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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 8/4/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document. It has been placed in the application file, but those references listed therein for which no copy has been provided have been struck through and have not been considered.
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 1-13 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 1 is unclear as to whether the latter recitation of “two longitudinal rails” (lines 6-7 of claim 1) is to refer to the same elements as the previous recitation of “longitudinal rails” (line 3 of claim 1), or to additional elements.
Claim 1 is unclear as to whether the latter recitation of “a defined chapel” (line 13 of claim 1) and “a destination chapel” (line 15 of claim 1) are to refer to the same elements as the previous recitation of “several adjacent chapels” (line 2 of claim 1), or to additional elements.
The remaining claims depend from claim 1 and are thus similarly unclear/rejected.
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.
(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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by JP H11299364.
Claim 1. An agricultural robotic gantry system (fig.1) for a greenhouse (fig. 1) comprising several adjacent chapels (1A, 1B) comprising - a first carriage (4) movable along longitudinal rails (3a, 3b) in a longitudinal direction (X, and/or into the page perpendicular to Y), the first carriage supporting and laterally guiding in a transverse direction (Y) a second carriage (6) provided with a tool carrier (9) for implementing a tool (10a) relative to a cultivation surface (surface in fig.1 supporting 2 thereon), each chapel supporting two longitudinal rails (3a, 3b, as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejection) substantially horizontal and facing each other, said chapels and said longitudinal rails extending in the longitudinal direction;- an inter-chapel switching mechanism (14, 15) positioned in an inter-chapel transfer zone (at 14, 15) extending between the chapels in the transverse direction, the inter-chapel switching mechanism being arranged such that the first carriage is operable either in a working configuration (condition of 6 in 1A) in which the first carriage is movable in a defined chapel (1A) in the longitudinal direction, or in a switching configuration (configuration of 6 switching to 1B from 1A) which is characterized in that the first carriage is translatable from said defined chapel towards a destination chapel (1B) in the transverse direction; the system is further characterized in that the inter-chapel switching mechanism comprises:- inter-chapel transverse rails (14, 15) substantially horizontal, facing each other and extending in the transverse direction between at least said defined chapel and said destination chapel; and - an inter-chapel switching carriage (7a, 7b, 8a, 8b) arranged to couple to the first carriage and translatable in the inter-chapel transfer zone via the inter-chapel transverse rails; and in that: - the two longitudinal rails are discontinuous (where right 13 is spaced from 14/15 and left 13) at the level of the inter-chapel transfer zone so as to form two interrupted sections (sections of interruption between right 13, 14/15 and left 13) defined on either side of the inter-chapel transfer zone; and - the inter-chapel switching carriage comprises two sections of longitudinal switching carriage rails (8a, 8b) facing each other, each positioned in the associated interrupted section.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H11299364.
Claim 2. The system of claim 1, wherein:- the longitudinal rails substantially horizontal and facing each other are fixed on each of two vertical uprights (2) of arches (arches of 1A, 1B) of each chapel at a defined height ,and - the inter-chapel transverse rails are fixed above (rather than below as claimed) the longitudinal rails at a determined height so as to allow the movement of the first carriage on the longitudinal rails. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inter-chapel transverse rails to be fixed below (rather than above) the longitudinal rails since there is no criticality (unexpected results) to either orientation over the other and thus would have been an obvious design choice in accordance with MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A) and MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Claim 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the inter-chapel switching carriage is capable of moving on the inter-chapel transverse rails. The examiner takes Official Notice that it was extremely well known in the art to provide a carriage with a motorized assembly, which one would have easily recognized to be more desirable than not (e.g., to reduce manual labor, to increase power relative to non-motorized, etc.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify as such.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The art of record does not suggest the totality of limitations, does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claims, nor was there any readily apparent cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the prior art to obtain the entirety of applicant’s claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on the attached PTO-892 and not relied upon above is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure due general structural similarity thereto.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights