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 listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the first sentence appears to be incomplete and contains a typographical error. The word “plasma” should not be capitalized. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-17 objected to because of the following informalities:
Throughout the claims, the word “plasma” should not be capitalized.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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.
For purposes of examination on the merits, the claims, as best understood, are examined in the Action below.
RE Claim 1: The following limitation: “a plasma functional liquid generating second equipped with a plasma functional liquid generating tank by storing a solvent, which generates a plasma functional liquid by introducing the plasma gas in the bubble state into the solvent” renders the claim indefinite because it reads as a method step inside an apparatus claim.
Claims 2-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 1, 4, 9, 11-12, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JPH 1999347566 (hereinafter ‘566).
RE Claim 1: ‘566 discloses a plasma functional liquid producing device (apparatus for producing water containing ozone), comprising:
a plasma gas generating section (para 0012) that generates plasma gas containing active species from plasma generating gas (para 0012-0015; also 0019-0021),
a plasma gas releasing section that releases the plasma gas in a bubbled state (para 0024), and
a plasma functional liquid generating section equipped with a plasma functional liquid generating tank storing a solvent, which generates a plasma functional liquid by introducing the plasma gas in the bubbled state into the solvent (para 0019-0021),
wherein an oxygen concentration of the plasma generating gas is 90% or more (oxygen tank per para 0020), and
wherein the Plasma functional liquid generating section comprises a releasing section capable of releasing the plasma functional liquid to a cultivating container for cultivating plants or a cultivating tank for hydroponically growing plants arranged outside the plasma functional liquid generating tank (at least para 0025).
RE Claim 14: ‘566 discloses a plasma functional liquid generating method that uses a Plasma functional liquid producing device comprising:
a plasma gas generating section that generates plasma gas containing active species from plasma generating gas (para 0012-0015; also 0019-0021), a plasma gas releasing section that releases the plasma gas in a bubbled state (para 0024), and
a plasma functional liquid generating section equipped with a plasma functional liquid generating tank storing a solvent, which generates a plasma functional liquid by introducing the plasma gas in the bubbled state into the solvent (para 0019-0021),
wherein an oxygen concentration of the plasma generating gas is 90% or more (oxygen tank per para 0020), and
wherein the Plasma functional liquid generating section comprises a releasing section capable of releasing the plasma functional liquid to a cultivating container for cultivating plants or a cultivating tank for hydroponically growing plants arranged outside the plasma functional liquid generating tank ((at least para 0025).
RE Claim 4: ‘566 discloses the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claim 1,
wherein: the plasma generating section is arranged outside the plasma functional liquid generating tank (Figs 1, 2), and
the plasma gas releasing section is a porous member that is immersed in the solvent stored in the plasma functional liquid generating tank and that releases the plasma gas in a bubbled state (para 0024-0027).
RE Claim 17: ‘566 discloses the plasma functional liquid generating method as recited in claims 14, wherein:
the plasma generating section is arranged outside the plasma functional liquid generating tank (Figs 1, 2), and
a porous member of the plasma gas releasing section is immersed in the solvent stored in the plasma functional liquid generating tank and releases the plasma gas in a bubbled state when the plasma gas passed through (para 0024-0027).
RE Claim 9: ‘566 discloses the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claim 1,
wherein: bubbles of the plasma gas are microbubbles or ultrafine bubbles (para 0012).
RE Claim 11: ‘566 discloses the plant factory comprising: the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claim 1, and
the cultivating tank (supplied to facility per para 0002),
wherein the releasing section supplies the plasma functional liquid to the cultivating tank (para 0020-0024).
RE Claim 12: ‘566 discloses the plant factory as claimed in claim 11,
wherein: the solvent is a liquid fertilizer, wherein the plasma generating gas contains at least nitrogen (para 0020)(air contains nitrogen), and
wherein the Plasma functional liquid generating section comprises a refluxing channel that refluxes the plasma functional liquid that is supplied to the cultivating tank from the cultivating tank to the plasma functional liquid generating tank (Figs 1-2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 2-3 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘566.
RE Claims 2 and 15: ‘566 discloses the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claims 1 and 14.
‘566 teaches air as an alternative to an oxygen tank and that ozone generation rate can be increased by supplying only oxygen to the ozone generator (para 0020).
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 the device of ‘566 such that the oxygen concentration of the plasma generating gas is 90% or more and 95% or less, 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 only involve routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II) Routine Optimization citing In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). This would be done based on application of the treated water per para 0003.
RE Claims 3 and 16: ‘566 teaches the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claim 1 and 14.
‘566 teaches air as an alternative to an oxygen tank and that ozone generation rate can be increased by supplying only oxygen to the ozone generator (para 0020).
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 the device of ‘566 such that the nitrogen concentration of the plasma generating gas is 0.5% or more, 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 only involve routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 (II) Routine Optimization citing In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). This would be done based on application of the treated water per para 0003.
Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘566 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2018-94541 A)(hereinafter ‘541A).
RE Claim 10: ‘566 discloses the plant factory comprising: the Plasma functional liquid producing device as recited in claim 1, and the cultivating container (Figs 1, 2)(para 0002 description of various use cases).
‘566 does not explicitly teach wherein the releasing section drops or sprays the plasma functional liquid on the plants.
However, ‘541 A teaches a functional liquid production device with micro plasma excitation (analogous art). ‘541A further teaches wherein the releasing section drops or sprays the plasma functional liquid on the plants (para 0001).
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 the device of ‘566 in view of ‘541A such that wherein the releasing section drops or sprays the plasma functional liquid on the plants as taught by ‘541A for the advantages of purposing the treated water.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 and 13 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 prior art of record does not disclose, either alone or in combination, the details of the porous member is made of copper, silver, or an alloy thereof (claim 5); wherein the plasma gas generating section supplies the plasma generating gas to a space between a first electrode that is applied with high frequency voltage and the porous member, which is a second electrode that is arranged to oppose the first electrode and that is connected to a grounding, and generates the plasma gas that contains active species by applying high frequencies between the first electrode and the second electrode, and wherein the plasma gas is intruded into the solvent in a bubbled state upon passing through the second electrode to generate the plasma functional liquid (claims 6, 8); wherein the plasma gas generating section supplies the plasma generating gas to a space between a first electrode that is applied with high frequency voltage and the porous member that is arranged to oppose the first electrode, and generates the plasma gas that contains active species by applying high frequencies between the first electrode and the solvent, which is a second electrode (claim 7); and the releasing section comprises a liquid spraying section that sprays the plasma functional liquid to the underground parts and a liquid supplying section that supplies the plasma functional liquid to the liquid spraying section (claim 13), along with the remaining limitations of the claim.
This statement is not intended to necessarily state all the reasons for allowance or all the details why the claims are allowed and has not been written to specifically or impliedly state that all the reasons for allowance are set forth (MPEP 1302.14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
These documents present alternative designs similar in scope which illustrate relevant features in comparison to the Applicant’s submission. The cited prior art include various pump systems for treating liquid and/or introducing gas to fluid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA E GRABER whose telephone number is (571)272-4640. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Timothy D Collins can be reached on 571-272-6886. 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.
/MARIA E GRABER/Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights