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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species VI, Figs. 16A-16B and claims 1, 2, and 4, in the reply filed on 9/30/2025 is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-2, and 6 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12201070. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1.
Claim 2 is anticipated by claim 2, as it depends from claim 1, of ‘070.
Claim 4 is anticipated by claim 4, as it depends from claim 1, of ‘070.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkins (US 4149970) in view of Neufeld (US 20160316645), Raring (US 20110023359) and Lewis (US 8468741).
Regarding claim 1, Atkins teaches of (fig. 1) a modular aeroponic garden system (abstract, nutrient film plant growth system) comprising:
a sloped conduit (trough 1) having a first conduit opening (opening to the right of conduit 1) and a second conduit opening (opening to the left of conduit 1);
a reservoir (tank 4) is configured to store a volume of fluid (tank 4 stores fluid),
wherein the second conduit opening is a non-sealed connection with the reservoir such that fluid is configured to return to the reservoir via gravity (col. 8 lines 4-30, nutrient solution flows from tank 2 to trough 1 to reservoir 4 under gravity);
a plurality of plant support insert holes positioned in the sloped conduit (holes to hold the plants in conduit 1), each of the plurality of plant support insert holes configured to receive a plant receptacle containing plant roots of a plant (seen in fig. 1);
a supplemental nutrient film system, wherein the supplemental nutrient film system uses gravity to deliver the volume of fluid to the plants in the sloped conduit via a delivery conduit in fluid communication with the volume of fluid in the reservoir gravity (col. 8 lines 4-30, Pump 13 moves fluid from the tank 4 to tank 2. Nutrient solution flows from tank 2 to trough 1 to reservoir 4 under gravity).
Atkins does not appear to teach of a fog generation device configured to create an atomized fluid comprising a fog cloud of water droplets, wherein at least a portion of the water droplets are less than 10 microns;
a fan, wherein the fog generation device is coupled to the fan such that the fan is configured to distribute the atomized fluid throughout the sloped conduit to achieve a desired fog saturation within the sloped conduit;
a hardware control assembly communicatively coupled to the fog generation device and the fan;
wherein a first mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the atomized fluid of the fog generation device and the fan air movement device such that the atomized fluid is distributed within the sloped conduit to achieve a desired fog saturation; and,
wherein a second mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the volume of fluid of the supplemental nutrient film system out of the reservoir through the delivery conduit and to the sloped conduit back into the reservoir.
Neufeld teaches of a fog generation device configured to create an atomized fluid comprising a fog cloud of water droplets (fig. 2, nozzles 56);
a hardware control assembly communicatively coupled to the fog generation device (¶0043, pump 22 serves to pump the nutrient rich water through the system 10, including to the fog generation device);
wherein a first mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the atomized fluid of the fog generation device such that the atomized fluid is distributed within the sloped conduit (¶0046-0047, pump 22 operatively connects to the hose 24 and nozzles 56 distributes the atomized fluid within the sloped conduit); and,
wherein a second mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the volume of fluid of the supplemental nutrient film system out of the reservoir (20) through the delivery conduit (24) and to the sloped conduit (18) back into the reservoir (¶0047, hydroponic system 10 utilizes both the above described systems, which is including a hose 24 that simply pours nutrient rich fluid into or adjacent the upper end 38 thereby allowing it to flow down the growing tube 18 in a thin film).
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 Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Neufeld of a fog generation device configured to create an atomized fluid comprising a fog cloud of water droplets; a hardware control assembly communicatively coupled to the fog generation device; wherein a first mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the atomized fluid of the fog generation device and the fan air movement device such that the atomized fluid is distributed within the sloped conduit to achieve a desired fog saturation; and, wherein a second mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the volume of fluid of the supplemental nutrient film system out of the reservoir through the delivery conduit and to the sloped conduit back into the reservoir in order to deliver nutrients to the plant via fine droplets that better cover the root systems as motivated by Neufeld in para. 0046, finely control the hardware and to have multiple watering systems to better deliver nutrients to the plants.
Raring is in the field of aeroponics and teaches of (fig. 1A) a fog generation device configured to create an atomized fluid comprising a fog cloud of water droplets, wherein each water droplet is less than 10 microns (¶0012-0014, water droplets less than 30 microns provide significant benefits for plant growth. The subject system allows for the specific control of droplet particle size distribution over a broad range of saunter mean diameters from <1 to 50 or more microns. It has been found that droplets in the range of 5 to 30 microns are desirable).
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 Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Raring of a fog generation device configured to create an atomized fluid comprising a fog cloud of water droplets, wherein each water droplet is less than 10 microns in order to optimize the particle size distribution and flow rate such that the device can aeroponically deliver droplets that match a plant’s “root hair diameters” and maximize plant growth as motivated by Raring in the abstract and paragraphs 0012-0015.
Lewis teaches of (fig. 5) a fan (fan 320), wherein the nozzle (nozzle 350; Examiner notes nozzle 350 is analogous to the nozzles 56 of Neufeld) is coupled to the fan (320) such that the fan (320) is configured to distribute the air flow (col. 6 lines 15-31, air flow from the nozzle 350; Examiner notes that this air flow is analogous to the atomized fluid in Neufeld since both are generated and spread through nozzles) throughout the area (fig.4, lighting and airflow fixture 300) to achieve a desired air flow distribution within the area (col. 6 lines 15-31, fan 350 and adjustable air flow nozzle 350 operates to give the desired air flow to the plant below the nozzle; Examiner notes that air flow distribution is analogous to fog saturation);
a hardware control assembly communicatively coupled to the fan (col. 5 lines 28-41, computer control system 54 controls the system, which would include the fan);
wherein a first mode of operation the hardware control assembly (54) regulates the air flow of the nozzle (350) and the fan air movement device (320) such that the air flow is distributed within the area to achieve a desired air flow (col. 5 lines 28-41, computer control system 54 controls the system to yield the desired type of growth).
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 Atkins as modified by Neufeld to incorporate the teachings of Lewis of a fan, wherein the fog generation device is coupled to the fan such that the fan is configured to distribute the atomized fluid throughout the sloped conduit to achieve a desired fog saturation within the sloped conduit; a hardware control assembly communicatively coupled to the fan; wherein a first mode of operation the hardware control assembly regulates the atomized fluid of the fan air movement device such that the atomized fluid is distributed within the sloped conduit to achieve a desired fog saturation in order to yield the desired type of growth by further controlling the distribution of output, whether it’s airflow or atomized liquid, from the nozzles as motivated by Lewis in col. 5 lines 28-41.
Regarding claim 2, Atkins as modified teaches of claim 1, and wherein the volume of fluid is a nutrient solution (abstract, liquid is a nutrient solution) and the atomized fluid is an atomized nutrient solution (as modified by Neufeld, ¶0042 of Neufeld, reservoir 20 holds nutrient rich water, making the fluids delivered to the sloped conduit a nutrient solution and an atomized nutrient solution).
Regarding claim 4, Atkins as modified teaches of claim 1, but does not appear to teach of wherein fog generation device comprises a venturi tube, air compressor, a fluid inlet port, an ultrasonic transducer, or other high pressure liquid diffuser.
Neufeld teaches of claim 1, and wherein fog generation device comprises a fluid inlet port, or other high pressure liquid diffuser (¶0046, proper pressure to ensure fluid passing through the openings 54 or nozzles 56 for spraying the plants).
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 Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Neufeld of a fluid inlet port, or other high pressure liquid diffuser in order to use a atomizer that provides enough pressure to give adequate spread of the liquid to the roots.
Conclusion
The cited references made of record in the contemporaneously filed PTO-892 form and not relied upon in the instant office action are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, and may have one or more of the elements in Applicant’s disclosure and at least claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOE TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8530. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-6pm 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/ZOE TAM TRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3647