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 .
This is the first Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they appear to be copies of photographs or CAD files, as they contain grayscale shading. Details of the claimed invention are difficult to discern, and the drawings are not of sufficient quality so that all details are reproducible in the printed patent. See MPEP 608.02; 37 CFR 1.84.
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 Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: “methyl cellulose” should be one word to be consistent with claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 14-16 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.
In this case, claims 14-16 are indefinite because they merely recite a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced (see MPEP § 2173.05(q)).
In view of the rejections above under 35 USC § 112, the claims referred to in any and all rejections below are rejected as best understood.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Von Rundstedt (US 20200344960 A1), hereafter referred to as “Von Rundstedt”.
Regarding claim 1, Von Rundstedt discloses a growing medium (abstract, paragraph [0008], claim 7) comprising methylcellulose (paragraphs [0038]-[0039]) and kappa carrageenan (paragraphs [0015]-[0018], claim 1), wherein the growing medium does not comprise soil (paragraph [0020]), peat (paragraph [0020]), coir (it is noted that while paragraph [0028] mentions coconut fiber, it is an optional material), rock wool (it is noted that while paragraph [0032] mentions rock wool, it is an optional material) or an acrylate or acrylamide based hydrogel (there is no mention of an acrylate or acrylamide based hydrogel).
Regarding claim 2, Von Rundstedt discloses the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses comprising at least 50% w/w plant-derived hydrogel (paragraphs [0008], [0021]-[0023], [0090]-[0091] teaching that the invention, itself, is a plant-derived hydrogel) wherein the plant derived hydrogel comprises methylcellulose (paragraphs [0038]-[0039] and claim 7), kappa carrageenan (paragraphs [0015]-[0018] and claim 7) and water (paragraphs [0090]-[0091]; it is additionally noted that it is well known in the art that materials kappa carrageenan must be dissolved in water to form the hydrogel).
Regarding claim 14, Von Rundstedt discloses the use of a growing medium as claimed in claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1) in agriculture (paragraph [0012], as best understood).
Regarding claim 15, Von Rundstedt discloses the use of a growing medium as claimed in claim 1 in vertical farming (paragraph [0012], as best understood).
Regarding claim 16, Von Rundstedt discloses the use of a growing medium as claimed in claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1) in growing plants from seed (paragraph [0012], as best understood).
Regarding claim 17, Von Rundstedt discloses a kit comprising:
i) a growing medium as claimed in claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1 above); and optionally
ii) instructions for use (e.g., paragraphs [0090]-[0091]).
Regarding claim 18, Von Rundstedt discloses a kit comprising:
i) a growing medium as claimed in claim 1 (see analysis of claim 1 above) in dehydrated form (paragraph [0091]); and optionally
ii) seeds (paragraph [0012]); and optionally
ii) instructions for use (e.g., paragraphs [0090]-[0091]).
Regarding claim 19, Von Rundstedt discloses a process for preparing a growing medium (abstract) as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses comprising mixing methyl cellulose (paragraphs [0038]-[0039] and claim 7) and kappa carrageenan (paragraphs [0015]-[0018] and claim 7) with water and allowing to set (paragraphs [0090]-[0091]).
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.
Claims 3, 6-7, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 20110003936 A1), hereafter referred to as “Chen”.
Regarding claim 3, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, and further teaches carrageenan, which is a naturally occurring gum, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising a gum.
Chen teaches a growing medium (abstract and paragraph [0014]) including a gum (paragraphs [0015]-[0017], [0024], and claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include an additional gum, as taught by Chen, in order to improve water retention, gel formation, and stability of the medium (Chen at the abstract and paragraphs [0014]-[0017]).
Regarding claim 6, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising lignin.
Chen teaches a growing medium (abstract and paragraph [0014]) including lignin (paragraphs [0015] and [0020] teaching lignocellulose).
Von Rundstedt is directed to providing a growing medium with increased stability (paragraphs [0023]-[0025]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include lignin, as taught by Chen, in order to further improve the stability of the growth medium (note Rundstedt teaching cellulose as a shape-stabilizing material at paragraph [0038]).
Regarding claim 7, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising locust bean gum.
Chen teaches a growing medium (abstract and paragraph [0014]) including a locust bean gum (paragraphs [0015]-[0017], [0024], and claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include locust bean gum, as taught by Chen, in order to improve water retention, gel formation, and stability of the medium (Chen at the abstract and paragraphs [0014]-[0017]).
Regarding claim 10, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising xanthan gum.
Chen teaches a growing medium (abstract and paragraph [0014]) including a xanthan gum (paragraphs [0015]-[0017], [0024], and claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include xanthan gum, as taught by Chen, in order to improve water retention, gel formation, and stability of the medium (Chen at the abstract and paragraphs [0014]-[0017]).
Regarding claim 13, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising guar gum.
Chen teaches a growing medium (abstract and paragraph [0014]) including a guar gum (paragraphs [0015]-[0017], [0024], and claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include guar gum, as taught by Chen, in order to improve water retention, gel formation, and stability of the medium (Chen at the abstract and paragraphs [0014]-[0017]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Medhi et al. (US 20180325046 A1), hereafter referred to as “Medhi”.
Regarding claim 4, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising biochar.
Medhi teaches a growing medium (abstract) including biochar (paragraphs [0006] and [0017] and claim 60).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include biochar, as taught by Medhi, in order to improve plant cultivation by providing nutrient and water retaining properties (paragraph [0017]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Landis et al. (US 20210360883 A1), hereafter referred to as “Landis”.
Regarding claim 5, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising activated charcoal.
Landis teaches a growing medium (abstract and figs. 1-7) including activated charcoal (paragraphs [0021], [0024], and [0035])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include activated charcoal, as taught by Landis, in order to improve plant cultivation by increasing penetration of roots of plants into a gel material (Landis at paragraph [0035]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (CN 109328987 A), hereafter referred to as “Li”.
Regarding claim 8, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising sodium bicarbonate.
Li teaches a growing medium (abstract) including sodium bicarbonate (see attached machine translation, page 3, paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include sodium bicarbonate, as taught by Li, in order to provide sterilizing properties (machine translation, page 3, paragraph 3).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pluchon et al. (US 20210032179 A1), hereafter referred to as “Pluchon”.
Regarding claim 9, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising salicylic acid.
Pluchon teaches a growing medium (abstract) including salicylic acid (paragraph [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include salicylic acid, as taught by Pluchon, in order to improve plant cultivation by providing synergistic effects (paragraph [0055] of Pluchon).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rubin et al. (US 20130019813 A1 1), hereafter referred to as “Rubin”.
Regarding claim 11, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising ammonium bicarbonate.
Rubin teaches a growing medium (abstract) including ammonium bicarbonate (paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include ammonium bicarbonate, as taught by Rubin, in order to plant growth by providing a fertilizer (paragraph [0035]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Von Rundstedt as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Karusten et al. (JP 2020506681 A), hereafter referred to as “Karusten”.
Regarding claim 12, Von Rundstedt teaches the growing medium as claimed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach additionally comprising potassium bitartrate.
Karusten teaches a growing medium (abstract) including potassium bitartrate (see attached machine translation, paragraph [0250]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the growing medium of Von Rundstedt to include potassium bitartrate, as taught by Karusten, in order to provide a fertilizer to further promote plant growth (machine translation of Karusten, paragraph [0250]).
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure. The references have many of the elements in the applicant’s disclosure and claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessica Byun whose telephone number is (571) 272-3212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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. Agendas may be sent to HaeRie.Byun@uspto.gov.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Poon can be reached on (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.
/H.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/PETER M POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3643