DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
As per the submission to the Office filed on 06/23/2026 the following represents the changes from the previous claims: Claims 1-4, 7-10, 12-13, 15 were amended, and Claims 5-6 were canceled. Claims 1-4 and 7-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 02/17/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
The information disclosure statement filed 02/17/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1), which requires the following: (1) a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office; (2) U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications listed in a section separately from citations of other documents; (3) the application number of the application in which the information disclosure statement is being submitted on each page of the list; (4) a column that provides a blank space next to each document to be considered, for the examiner’s initials; and (5) a heading that clearly indicates that the list is an information disclosure statement. The information disclosure statement has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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 7 and 12 are 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 claim 7, the limitation “liquid” in line 2 is unclear because is it referring to a different liquid than what was stated in claim 1, line 3? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same liquid and it is recommended that “the” be inserted before “liquid” in claim 7.
For claim 12, the limitation “a plurality of pod holders” in line 2 is unclear because is it referring to a different plurality of pod holders than what was stated in claim 1, lines 4-5? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same plurality of pod holders and it is recommended that “the” be inserted before “plurality of pod holders” in claim 12.
Also, for claim 12, the limitation “a plurality of channels” in lines 2-3 is unclear because is it referring to a different plurality of recessed channels than what was stated in claim 1, line 5?
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 1-4, 8, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher (US 20220124965 A1) in view of Herbert (US 20190289802 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches a plant-growing system (title, disclosure) comprising:
a reservoir system (101 and 201) comprising: a base (101) forming a reservoir (fig. 1 and [0053]) configured to hold a liquid ([0053]); and a top plate (102 and top plate of 201), forming a plurality of pod holders (fig. 2 depicts a plurality of central openings within 201) and a plurality of recessed channels (the walls of the plurality of openings on top plate 201 in fig. 2 form recessed channels) separated from the reservoir (fig. 2), wherein a first recessed channel (the channels between the left and middle pod holders in fig. 2) of the plurality of recessed channels forms a passage (opening of the first channel in fig. 2) from a first pod holder (pod holder on far left of fig. 2) to a second pod holder (pod holder in the middle in fig. 2; as the openings of the first channel will allow for liquid to travel from the first pod holder to the second pod holder, and so forms a passage), wherein the top plate is supported by the base (fig. 1), wherein at least one pod holder of the plurality of pod holders corresponds to a recessed portion (figs. 1 and 2 depict a recessed portion around the rim of 102 and walls of 201 leading into the plurality of pod holders) in the top plate (figs. 1-2 as the at least one pod holder corresponds to the recessed portion of 102 when placed on top of 102 and the opening of the pod holder corresponds to the walls of 201), wherein the at least one pod holder, a top surface of the top plate (top surface of 102 and top plate of 201), and wherein the at least one pod holder forms a hole (central opening of 201 in fig. 2) configured to allow entry of liquid from the reservoir (the opening of the central opening of 201 in fig. 2 will allow for the entry of liquid from the reservoir); and at least one pod (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 2) configured to be removably inserted in the at least one pod holder (fig. 2 and [0058]), the at least one pod comprising: a support plate (105 and 202); and a wick (203) comprising a first end (right end of 203 in fig. 5) and a second end (left end of 203 in fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
572
491
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Schumacher is silent wherein the at least one pod holder comprises: a bottom portion, at least one side portion extending from the top surface of the top plate to the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder; and the wick is configured to be suspended above the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder.
Herbert teaches wherein the at least one pod holder (508 as the cup shaped base and plate shaped planter of 508 will allow for it to hold a pod [0038] and so 508 is a pod holder) comprises: a bottom portion (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 8), at least one side portion (sides of 532) extending from the top surface of the top plate (536) to the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder (figs. 6-7 and [0038]); and the wick (512) is configured to be suspended above the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 8 as fig. 8 depicts a space between the wick 512 and the at least one pod holder 508).
PNG
media_image2.png
371
459
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one pod holder of Schumacher to comprise of a bottom portion, at least one side portion extending from the top surface of the top plate to the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder; and the wick is configured to be suspended above the bottom portion of the at least one pod holder as taught by Herbert in order to securely contain the plant (abstract of Herbert) and prevent the wick from bending and allow for the wick to have a faster absorption as it is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate comprises: a base plate (base of 105 and 202) comprising a top side (top of 105 and 202) and a bottom side (bottom of 105 and 202); a rim (rim of 105 in fig. 2) extending from a periphery of the base plate away from the bottom side (fig. 2); and a base support (301) extending from the bottom side (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 2, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate further comprises: a first hole (303) extending through the base plate (fig. 3); a second hole (304) extending through the base plate (fig. 3); and a recessed portion (302) in the base plate (fig. 3), the recessed portion extending between the first hole and the second hole (fig. 3, note there are two recess channels 302 that functionally perform as one unit as shown in figs. 3 and 5, i.e. a right and left side where this channel is broadly readable as “extending between” the first hole 303 and the second hole 304 since the wick member 203 is captured in both of these recesses 302 while the wick’s two ends traverses through each of the holes 303 and 304 as clearly shown in fig. 5), wherein the recessed portion is configured to receive the wick so that the first end extends through the first hole and the second end extends through the second hole (figs. 1-2 and 5).
Regarding claim 4, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 3, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate further comprises a plurality of third holes (fig. 2 depicts 105 to have a plurality of third holes and fig. 3 depicts 202 to have a plurality of third holes) extending through the base plate (figs. 2-3), the plurality of third holes located within a perimeter defined by the base support (figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 8, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the wick is configured to deliver the liquid to a seed pad (205) when the at least one pod is inserted into the at least one pod holder (figs. 2 and 5 and [0059]).
Regarding claim 12, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the at least one pod holder comprises a plurality of pod holders (central opening of 201 in fig. 2), wherein the top plate further comprises a plurality of channels (plurality of openings on top plate 201 in fig. 2) extending between adjacent pod holders of the plurality of pod holders (fig. 2 as the channels extend between adjacent pod holders), wherein the plurality of channels allow the liquid to be exchanged between the plurality of pod holders (fig. 2 as the plurality of channels are placed between the plurality of pod holders, and so will allow the liquid to be exchanged between the plurality of pod holders).
Regarding claim 13, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate is configured to hold the wick in contact with a seed pad (fig. 5).
Regarding claim 14, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the liquid comprises water and one or more plant nutrients (abstract and [0042]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher as modified by Herbert as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ware (US 4299054 A).
Regarding claim 7, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 1, but is silent wherein the bottom portion comprises one or more holes, wherein the one or more holes are configured to allow liquid in the base to enter the at least one pod holder.
Ware teaches the plant-growing system (10), wherein the bottom portion (27) comprises one or more holes (21-26), wherein the one or more holes are configured to allow liquid in the base (12) to enter the at least one pod holder (figs. 4-5 and Col. 3, lines 66-68 and Col. 4, lines 1-4 as Ware is capable of allowing the holes to allow liquid in the base to enter the at least one pod holder).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plant-growing system of Schumacher as modified by Herbert to include wherein the bottom portion comprises one or more holes, wherein the one or more holes are configured to allow liquid in the base to enter the at least one pod holder as taught by Ware in order to allow the wick to have access to the liquid so as to transport the liquid to the seed pad (figs. 4-5 and Col. 3, lines 66-68 and Col. 4, lines 1-4 of Ware).
Claims 9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Prinster (WO 2013123447 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 8, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the seed pad comprises: at least one base sheet (bottom of 205 in figs. 5-6); one or more plant seeds ([0065]); and a top surface (top of 205 and [0065]), the one or more plant seeds positioned between the at least one base sheet and the top surface ([0065] as the one or more plant seeds can be placed in the seed pad).
However, Schumacher as modified by Herbert is silent about a cover.
Prinster teaches a cover (102).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seed pad of Schumacher as modified by Herbert to include a cover as taught by Prinster in order to seal the seeds within the media ([0109] of Prinster).
Regarding claim 11, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Prinster teaches the plant-growing system of claim 9, but is silent wherein the cover comprises organic material.
Prinster teaches wherein the cover (102) comprises organic material ([0127] “the rooting media 102, lid 102, and/or adhesive may be composed and constructed of natural or organic materials”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plant-growing system of Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Prinster to include wherein the cover comprises organic material as taught by Prinster in order to provide a biodegradable cover ([0141] of Prinster) and seal the seeds within the media ([0109] of Prinster).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher as modified by Herbert as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Holloway (WO 2018007585 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Schumacher as modified by Herbert teaches the plant-growing system of claim 8, but is silent wherein the seed pad further comprises a biopolymer binder.
Holloway teaches wherein the seed pad (2) further comprises a biopolymer binder (as the seed pad comprises polymeric gels such as polyoxyethylene gels (PEO), silica gels, psyllium husk and so called "super absorbents" such as super absorbent acrylic polymers (e.g.polyacrylamide) Page 6, lines 6-12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seed pad of Schumacher as modified by Herbert to include a biopolymer binder as taught by Holloway in order to improve the absorbency of the seed pad (Page 6, lines 6-12 of Holloway).
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher (US 20220124965 A1) in view of Herbert (US 20190289802 A1) and Hsu (US 11877546 B2).
Regarding claim 15, Schumacher teaches a pod (see examiner’s illustration of Fig. 2 above) for a plant-growing system (the pod of Schumacher, detailed below, is capable of use in a plant growing system, in a similar manner as detailed in the rejection of, e.g., claim 1), the pod configured to be removably inserted in a pod holder (fig. 2 and [0058]), the pod comprising: a support plate (105 and 202), the support plate comprising two wick holes (303 and 304 fig. 3); a wick (203) comprising a first end (right end of 203 in fig. 5) and a second end (left end of 203 in fig. 5); and a seed pad (205), the wick positioned between the support plate and the seed pad (fig. 2), and wherein the seed pad is in physical contact with a portion of the wick (figs. 1-2 and 5).
However, Schumacher is silent wherein at least one of the two wick holes comprises a retention slot; the wick is configured to be suspended above a bottom portion of the pod holder.
Hsu teaches wherein at least one of the two wick holes (311, 314, 315) comprises a retention slot (312 313).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the two wick holes of Schumacher to comprises a retention slot as taught by Hsu in order to allow for water to be leaked (Col. 3, lines 62-66 of Hsu).
Herbert teaches wherein the wick (512) is configured to be suspended above a bottom portion (see examiner’s illustration of fig. 8) of the pod holder (508 as the cup shaped base and plate shaped planter of 508 will allow for it to hold a pod [0038] and so 508 is a pod holder; see examiner’s illustration of fig. 8 as fig. 8 depicts a space between the wick 512 and the at least one pod holder 508).
PNG
media_image2.png
371
459
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the at least one pod holder of Schumacher to include wherein the wick is configured to be suspended above a bottom portion of the pod holder as taught by Herbert in order to securely contain the plant (abstract of Herbert) and prevent the wick from bending and allow for the wick to have a faster absorption as it is well known in the art.
Regarding claim 16, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches the pod of claim 15, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate comprises: a base plate (base of 105 and 202) comprising a top side (top of 105 and 202) and a bottom side (bottom of 105 and 202); a rim (rim of 105 in fig. 2) extending from a periphery of the base plate away from the bottom side (fig. 2); and a base support (301) extending from the bottom side (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches the pod of claim 16, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate further comprises: a first hole (303) extending through the base plate (fig. 3); a second hole (304) extending through the base plate (fig. 3); and a recessed portion (302) in the base plate (fig. 3), the recessed portion extending between the first hole and the second hole (fig. 3, note there are two recess channels 302 that functionally perform as one unit as shown in figs. 3 and 5, i.e. a right and left side where this channel is broadly readable as “extending between” the first hole 303 and the second hole 304 since the wick member 203 is captured in both of these recesses 302 while the wick’s two ends traverses through each of the holes 303 and 304 as clearly shown in fig. 5), wherein the recessed portion is configured to receive the wick so that the first end extends through the first hole and the second end extends through the second hole (figs. 1-2 and 5).
Regarding claim 18, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches the pod of claim 17, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the support plate further comprises a plurality of third holes (fig. 2 depicts 105 to have a plurality of third holes and fig. 3 depicts 202 to have a plurality of third holes) extending through the base plate (figs. 2-3), the plurality of third holes located within a perimeter defined by the base support (figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 19, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches the pod of claim 15, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the wick is configured to deliver a liquid to the seed pad when one or more of the first end or the second end is inserted into a source containing the liquid (figs. 2 and 5 and [0059]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Prinster (WO 2013123447 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu teaches the pod of claim 15, and Schumacher further teaches wherein the seed pad comprises: at least one base sheet (bottom of 205 in figs. 5-6); one or more plant seeds ([0065]); and a top surface (top of 205 and [0065]), the one or more plant seeds positioned between the at least one base sheet and the top surface ([0065] as the one or more plant seeds can be placed in the seed pad).
However, Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu is silent about a cover.
Prinster teaches a cover (102).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seed pad of Schumacher as modified by Herbert and Hsu to include a cover as taught by Prinster in order to seal the seeds within the media ([0109] of Prinster).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, and 7-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues “Applicant respectfully asserts that the cited art does not teach or suggest at least these recitations. For example, Applicant has been unable to find disclosure in Schumacher of a "top plate forming a plurality of pod holders and a plurality of recessed channels separated from the reservoir." Nor has Applicant been able to find disclosure in Schumacher of "a first recessed channel of the plurality of recessed channels [that] forms a passage from a first pod holder to a second pod holder." Additionally, Applicant has been unable to identify disclosure in Schumacher that "at least one pod holder of the plurality of pod holders corresponds to a recessed portion in the top plate." Further, Applicant has been unable to identify disclosure in Schumacher that "the at least one pod holder forms a hole configured to allow entry of liquid from the reservoir.".
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Please see rejection above as Schumacher teaches the recessed channels as the walls of the plurality of openings on top plate 201 in fig. 2 form recessed channels. The opening of the first recessed channel will form a passage which will allow for liquid to pass through the openings of the channels. As the first recessed channel is in between the first pod holder and the second pod holder, there will be a passage formed between the first pod holder and the second pod holder.
Also, Schumacher teaches a recessed portion in the top plate as figs. 1 and 2 depict a recessed portion around the rim of 102 and walls of 201 leading into the plurality of pod holders and the at least one pod holder corresponds to the recessed portion of 102 when placed on top plate of 102 and the opening of the pod holder corresponds to the walls of 201.
Also, Schumacher teaches wherein the at least one pod holder forms a hole (central opening of 201 in fig. 2) configured to allow entry of liquid from the reservoir (the opening of the central opening of 201 in fig. 2 will allow for the entry of liquid from the reservoir).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAHAR ALMATRAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Peter Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/SAHAR ALMATRAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights