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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the NPL titled Evaluation of photosynthetic activity by bioelectric potential for optimizing wavelength ratio of plant cultivation light by Murohashi et al., herein Mu in view of Goto et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0351328 A1; herein Go.
Re claim 1, Mu discloses a plant cultivation method characterized in that
a plant is irradiated with irradiation light (Methods & fig. 2, within the plant growth chamber via the LED panel) containing visible light having a photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 29 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 120 (µmol/m²·s) or less in a visible light region (Methods & fig. 1, wherein the experimental conditions have a visible light with a PPFD of 60 µmol/m²·s) with a wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less (Abstract, Introduction, and Plant bioelectric potential measurement, the LED panel produces light with wavelengths from 475-660 nm),
in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in a blue light region (PPFD- B) with a wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm (Abstract, Introduction, and Plant bioelectric potential measurement, wherein the blue light has a wavelength of 475 nm) is set to be 5 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 20 (µmol/m²·s) or less (fig. 1; Condition VI; Variety 3, wherein the blue light has a PPFD of 15 µmol/m²·s),
in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in a green light region (PPFD- G) with a wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm (Abstract, Introduction, and Plant bioelectric potential measurement, wherein the green light has a wavelength of 525 nm) is set to be 10 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less (fig. 1; Condition VI; Variety 3, wherein the green light has a PPFD of 30 µmol/m²·s), and
in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in a red light region (PPFD-R) with a wavelength of 600 nm or more and less than 700 nm (Abstract, Introduction, and Plant bioelectric potential measurement, wherein the red light has a wavelength of 660 nm) is set to be 14 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²-s) or less (fig. 1; Condition VI; Variety 3, wherein the green light has a PPFD of 15 µmol/m²·s).
Mu fails to disclose irritating in a second step which corresponds to a period from cotyledon opening to inflorescence development in a process of plant growth and a color temperature of the irradiation light is set to be 3000 K or higher and 4800 K or lower. However, Go discloses a cultivation method comprising steps of irradiating plants with during a period from cotyledon opening (para 146, wherein an early growth stage where the plant leave are small) to inflorescence development (para 146, the later growth stage where the leaves are large) in a process of plant growth (para 146, 211, & 260, wherein the LED sheet/chips are adjusted based on the given growth stage within the cycle) and the irradiation light with a color temperature of the irradiation light is set to be 3000 K or higher and 4800 K or lower (para 218, 242, 248 & table 1, wherein the color temperature 3000 K).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose irritating in a second step which corresponds to a period from cotyledon opening to inflorescence development in a process of plant growth and a color temperature of the irradiation light is set to be 3000 K or higher and 4800 K or lower however, Go discloses such steps and conditions. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the known technique of irradiating the plants during an early and late phase as taught by Go to improve the similar device disclosed by the prior art in the same way by stimulating photosynthesis in the strawberry plants. See MPEP 2143 I. (C).
Claims 2 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mu in view of Go as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Vuorinen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0150684 A1; herein Nen.
Re claim 2, the combination of Mu and Go discloses the invention of claim 1, Mu further discloses a plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 59 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 135 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less, in the visible light (Methods & fig. 1, wherein the experimental conditions have a visible light with a PPFD of 60 µmol/m²·s).
The combination of Mu and Go fails to disclose a first step which corresponds to a period from sowing to germination of seeds in a process of plant growth conducted prior to the second step, the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 59 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 135 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm is set to be 11 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 25 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) with the wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm is set to 20 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, and in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) with the wavelength of 600 nm or more and less than 700 nm is set to be 28 (µmol /m²·s) or more and 60 (µmol/m²·s) or less. However, Nen discloses a plant cultivation method comprising a first step (Table 2, the germination phase) which corresponds to a period from sowing to germination of seeds in a process of plant growth conducted prior to a the second step (Table 2, the seedling through flowering phase), the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 59 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 135 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region (para 42, wherein the PPFD is 80 µmol/m²·s) with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less, in the visible light (Table 2, the wavelength spectrum produced by the light is between 400 and 690 nm), the blue light region with a wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm, in the visible light (Table 2), the green light region with a wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm in the visible light (Table 2), and the red light region with a wavelength of 600 nm or more and less than 700 nm in the visible light (Table 2)
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to explicitly disclose a first step which corresponds to a period from sowing to germination of seeds in a process of plant growth conducted prior to the second step, the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 59 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 135 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm is set to be 11 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 25 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) with the wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm is set to 20 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, and in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) with the wavelength of 600 nm or more and less than 700 nm is set to be 28 (µmol /m²·s) or more and 60 (µmol/m²·s) or less however, Nen discloses a plant cultivation method with a germination phase within the claimed range. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the known technique of the stronger PPFD value taught by Nen to improve the similar device disclosed by the prior art in the same way by applying appropriate lighting to simulate growth of the strawberry plants. See MPEP 2143 I. (C).
The combination of Mu, Go, and Nen discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) is set to be 11 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 25 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) is set to 20 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, and in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) is set to be 28 (µmol /m²·s) or more and 60 (µmol/m²·s) or less. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to utilize a total PPFD of ~80 µmol/m²·s disclosed by Nen with the lighting ratio discloses in condition VI variety 2 in order to gauge the appropriate intensity, since it has been held that that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable supports a case of obviousness when the general conditions of the claim are met by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 II. A.
Re claim 6, the combination of Mu, Go, and Nen discloses the invention of claim 2, Mu as modified by Go and Nen further discloses a first peak value which is a peak value at a maximum wavelength of the irradiation light is 400 nm or more and 500 nm or less in the first step and the second step (para 229-230, P2 with a center wavelength of 440-460 nm), and a second peak value which is a peak value at the next highest wavelengths of the irradiation light after the first peak value is 550 nm or more and 700 nm or less (para 229-230, P1 with a center wavelength of 610-630 nm).
Claim 3-4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mu in view of Go as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of the NPL titled Effects of partial replacement of red by green light in the growth spectrum on photomorphogenesis and photosynthesis in tomato plants by Trojak et al.; herein Jak and Dupras et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0272816 A1; herein Dup.
Re claim 3, the combination of Mu and Go discloses the invention of claim 2, Mu as modified by Go further discloses the plant belonging to the family Rosaceae (Sample Plant), and in the second step, the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density in the visible light region with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) with the wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm (see the rejection of claim 1).
The combination of Mu and Go fails to disclose in the second step, the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 90 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 120 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) set to be 10 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 20 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) set to be 30 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) set to be 30 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, and the color temperature of the irradiation light in the second step is set to be 4000 K or higher and 4500 K or lower. However, Jak discloses a plant irradiated with light containing visible light having a photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 90 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 120 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region (abstract, the plants are cultivated under 100 µmol/m²·s) with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and 700 nm or less (Plant material and light treatment, the wavelength spectrum covered by the LED modules is 428-681 nm), in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) with the wavelength of 400 nm or more and less than 500 nm (Plant material and light treatment, the wavelength spectrum covered by the blue light modules is 428-448 nm) is set to be 10 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 20 (µmol/m²·s) or less (abstract and table 1, G10-G40), in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) with the wavelength of 500 nm or more and less than 600 nm (Plant material and light treatment, the wavelength spectrum covered by the green light modules is 505-545 nm) is set to be 30 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less (abstract and table 1, G30-G40), in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) with the wavelength of 600 nm or more and less than 700 nm (Plant material and light treatment, the wavelength spectrum covered by the red light modules is 656-681 nm) is set to be 30 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less (abstract and table 1, G30-G40).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose in the second step, the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light containing the visible light having the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD-VL) of 90 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 120 (µmol/m²·s) or less in the visible light region, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the blue light region (PPFD- B) set to be 10 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 20 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the green light region (PPFD-G) set to be 30 (µmol/m²·s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, in the visible light, the photosynthetic photon flux density in the red light region (PPFD- R) set to be 30 (µmol/m²-s) or more and 50 (µmol/m²·s) or less, and the color temperature of the irradiation light in the second step is set to be 4000 K or higher and 4500 K or lower however, Jak discloses such a ratio of photosynthetic photon flux densities. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the known technique of the lighting recipe taught by Jak to improve the similar device disclosed by the prior art in the same way by allowing stronger flux densities to be analyzed. See MPEP 2143 I. (C).
The combination of Mu, Go, and Jak fails to disclose the color temperature of the irradiation light in the second step is set to be 4000 K or higher and 4500 K or lower. However, Dup discloses irradiating plants wherein the color temperature of an irradiation light is set to be 4000 K or higher and 4500 K or lower (para 189, wherein the color temperature is 4200 K)
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose the color temperature of the irradiation light in the second step is set to be 4000 K or higher and 4500 K or lower however, Dup discloses such a color temperature. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the known technique of a color temperature of 4200 K taught by Dup to improve the similar device disclosed by the prior art in the same way by utilizing a higher color temperature to simulate the plant’s development. See MPEP 2143 I. (C).
Re claim 4, the combination of Mu, Go, and Jak discloses the invention of claim 3, Mu further discloses characterized in that the plant is strawberry (abstract, introduction, and sample plant, the varieties of strawberries).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mu in view of Go and Nen as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Kajiyama, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0170197 A1; herein Yama.
Re claim 5, the combination of Mu, Go, and Nen discloses the invention of claim 2, the combination fails to disclose characterized in that the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light in a temperature environment of 9°C or higher and 28°C or lower in the first and second steps. However, Yama discloses a plant is irradiated with an irradiation light in a temperature environment of 9°C or higher and 28°C or lower (para 111 & 143, wherein the environment is set to 22℃).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose characterized in that the plant is irradiated with the irradiation light in a temperature environment of 9°C or higher and 28°C or lower in the first and second steps however, Yama discloses such an environment. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the prior art element of the 22℃ environment taught by Yama to the cultivation method of the prior art to yield the predictable result of a stable room temperature for cultivating plants. See MPEP 2143 I. (A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE P MACCRATE whose telephone number is (571)272-5215. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 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, Joshua J Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
/NICOLE PAIGE MACCRATE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights