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 .
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sewing (DE 3537306) in view of Spiro (US 10,524,433).
Regarding claim 1, Sewing discloses a modular enclosure (garden house) comprising: a hexagonally shaped base 6 (Fig 1-3); a set of pillars 1 attached to the hexagonally shaped base and to a hexagonally shaped roof 8 (Fig 1), wherein the set of pillars 1 support the roof 8 (Fig 1). Sewing discloses the modular enclosure could serve as a garden house, but does not disclose the modular enclosure is a hydroponic enclosure comprising a growth subsystem comprising a tower having a top and a bottom, further wherein: the tower comprises a plurality of pods, and each of the plurality of pods holds a plant. However, Spiro discloses a hydroponic cultivation system 200 including a growth subsystem comprising a tower having a top and a bottom, further wherein: the tower comprises a plurality of pods 4, and each of the plurality of pods holds a plant (Fig 1A, 5B). Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the enclosure of Sewing to include a growth subsystem as taught by Spiro, in order to provide a hydroponic enclosure. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Sewing further teaches the base 6 comprises a hexagonally shaped lower floor support shell 3, 4 (Fig 3).
Regarding claim 3, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Sewing further teaches the lower floor support shell 3 comprises one or more lower floor support shell members (Fig 3).
Regarding claim 4, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Sewing further teaches the base comprises a hexagonally shaped floor 6a, 6b (Fig 3).
Regarding claim 6, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches a water distribution subsystem further comprising: an upper water return distribution subsystem 9, 13 to feed water to the top of the tower, and a lower water return distribution subsystem 39 coupled to the bottom of the tower (Fig 1A).
Regarding claim 7, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the growth subsystem comprises a nutrient delivery system (Col. 6, Lines 22-34).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches a communications subsystem; and one or more subsystems other than the growth subsystem comprising one or more sensors and the communications subsystem, further wherein: the communications subsystem is communicatively coupled to a user device via a network, the other one or more subsystems and the growth subsystem are communicatively coupled to the communications subsystem, and the other one or more subsystems and the growth subsystem are monitored and operated by an enclosure monitoring application running on the user device (Fig 1A), (Col 6, Lines 38-67, Col 7, Lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 10, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches a processing and control subsystem is communicatively coupled to the network; and the processing and control subsystem: collects data from the one or more sensors; and processes the collected data (Abstract, Col 7, Lines 12-19).
Regarding claim 11, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the processing and control subsystem comprises a hydroponic processing subsystem (Abstract, Col 7, Lines 12-19), but does not specifically disclose the hydroponic processing subsystem processes the collected data using one of: a machine learning algorithm, an artificial intelligence algorithm, and a deep learning algorithm. However, it would have been an obvious engineering design to desired algorithm according to the required system to control the growing environment that would optimize the growth of the hydroponic plants.
Regarding claim 14, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the lower water return distribution subsystem comprises a return water pipe 39; the return water pipe is coupled to the bottom of the tower (Fig 1A), but does not disclose the return water pipe comprises segments coupled to each other to form a hexagon shape. However, it would have been an obvious engineering design choice to have the return water pipe comprising segments coupled to each other to form a hexagon shape according to the desired amount of growth subsystems connected to each other and their position within the enclosure.
Regarding claim 15, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the lower water return distribution subsystem comprises a water tank 7; the water tank is coupled to the upper water distribution subsystem via a pipe 13; and the water tank comprises a sump pump 6 to distribute water to the upper water distribution subsystem via the pipe (Fig 1A).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sewing (DE 3537306) in view of Spiro (US 10,524,433) and further in view of Porter (US 4,275,534). Sewing discloses the roof 8, but does not disclose the roof comprising a hexagonally shaped lower roof support shell. However, Porter discloses a roof having a hexagonally shaped lower roof support shell 14. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof of Sewing to include lower roof support shell members as taught by Porter, in order to provide a stronger support for the roof. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 12, 13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sewing (DE 35373067) in view of Spiro (US 10,524,433) and further in view of Sahu (US 10,631,469).
Regarding claim 12, Sewing as modified by Spiro teaches the invention substantially as claimed but does not disclose the enclosure monitoring application allows a user associated with the user device to perform one of buying, selling or trading produce harvested from the enclosure via a digital marketplace. However, Sahu discloses a plant growing system including a user application program on a computer or mobile device that enables a user to buy seeds (Abstract). Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the enclosure monitoring application of Sewing and Spiro to include a user application program as taught by Sahu, in order to allow a user to buy produce via a digital market. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 13, Sewing as modified by Spiro and Sahu teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the processing and control subsystem receives commands from the enclosure monitoring application; and in response to the received commands, the processing and control subsystem supplies the collected data (Abstract, Col 7, Lines 12-19).
Regarding claim 16, Sewing as modified by Spiro and Sahu teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches the modular enclosure comprises a communications subsystem communicatively coupled to a user device via a network; an application runs on the user device (Col 6, Lines 38-67, Col 7, Lines 1-3); but fails to teach the application allows a user associated with the user device to perform at least one of buying, selling or trading produce harvested from the enclosure. However, Sahu discloses a plant growing system including a user application program on a computer or mobile device that enables a user to buy seeds (Abstract). Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the enclosure monitoring application of Sewing and Spiro to include a user application program as taught by Sahu, in order to allow a user to buy produce via a digital market. Such a combination, to one of ordinary skill in the art, would have a reasonable expectation of success, and would be based on ordinary skill and common sense before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 17, Sewing as modified by Spiro and Sahu teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches wherein: the communications subsystem is communicatively coupled to the growth subsystem; and the application enables the user to monitor and operate the growth subsystem (Fig 1A), (Col 6, Lines 38-67, Col 7, Lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 18, Sewing as modified by Spiro and Sahu teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches wherein: the modular enclosure comprises one or more subsystems other than the growth subsystem and the communications subsystem; and the application enables the user to monitor and operate at least one of the other one or more subsystems (Fig 1A), (Col 6, Lines 38-67, Col 7, Lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 19, see claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 20, Sewing as modified by Spiro and Sahu teaches the invention substantially as claimed and Spiro further teaches wherein the other one or more subsystems comprise at least one of: one or more sensors, a heating, ventilation and air conditioning subsystem, a water distribution subsystem, a lighting subsystem, a security subsystem, a lighting subsystem, and a power supply (Fig 1A), (Col 6, Lines 38-67, Col 7, Lines 1-3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EBONY E EVANS whose telephone number is (571)270-1157. The examiner can normally be reached 9am -5pm 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, can be reached at 5712726909. The fax phone number for the organization Kimberly Berona 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.
/EBONY E EVANS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights