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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the recess 25 of amended claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Recess 25 is not shown in any of the drawings nor mentioned in the specification. No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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 1 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(s) 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. The recess 25/25’ now claimed in amended claim 1 is not mentioned described in the specification, nor is it shown or labeled in the drawings.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (US-20190307076-A1) in view of Jensen (US-7043877-B1) and Holbrook (US-10442617-B1).
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses a detachable flowerpot, comprising a flowerpot body (1), the bottom of the flowerpot body (1, see figs 1-4) being provided with a pot bottom (13, see fig 3),
a planting chamber being formed inside the flowerpot body (see figs 1-4),
characterized in that the flowerpot body (1) is composed of a plurality of pot rings (3-6, see figs 1-4), the pot rings (3-6, see fig 4) can be nested together,
wherein the plurality of pot rings (3-6) after assembly have an inverted truncated cone structure, with a conical surface inclined outwards from the upper end on its periphery (see figs 1-3).
Smith fails to disclose the pot rings being detachable, and a detachable structure is arranged between the adjacent pot rings; and the detachable structure comprises a first connecting portion (2) arranged at a lower end of the pot ring (11) and a second connecting portion (3) arranged at an upper end of the pot ring (11) and adapted to the first connecting portion (2), the first connecting portion (2) and the second connecting portion (3) are connected and fixed, and a sealing structure is arranged between the first connecting portion (2) and the second connecting portion (3), the first connecting portion (2) is provided with a hooked portion (21') and a recess portion (25'), and the second connecting portion (3') is provided with a groove (31') and a protrusion portion (33') adapted to the hooked portion (21'): The recess portion (25) is fit within the protrusion portion (33);the lower surface of the hooked portion (21) is a first inclined plane (21a): the protrusion portion (33) is provided with a second inclined plane (33a) in a same inclined direction as the inclined plane (21a) after the first connecting portion (2) and the second connecting portion (3) are fixed, an accommodating chamber (4a) is formed between the recess portion (25) and the second inclined plane (33a) of the protrusion portion (33); and a sealing ring (4) is arranged inside the accommodating chamber (4a): the first connecting portion (2) is provided with a first step surface (22), and the second connecting portion (3) is provided with a second step surface (32) adapted to the first step surface (22): and wherein the plurality of detachable pot rings (11) after assembly have an inverted truncated cone structure, with a conical surface (1la) inclined outwards from the upper end on its periphery.
Jensen teaches characterized in that the flowerpot body (1) is composed of a plurality of detachable pot rings (12a-d, see figs 21-22), the detached pot rings (11) can be nested together (see fig 25), and a detachable structure is arranged between the adjacent pot rings (pegs 30 and holes 32, see figs 5-6); and the detachable structure comprises a first connecting portion (pegs 30, see fig 6) arranged at a lower end of the pot ring (see fig 6) and a second connecting portion (holes 32, see fig 5) arranged at an upper end of the pot ring (see fig 5) and adapted to the first connecting portion, the first connecting portion (30) and the second connecting portion (32) are connected and fixed (see fig 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modified the pot of Smith with the detachable pot rings of Jensen with a reasonable expectation of success because this will allow for a more compact nesting configuration for easier transport or storage and this will allow for easier cleaning of the pot.
Holbrook teaches a sealing structure is arranged between the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion (hook, groove and sealing O-ring 178, see col 6, lines 25-50 and annotated figure 5 below), the first connecting portion (174) is provided with a hooked portion and a recess portion (see annotated fig 5) and the second connecting portion (172) is provided with a groove and a protrusion portion adapted to the hooked portion (see annotated fig 5); the recess portion is fit within the protrusion portion (see annotated fig 5); the lower surface of the hooked portion is a first inclined plane (see annotated fig 5); the protrusion portion is provided with a second inclined plane in a same inclined direction as the inclined plane (see annotated fig 5); after the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are fixed, an accommodating chamber (chamber for 178, see annotated fig 5 below) is formed between the recess portion and the second inclined plane of the protrusion portion (see annotated fig 5); and a sealing ring (sealing O ring 178, see fig 5 and col 6, lines 25-50) is arranged inside the accommodating chamber; the first connecting portion (72B, see fig 3B) is provided with a first step surface (76B, see fig 3B), and the second connecting portion (70B, see fig 3B) is provided with a second step surface (67B, see fig 3B) adapted to the first step surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
668
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 5
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modified the connection system with the connections and sealing O ring and of Holbrook with a reasonable expectation of success as this will ensure the planters stay securely connected so that the plants have a stable growing environment.
Regarding claim 10, the modified reference teaches the detachable flowerpot according to
claim 1, and Smith further discloses characterized in that the periphery of the pot ring is a conical surface with an upper end inclined outwards (see figs 1-3).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (US-20190307076-A1) in view of Jensen (US-7043877-B1) and Holbrook (US-10442617-B1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peterson (US 9521811 B2).
Regarding claim 3, the modified reference teaches the detachable flowerpot according to
claim 1, and Holbrook further teaches characterized in that both the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are of ring structures (see figs 1-2 and 4, ring shaped connections).
The modified reference fails to teach the ring structure of the first connecting portion is provided with a gap.
Peterson teaches the ring structure of the first connecting portion is provided with a gap (see fig 1, ring portion has gap between each level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modified the system with the gap between connecting portions as taught by Peterson with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide increased airflow throughout the planting container and easier disassembly of the pot for nesting.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. While Applicant did submit a “Remarks” section, Applicant merely restates the amended claims
in bold and does not provide any arguments of substance. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
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 KATHERINE ANNE KLOECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-5103. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00 -5:30 MST, F: 8:00 - 12:00 MST.
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.
/K.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642