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 Objections
Claims 3-4 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 reads “which comprises of a plate” which should read “which comprises [[of]] a plate”
Claim 3 reads “wherein the wall element is arranged with the terminal profile on a substrate” which should read “wherein the wall element is configured to be arranged with the terminal profile on a substrate”
Claim 4 reads “wherein wall elements having the same dimensions in the dismantled state, in which they do not form an enclosure, are stacked in a space-saving manner,” which should read “wherein wall elements (1) having the same dimensions in the dismantled state, in which they do not form an enclosure, are configured to be stacked in a space-saving manner”
Claim 8 reads “wherein the walls of the border formed by the wall elements are extended at any time in any direction by one or more wall elements” which should read “wherein the walls of the border formed by the wall elements are configured to be extended at any time in any direction by one or more wall elements”
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-2, 4-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE-102019105430-A1) in view of Chan (US-4664282-A), Lorenz (DE-102017104344-B3) and Jansen (US 20160066519 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fischer discloses a border for a raised bed (see fig 1), comprising a plurality of wall elements (1- 6) connected to one another to form an enclosure,
each wall element comprising:
a first end face (see annotated fig 1 below);
a second end face opposing the first end face (see annotated fig 1 below);
a first longitudinal side extending between the first end face and the second end face (see annotated fig 1 below); and
a second longitudinal side extending between the first end face and the second end face (see annotated fig 1 below), wherein the second longitudinal side is located opposite and parallel the first longitudinal side (see annotated fig 1 below);
one or more complementing fastening elements projecting from each of the first end face and second end face of each wall element (plug in connections at each panel end, see figs 1 and 6);
wherein adjacent wall elements are arranged such that at least a portion of one wall element overlaps with a corresponding portion of an adjacent wall element, when stacked (see fig 2, vertically adjacent wall elements 1-6 have at least some overlap).
PNG
media_image1.png
540
836
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 1
Fischer fails to disclose each of the fastening element defines a L-shaped profile; a receiving space is defined between the L-shaped profile of each of the fastening element and respective first end face and second end face, configured to receive another complementing fastening element with L- shaped profile; and the L-shaped profile of one wall element is configured to being connected to engage with a corresponding L-shaped profile of an adjacent wall element at the first end face and the second end face so as to interlock the wall elements by means of a plug connection, a cross section extending between the two opposing the first longitudinal side and second longitudinal side, the cross-section comprising alternately arranged first and second sections on opposite sides of a longitudinal center axis (L) of the cross-section extend on opposite sides of the longitudinal center axis, and defining a continuous zig-zag profile, an intermediate bottom (9) is arranged perpendicularly to the positioned between opposing wall elements, wherein: the intermediate bottom is configured to be arranged perpendicular to the wall elements at a variable height within the border formed by the wall elements by engaging in the first and second sections of the zig-zag profiles (7, 8), respectively, of the opposing wall element and opposite ends of the intermediate bottom overlap with one or more portions of the zig-zag profile.
Lorenz teaches each of the fastening element (4) defines a L-shaped profile (see figs 1-2 and 6); a receiving space is defined between the L-shaped profile of each of the fastening element and respective first end face and second end face (receiving space inside hook 5), configured to receive another complementing fastening element with L-shaped profile (fasteners connected, see figs 2 and 6); and the L-shaped profile of one wall element is configured to being connected to engage with a corresponding L-shaped profile of an adjacent wall element at the first end face and the second end face so as to interlock the wall elements by means of a plug connection (see figs 2 and 6).
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 the fasteners of Fischer with the L-shaped fasteners of Lorenz with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide a secure and sturdy fastening hook, to prevent unintentional disconnection of the panels, which would disturb plant growth.
Jansen teaches a cross section extending between the two opposing the first longitudinal side and second longitudinal side (alternating panels, see fig 5, see cross section in annotated fig 3 below), the cross-section comprising alternately arranged first and second sections on opposite sides of a longitudinal center axis (L) of the cross-section extend on opposite sides of the longitudinal center axis (see annotated fig 3 below), and defining a continuous zig-zag profile (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
666
394
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 3
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 the wall elements with the alternating first and second sections as taught by Jansen with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide air pockets for increased insulation during cold spells to ensure the plants are protected.
Chan teaches an intermediate bottom (shaping tray 50) is arranged perpendicularly to the positioned between opposing wall elements (see fig 1-7), wherein: the intermediate bottom is configured to be arranged perpendicular to the wall elements at a variable height (variable height, see col 3, lines 55-65) within the border formed by the wall elements by engaging in the first and second sections of the zig-zag profiles (shaping tray 50, engages alternating wall elements and can be disposed at differing heights, see figs 1-7), respectively, of the opposing wall element and opposite ends of the intermediate bottom overlap with one or more portions of the zig-zag profile (shaping tray 50, engages alternating wall elements and can be disposed at differing heights, see figs 1-7)
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 the raised bed with the intermediate bottom of Chan with a reasonable expectation of success as this allows for plant cultivation with the plant height variable and up to the user, allowing for people with limited mobility ease of access to their planting bed, or for height changes based on plant species and estimated growth.
Regarding claim 2, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1, and Chan further teaches wherein the intermediate bottom (50) comprises several intermediate bottom parts (52a and 52b, see figs 4-6).
Regarding claim 4, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1, and Fischer further discloses wherein wall elements (1-6) having the same dimensions in the dismantled state (wall element size would not change when dismantled), in which they do not form an enclosure, are stacked in a space-saving manner.
The modified reference fails to teach when stacked in a space-saving manner, in that the first sections and the second sections of a plurality of wall elements come to rest on one another without a gap therebetween when these wall elements are arranged one above the other.
Jansen teaches the wall elements can be stacked in a space saving manner, in that the first sections and the second sections of a plurality of wall elements come to rest on one another without a gap therebetween when these wall elements are arranged one above the other (wall elements can be stacked and would fit on top of one another without a gap due to the cross section of the wall element, see annotated fig above).
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 the wall elements with the space-saving stacking of Jansen with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide a more compact stacking arrangement for when the wall elements are not in use.
Regarding claim 5, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1, and Fischer further discloses wherein the wall elements (1-6) are connected to one another exclusively by means of plug connections (plug connections at each end, see figs 1, 6 and page 4).
Regarding claim 7, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1, and Fischer further discloses wherein the wall elements (1-6) are made of plastic, wood or metal (planks made of wood, see page 6) and optionally have a coating.
Claim(s) 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE-102019105430-A1) in view of Chan (US-4664282-A), Lorenz (DE-102017104344-B3) and Jansen (US 20160066519 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Plast (DE-202019106290-U1).
Regarding claim 3, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1.
The modified reference fails to teach wherein each wall element has a terminal profile on one of its longitudinal sides which comprises or consists of a plate, wherein the wall element can be arranged with the terminal profile on a substrate.
Plast teaches wherein each wall element has a terminal profile on one of its longitudinal sides which comprises of a plate (g at bottom of wall elements), wherein the wall element is arranged with the terminal profile on a substrate (g can be placed on the ground or a substrate).
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 the wall elements with the terminal profile and arrangement of Plast with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide a more stable surface for the wall elements, and will provide more security and easy of placement on uneven ground.
Regarding claim 6, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1.
The modified reference fails to teach wherein wall elements belonging to the same side of the border for a raised bed are spaced apart from one another by a batten arranged between the longitudinal sides of two adjacent wall elements.
Plast teaches wherein wall elements (5) belonging to the same side of the border for a raised bed are spaced apart from one another by a batten (piece with handle 26, see figs 1, 4 and 7) arranged between the longitudinal sides of two adjacent wall elements (see figs 1, 4 and 7).
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 the system with the batten of Plast with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide extra strength to the wall elements and allow for increased spacing between the open areas within the enclosure.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE-102019105430-A1) in view of Chan (US-4664282-A), Lorenz (DE-102017104344-B3) and Jansen (US 20160066519 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Buckle (US 20250146268 A1, using the date of the provisional).
Regarding claim 8, the modified reference teaches the border for a raised bed according to claim 1 and Fischer further discloses wherein two wall elements (1-6) are connected to one another at an angle of 90⁰ (see figs 1-6).
The modified reference fails to teach wherein the walls of the border formed by the wall elements are extended at any time in any direction by one or more wall elements.
Buckle teaches wherein two wall elements (10) are connected to one another at an angle of 90⁰ (see figs 2a-b), wherein the walls of the border formed by the wall elements (10) can be extended at any time in any direction by one or more wall elements (see figs 8a and b, higher wall tiers).
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 the wall system to be extendable as taught by Buckle with a reasonable expectation of success as this will allow for user customization based on planting desires or unexpected growth of plants, to ensure plants have adequate spacing for growth.
Claim(s) 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckle (US 20250146268 A1, using the date of the provision) in view of Jansen (US 20160066519 A1) and Plast (DE-202019106290-U1).
Regarding claim 9, Buckle discloses a process for erecting a raised bed comprising the steps of providing a plurality of wall elements (see figs 1-3), each wall element (10) having a first end face (10c) and an opposite second end face (10d), which respectively have fastening elements (pegs 30/33 and hollow connector posts 12 with pegs, see also 10d, see figs 1-2, 3a and 3c-d),
each wall element (10) also having a first longitudinal side (10b) extending between the first end face (10c) and the second end face (10d) and a second longitudinal side (10a) lying opposite the first longitudinal side (10b) and also extending between the first end face (10c) and the second end face (10d) in parallel to the first longitudinal side (10b), each wall element (10) having, perpendicular to the two opposing longitudinal sides (10a, 10b), a cross section extending between the two opposing longitudinal sides (10a, 10b),
connecting each wall element (10) at its first end face (10c) and at its second end face (10d) to an adjacent wall element (10), the connection being made by means of a plug connection (pegs 30/33 and hollow connector posts 12 with pegs, see also 10d, see figs 1-2, 3a and 3c-d),and an enclosure being formed as a result (see figs 2a-b and 3c-d).
Buckle fails to disclose the cross section, which comprises alternately arranged first and second sections wherein the first sections and the second sections with respect to a longitudinal center axis of the cross-section extend on opposite sides of the longitudinal center axis; - arranging an intermediate bottom perpendicular to the wall elements at any height within the enclosure formed by the wall elements by engaging the intermediate bottom with the first and second sections of opposing wall elements.
Jansen teaches the cross section, which comprises alternately arranged first and second sections (alternating panels, see fig 5, cross section see fig 3), wherein the first sections and the second sections with respect to a longitudinal center axis (L, see annotated fig 3 below) of the cross-section extend on opposite sides of the longitudinal center axis (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
666
394
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 3
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 the wall elements with the alternating first and second sections as taught by Jansen with a reasonable expectation of success as this will provide air pockets for increased insulation during cold spells to ensure the plants are protected.
Plast teaches - arranging an intermediate bottom (10) perpendicular to the wall elements (5) at any height within the enclosure formed by the wall elements (5) by engaging the intermediate bottom (10) with the first and second sections (8) of opposing wall elements (5, see figs 3-4).
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 the raised bed with the intermediate bottom of Plast with a reasonable expectation of success as this allows for plant cultivation with the plant location variable and up to the user, allowing for people with limited mobility ease of access to their planting bed.
Regarding claim 10, the modified reference teaches the process according to claim 9, and Plast further teaches wherein filling material is arranged on the intermediate bottom (see pages 3 and 5, soil arranged on intermediate bottom), while an air-filled space remains below the intermediate bottom (see figs 3-4), which is defined by the intermediate bottom (see figs 3-4), a plurality of wall elements (5) and the substrate (g) on which the wall elements (5) are arranged to form an enclosure (see fig 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Specifically, Buckle is no longer relied upon as the primary reference, rather only to teach the extendable panel system and therefore Applicant’s arguments over Buckle are moot. Similarly, Oyamada is no longer relied upon and therefore those arguments are moot.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art fail to teach the L-shaped fasteners. This is a new limitation and a new reference, Lorenz, has been brought in to teach this limitation.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art fail to teach the alternating panels and continuous zigzag cross section. A new reference, Fischer, has been brought in to teach the amended limitations regarding the alternating panels. The Office disagrees with Applicant’s assertion that Jansen fails to teach the zigzag cross section. As seen in the rejection above, Jansen teaches a zigzag or wavy wall cross section, and new reference Fischer teaches singular wall element panels. Therefore the wall elements creating a continuous zigzag cross section as claimed is taught by the cited references.
Applicant argues that Oyamada fails to teach the amended limitations regarding the intermediate bottom and its engagement with the wall elements. A new reference, Chan, has been brought in to teach these amended limitations, and therefore Applicant’s arguments are moot.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE ANNE KLOECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-5103. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00 -5:30 MST, F: 8:00 - 12:00 MST.
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 Huson can be reached at (571) 270-5301. 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.
/K.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights