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
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PGPub 2021/0252528 (Steingrandt) in view of US PGPub 2021/0029893 (Cooley) and in further view of US PGPub 2016/0122042 (Breulmann).
In Re claim 1 Steingrandt teaches a pot-filler assembly configured to fill a pot with soil (actuated dry material dispenser Paragraph 1), the pot-filler assembly comprising: a soil hopper (hopper 2 in Figure 1); a soil conveyor configured to convey soil out of the soil hopper towards the pot (conveyor comprising feed pipe 3, dispenser 4 and exit spout 5); a measuring chamber defining an inner volume, the measuring chamber configured to be adjusted to increase or decrease the inner volume (measuring chamber at elbow 10 can be adjusted through the use of dose restriction cylinder 24, Paragraph 48); a funnel arranged below the measuring chamber (exit spout 5, Figure 1-5), the funnel configured to direct soil into the pot (Paragraph 42).
Steingrandt fails to disclose a funnel movable vertically into and out of the pot when the pot is positioned below the funnel, and a paper dispenser configured to arrange a sheet of paper between the funnel and the pot.
Cooley discloses a pot for growing plants wherein before receiving soil, a paper membrane is placed into the pot (Paragraph 7).
Breulmann discloses a filling funnel wherein the dispensing end of the funnel is movable between a raised and lowered position (filling spout telescopes to enter a destination container, Paragraph 59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Steingrandt apparatus by adding a paper membrane layer between the pot and the soil to maintain shape and drainage during used. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to make the outlet of the funnel able to be raised and lowered, as taught by Breulmann, in order to ensure the pot is filled without spilling.
In Re claim 2 Steingrandt discloses a measuring chamber suspended above the funnel (elbow 10).
In Re claim 3 Steingrandt as modified by Breulmann discloses a funnel configured as an inserter (spout can be inserted into a container, Paragraph 59 of Breulmann).
In Re claim 4 Steingrandt discloses a pot conveyor configured to move multiple pots to and away from the funnel (conveyor 6, Paragraph 42).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steingrandt in view of Cooley and Breulmann and in further view of US PGPUb 2022/0127025 (Sas Freixenet).
In Re claim 6 Steingrandt in view of Cooley and Breulmann discloses many limitations, but fails to disclose an upper gate above the funnel and a lower gate below the funnel.
Sas Freixenet discloses a dispenser having a funnel (conduit 4) having an upper gate (8a 8b) and a lower gate (16) to control the passage of material through the funnel.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Steingrandt apparatus by adding an upper gate above the funnel and a lower gate below the funnel, in order to more accurately meter the material dispensed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 are allowed.
Claim 5 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON KAROL NIESZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3920. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571 272 3607. 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.
/JASON K NIESZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753