant).
Regarding claim 22, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the plurality of plants are sorted according to type and quality, quantity, amount, shape, size or the like (¶17 and ¶28 – plants are moved based on detected shapes and size patterns corresponding to the recited sorted according to the shape/size).
Regarding claim 23, Von Rundstedt further discloses wherein the processing of the plant takes place in a sterile or in a non-sterile environment, wherein the at least one plant is transported automatically into the sterile environment and automatically out of the sterile environment again (¶23-25 and Fig. 1 – sterile atmosphere in the room with airlock type access corresponding to the recited at least one plant is transported automatically into the sterile environment and automatically out of the sterile environment again ).
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Horn et al. (US 2009/0288287) discloses a processing plant including multiple parallel conveyor belts and articulated arms utilized in processing material (Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Reda whose telephone number is (408)918-7573. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW J. REDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665