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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not suggest or teach the limitations of claim 12, specifically that of “wherein a first insert body protruding upward and having a first insertion space therein is provided on the upper end portion of the first spacer, wherein a second insert body protruding upward and having a second insertion space therein is provided on the upper end portion of the second spacer, wherein, a first fitting main body is provided inside the housing and at the first end portion of the housing, the first fitting main body protruding downward and being configured to be inserted into the first insertion space when the first spacer is coupled to the housing, wherein, a second fitting main body is provided inside the housing and at the second end portion of the housing, the second fitting main body protruding downward and being configured to be inserted into the second insertion space when the second spacer is coupled the housing”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-11, 15-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheng (CN 211832085 U) in view of Moon (KR 20120060096 A).
Regarding claim 1: Sheng discloses a plant cultivator comprising: a main body (1) on which a cultivation package (10) with a growing medium (9) is seated; a light assembly (303) configured to emit light toward the cultivation package (Fig. 3); a housing (301) disposed above the main body and configured to accommodate the light assembly; and a spacer (4) configured to connect the main body and the housing, wherein the spacer includes: a first spacer (4) having an upper end portion which is coupled to a first end portion of the housing (301) and a lower end portion which is coupled to the main body (1); and wherein the housing includes an extension part disposed between the first end portion of the housing and the second end portion of the housing, and wherein the light assembly (303) is provided on a lower part of the extension part (Fig.3).
Sheng fails to teach and a second spacer (32) having an upper end portion which is coupled to a second end portion of the housing (22) and a lower end portion which is coupled to the main body (10);
Moon teaches and a second spacer (32) having an upper end portion which is coupled to a second end portion of the housing (22) and a lower end portion which is coupled to the main body (10);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the single spacer as disclosed by Sheng with the multiple spacers as taught by Moon with a reasonable expectation of success because providing multiple spacers would allow for greater amount of stability in the system, decreasing the likelihood that a singular spacer would fail or be damaged as there would be a greater amount of force distribution among multiple spacers.
Regarding claim 2: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further discloses wherein the light assembly receives power from the main body through the spacer (Sheng Fig. 3, wire 43 connects main body and light assembly via 41/42, to provide power).
Regarding claim 3: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further discloses wherein the spacer includes: a connector part (Sheng 43) configured to transmit the power from the main body to the light assembly (Sheng Fig. 3) and disposed on the first spacer (Sheng 4).
Regarding claim 5: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 2 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the connector part (Sheng 43) is positioned to be spaced apart from the second spacer (cable would be positioned in first space 4 of Sheng).
Regarding claim 6: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 2 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the connector part (Sheng 43) includes: a first connector (upper end of wire 43) disposed at one of the upper end portion or the lower end portion of the first spacer (Sheng 4); a second connector (lower end of wire 43) disposed at another one of the upper end portion or the lower end portion of the first spacer; and a wire (Sheng 43) configured to electrically connect the first connector and the second connector.
Regarding claim 7: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 6 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the first spacer (Sheng 4) includes: a first spacer body (whole body of Sheng 4) which is hollow and has a first end portion (Sheng 401) and a second end portion (Sheng 402), each of the first end portion and the second end portion of the first spacer body being open (This limitation can be understood to be met when the rods are extended); a first spacer insert (Sheng 42) disposed at first end portion of the first spacer body and configured to close the first end portion of the first spacer body; and a first spacer fitting (Sheng 41) disposed at the second end portion of the first spacer body and configured to close the second end portion of the first spacer body; wherein the first connector is coupled to the first spacer insert, wherein the second connector is coupled to the first spacer fitting, and wherein the wire is disposed inside the first spacer body (As illustrated in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 7 as shown above, and further teaches wherein a first fitting (Sheng 31) is provided at the first end portion of the housing (Sheng Fig. 5), and the first fitting is configured to be coupled to the first spacer insert (Sheng 42) when the first spacer is coupled to the housing, and wherein a third connector is disposed in the first fitting, and the third connector is configured to be electrically connected to the first connector of the first spacer when the first fitting is coupled to the first spacer insert (Sheng states “ the light supplementing mechanism 3 is provided with an upper connecting interface 31 for realizing electric connection, the top part of the connecting rod 4 is provided with an upper connecting joint 42 matched with the upper connecting interface 31”).
Regarding claim 9: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 8 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the main body includes a first main body insert (Sheng 11), and the first main body insert is configured to be coupled to the first spacer fitting when the first spacer is coupled to the main body (Sheng Fig. 3), and wherein a fourth connector is disposed on the first main body insert, and the fourth connector is configured to be electrically connected to the second connector of the first spacer when the first main body insert is coupled to the first spacer fitting (Sheng states “the base 1 is provided with a lower connecting interface 11 electrically connected with the driving power supply, the bottom of the connecting rod 4 is provided with a lower connecting joint 41 matched with the lower connecting interface 11”).
Regarding claim 10: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 9 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the fourth connector provided in the first main body insert is configured to be electrically connected to a third connector provided in the first fitting of the housing when the housing and the main body are coupled together without the spacer (As best understood, since the fourth connector and third connector are electrical connections, they could be connected via other means by one of ordinary skill in the art without the use of a spacer, such as wiring).
Regarding claim 11: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above, and further teaches wherein the upper end portion of the first spacer is configured to prevent the first spacer from being coupled with the second end portion of the housing (the first spacer 32 would include power cable 80 which connects control box 50 to substrate 21 as shown in Figs. 2-3, therefore this spacer prevents incorrect assembly as one of the four spacers is explicitly designated for this purpose, and improper positioning would prevent the apparatus from functioning).
Regarding claim 15: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 6 as shown above.
Sheng as modified fails to explicitly teach wherein the first connector is a male connector, and the second connector is a female connector.
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date as substitution of functional equivalent to substitute the mating ends of the connectors, to the corresponding female and male connecting ends since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395, 1396 (2007). Such substitution could be done in order to ensure that there is a strong electrical connection between the power components of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 16: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 9 as shown above.
Sheng as modified fails to explicitly teach wherein the first connector and the fourth connector are male connectors, and the second connector and third connectors are female connectors.
It would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date as substitution of functional equivalent to substitute the mating ends of the connectors, to the corresponding female and male connecting ends since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395, 1396 (2007). Such substitution could be done in order to ensure that there is a strong electrical connection between the power components of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 18: the modified reference teaches the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Sheng fails to teach wherein the housing defines a handle configured to be touched by a user to move the plant cultivator.
However, Moon teaches wherein the housing (22) defines a handle (22a) configured to be touched by a user to move the plant cultivator.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the housing as disclosed by Sheng with the handle housing as taught by Moon with a reasonable expectation of success because providing handles would allow for the user to have a greater amount of control when manipulating the height of the housing with respect to the main body.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheng as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsao (US 10881052 B1).
Regarding claim 17: Sheng discloses the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
Sheng fails to teach wherein the light assembly includes: a circuit board received in the extension part; and a plurality of light source elements provided on the circuit board, and wherein the housing includes at least one of a transparent cover or one or more holes through which light from the light source elements is emitted toward the cultivation package.
However, Tsao teaches wherein the light assembly includes: a circuit board (22) received in the extension part; and a plurality of light source (20) elements provided on the circuit board (Fig. 4), and wherein the housing includes at least one of a transparent cover or one or more holes through which light from the light source elements is emitted toward the cultivation package (Fig. 3 shows the use of multiple openings for which light could be emitted through toward the plants).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the lighting as disclosed by Sheng with the circuit and openings as taught by Tsao with a reasonable expectation of success because providing the modifications would allow for a greater amount of illumination to be applied to the plants within the body, achieving the predictable result of providing greater environmental control.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of Sheng in view of Moon would not arrive at the claimed invention as Moon teaches four sliding bars and not two spacers. The Office respectfully disagrees, as the apparatus claims only require that there are two spacers provided, the claims as currently recited however do not limit the invention to only two spacers. As such, Moon’s sliding bars (32) teach two spacers and two additional spacers, arriving at the claimed invention.
Applicant argues that the prior art of Tsao does not teach the limitations of the light assembly being provided on a lower part of an extension part. The Office respectfully disagrees, as within the provided image the light sources (20) would be provided on an upper surface, wherein the upper surface would be analogous to the extension part as recited in the claim. Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to clearly arrive at the limitations using the combination of art.
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 EDGAR REYES whose telephone number is (571)272-5318. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 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, 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.
/E.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642