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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/06/2026 has been entered.
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 15-17 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.
Claim 15 is rejected for lack of clarity in regards to the limitation “recirculating a plant tray containing plant seeds and/or plants around a prescribed conveying path from a seed end to a harvest end through a growing environment defined between a conveyor and a hood of a plant growing apparatus.” The specification does not make any mention of the word recirculate or recirculating. Specification paragraph 033 does state that after the tray reaches harvest end 114, plants are removed and the tray 118 is sterilized and then returned to seed end 112 to begin the process again. Therefore, it is unclear if Applicant means to claim that only the tray itself is recirculated, or if the seeds and/or plants contained within the tray are recirculated and conveyed through the growing environment multiple times.
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) 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaplita (US-12069993-B2) in view of Chen (CN-104584847-A), Boyes (US-6360482-B1) and Vesty (US-20200367455-A1).
Regarding claim 15, Kaplita discloses a method of growing plants comprising:
conveying (conveyor 106) a plant tray (108) containing plant seeds and/or plants (see col 11, lines 36-39) around a prescribed conveying path (conveying path 104a-e) from a seed end to a harvest end (conveyor takes plants through life cycle, see abstract, see also fig 2D, seed end at 104a, fully grown plants at 104e, and harvest location 148) through a growing environment defined between a conveyor a layer of a plant growing apparatus (growing environment between conveyor and conveyor level above, see figs 1c and 2c and col 21, lines 23-39);
maintaining the temperature of the growing environment within a degrees F range (air
controller that maintains temperature, see col 7, lines 39-43, col 9, lines 60-61, col 14, lines 10-13); and Kaplita fails to explicitly disclose recirculating a plant tray containing plant seeds and/or plants around a prescribed conveying path, the growing environment being between the conveyor and a hood, spraying the plant seeds and/or plants with a water mixture for a predetermined number of seconds per hour and maintaining the temperature of the growing environment within a 2 degrees F range.
Vesty teaches recirculating a plant tray containing plant seeds and/or plants around a prescribed conveying path (drive assembly 128 recirculates growing tray assembly 2 around a prescribed growing path, see para 0215, 0225, abstract, and claim 1, see also 112(b) rejection above).
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 method of growing plants with the recirculation of the plant growing tray as taught by Vesty with a reasonable expectation of success as this will allow for a more environmentally friendly system due to reuse of the trays, and allow for plants to remain within the growing system until they are fully matured and ready for harvest.
Chen teaches spraying the plant seeds and/or plants with a water mixture a predetermined number of seconds per hour (watering by spraying once every 1 hours, each time spray duration is 5-10 seconds).
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 of Kaplita with the watering timing of Chen with a reasonable expectation of success because this will ensure the plants are not watered too frequently, which can result in overwatering and lack of absorption, and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Applicant does not provide criticality for the watering duration and timing in the specification.
Boyes teaches conveying (conveyor 24) a plant tray (flat 32) containing plant seeds and/or plants through a growing environment (22, made by cover 40 with sides 42 and top 44, see figs 2a-2b) defined between a conveyor (24) and a hood (44) of a plant growing apparatus.
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 method of Kaplita with the hood of Boyes with a reasonable expectation of success as this will ensure each layer is climatically isolated so that plants only experience the growing conditions while they are within the hood environment.
The modified reference teaches the claimed invention except the temperature range being 2 degrees. 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 method with a 2 degree temperature range with a reasonable expectation of success as this will allow for minor fluctuation while still ensuring the plants receive the most optimal conditions possible and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Applicant does not provide criticality for
Regarding claim 17, the modified reference teaches the method of growing plants of claim 15 and Kaplita further discloses further comprising illuminating the plants and/or seeds with growing light rays (see col 9, lines 60-61).
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaplita (US-12069993-B2) in view of Chen (CN-104584847-A), Boyes (US-6360482-B1), and Vesty (US-20200367455-A1) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Shi (CN-108541571-A).
Regarding claim 16, the modified reference teaches the method of growing plants of claim 15.
The modified reference fails to teach further comprising conveying a sterilizing tray containing sterilizing equipment through the growing environment alongside the plant tray.
Vesty teaches further comprising conveying a cleaning tray containing cleaning equipment through the growing environment alongside the plant tray (cleaning tray alongside plant trays on the conveyor, see para 0228).
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 cleaning equipment being conveyed with the plants with a reasonable expectation of success because this will ensure the entirety of the growing system is cleaned.
Shi teaches specifically sterilizing equipment (ultraviolet sterilizing lamp 19, see page 4).
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 light sterilization of Shi with a reasonable expectation of success because this will ensure the growing environment is free of bacteria, microbes and other organisms that could cause plant disease.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the cited references fail to teach the amendment “recirculating a plant tray containing plant seeds and/or plants around a prescribed conveying path from a seed end to a harvest end through a growing environment defined between a conveyor and a hood of a plant growing apparatus.” Vesty is now being used to teach the trays being recirculated and therefore arguments in regards to the recirculation of trays are moot. In regards to the rest of the amendment, the Office respectfully disagrees. Kaplita does indeed teach conveying trays with plants and/or seeds “around a prescribed conveying path from a seed end to a harvest end through a growing environment.” Applicant does not claim specific structure requiring the conveying path to be circular or preventing it from including elevators and therefore Applicant’s arguments that Kaplita fails to teach the conveying path are not persuasive. Boyes teaches the details regarding the conveyor and hood.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Those references cited on the attached 892 form, but not referenced in the rejection above, exhibit similarities to the present invention, particularly, Smith, which teaches a plant growing system, including recirculating trays, a seed end and a harvest end and a sterilizing means.
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 on (571) 270-5301. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-2 73-8300.
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
Prosecution Insights