DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “64” has been used to designate both “flow diverters” and “stem portion”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitations uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “mounting mechanism” in claim 1; “fluid distribution features” in claim 3; and “water diverters” in claims 9, 13, and 14; and “flow diverters” in claim 11.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to prevent it from being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structures to perform the claimed functions so as to avoid them from being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim limitations “mounting mechanism,” “fluid distribution features,” “water diverters,” and “flow diverters” each invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed functions and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the functions. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f);
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2019/245388 to Morgan et al. (“Morgan”)1.
Regarding claim 1, Morgan discloses a cultivation system comprising: a vertical film (110; pg. 7, lines 6-10) extending substantially along a vertical direction, the vertical film comprising a plurality of holes (112) each configured to receive a basket (pg. 8, lines 30-36), the vertical film having a major surface including a plurality of fluid channels (115) formed on the major surface to flow fluid primarily by gravity and direct the fluid to the plurality of holes (pg. 9, line 22 to pg. 10, line 5), wherein each of the plurality of fluid channels comprises a downstream end fluidly connected (via 114) to an opening of a respective one of the plurality of holes (FIG. 1a); and a mounting mechanism (120) disposed adjacent to a top edge of the vertical film (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 2, Morgan discloses wherein the plurality of fluid channels comprises one or more channels fluidly (115) connected to the plurality of holes (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 3, Morgan discloses wherein the vertical film further comprises a splash zone disposed adjacent to the top edge of the vertical film, the splash zone comprising a plurality of fluid distribution features (118) fluidly connected to plurality of fluid channels (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 4, Morgan discloses wherein the plurality of fluid distribution features comprises a plurality of fluid distribution channels (118, FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 5, Morgan discloses wherein the vertical film further comprises a recessed area at least partially surrounding each of the plurality of holes, the recessed area fluidly connected to the plurality of fluid channels (FIG. 1a, showing the area immediately adjacent to each hole, which is necessarily recessed).
Regarding claim 6, Morgan discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of fluid channels comprises a vertical channel and a lateral channel connected to the vertical channel, the lateral channel fluidly connected to the respective holes (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 7, Morgan discloses wherein the mounting mechanism comprises a first support (120, FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 8, Morgan discloses wherein the vertical film comprises an inclined portion and a vertical portion downstream of the inclined portion (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 9, Morgan discloses one or more water diverters each received by the respective holes and configured to control fluid flow adjacent the respective holes (pg. 8, line 36, describing growing containers (note: claim 1 does not positively claim the basket).
Regarding claim 10, Morgan discloses wherein the baskets each comprises a root portion and a stem portion connected to the root portion (FIG. 1a) (note: claim 1 does not positively claim the baskets).
Regarding claim 11, Morgan discloses wherein the root portion comprises one or more flow diverters (FIG. 1a) (note: claim 1 does not positively claim the baskets).
Regarding claim 12, Morgan discloses wherein the stem portion has a tapered shape (FIG. 1a) (note: claim 1 does not positively claim the baskets).
Regarding claim 13, Morgan discloses one or more water diverters to be selectively received by the holes (pg. 8, line 36, describing growing containers (note: claim 1 does not positively claim the basket).
Regarding claim 14, Morgan discloses wherein the one or more water diverters are configured to direct fluid from the at least some of the plurality of fluid channels to bypass the holes (pg. 8, line 36).
Regarding claim 15, Morgan discloses a water and nutrient catch disposed adjacent to a bottom edge of the vertical frame (pg. 9, lines 16-18).
Regarding claim 16, Morgan discloses a water line extending from the top edge of the vertical film to the water and nutrient catch (FIG. 1a).
Regarding claim 17, Morgan discloses wherein the vertical film comprises one or more polymers including polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (pg. 8, lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 18, Morgan discloses wherein at least some of the plurality of fluid channels comprise micro-replicated surface features (pg. 7, lines 8-10; pg. 8, lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 19, Morgan discloses wherein the vertical film comprises a chemically modified surface to reduce bacterial adhesion (pg. 7, lines 8-10).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morgan, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 20, Morgan teaches each and every element of claim 1, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the holes include one or more horseshoe shapes (FIG. 1a). Morgan, however, does not explicitly teach that the holes include horseshoe shapes of a perforated line. At the time of the effective filing date, it was well known in the art to form holes in films with perforated lines. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Morgan so that the holes include horseshoe shapes of a perforated line, in order to facilitate manufacturing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Claim limitations “mounting mechanism,” “fluid distribution features,” “water diverters,” and “flow diverters” each invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed functions and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the functions. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
There is not a clear definition of a “mounting mechanism.” The closest description appears at page 3 of the specification, which reads “In the embodiment depicted in FIG. 2A, the mounting mechanism 20 includes a pair of latching hooks 22 which can be attached to, e.g., a warehouse ceiling grid” (emphasis added) (Applicant’s specification at pg. 3.)
Also, there is not a clear definition of “fluid distribution features.” The closest description appears at page 4 of the specification, which reads “The splash zone 32 includes a plurality of fluid distribution features 34 in the form of, for example, channels, to spread out the fluid after the flow is received by the splash zone 32” (emphasis added). (Applicant’s specification at pg. 4.)
Also, there is not a clear definition of “water diverters.” The closest description appears at page 8 of the specification, which reads “FIG. 7B illustrates a side perspective view of a water diverter 70, according to one embodiment. The water diverter 70 includes a body 72 to be received by the hole 12” (emphasis added). (Applicant’s specification at pg. 8.)
The “flow diverters” are mentioned only at pages 7 and 9 of the specification, which recite “The root portion 62 includes one or more flow diverters 64 which can be fluid channels to distribute and direct water around the root portion 62” (emphasis added) and “Embodiment 11 is the cultivation system of embodiment 10, wherein the root portion comprises one or more flow diverters.” (Applicant’s specification at pgs. 7 and 9, respectively.)
35 U.S.C. 102
Morgan discloses that each of the plurality of fluid channels (115) comprises a downstream end fluidly connected (via 114) to an opening of a respective one of the plurality of holes (FIG. 1a).
Conclusion
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 MARISA CONLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4387. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, PETER POON can be reached at (571)272-6891. 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.
/MARISA V CONLON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
1 A copy of the foreign reference was provided by applicant on 03/11/2024.