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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-14 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
As of the date of this action, no information disclosure statement has been filed on behalf of this case.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the valve assembly of claim 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Additionally, the drawings are objected to for excess shading, making it difficult to differentiate the elements of the device and the specific structures. It is noted that the drawings should be line drawings only. MPEP 1.84 m
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 6 “a plurality of hole” appears to be a typo and should be –a plurality of holes--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 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.
Claim 1 lines 9-10 “the root ball” “the walls of an excavated planting hole” lack antecedent basis, and should be amended to --a root ball-- and --walls of an excavated planting hole--.
Claim 5 recites “the length of the hollow pipe varies”. The term “varies” here is indefinite as it is unclear if applicant is attempting to claim that the size of the hollow pipe is somehow variable (thus, a singular pipe is adjustable to be various lengths), or if applicant is stating that the length of the hollow pipe can be of a size ranging from 10 inches to 24 inches. As best understood based on the disclosure, the claim has been interpreted as the length of the pipe ranges from 10 inches to 24 inches.
Claim 8 recites a valve assembly integrated near the threaded end of the hollow pipe to regulate flow rate, however this valve assembly is not demonstrated in the drawings nor described in the specification in such a way that it makes it clear as to what structure the valve assembly has to make it ‘integrated near the threaded end of the hollow pipe’. As best understood, this limitation was interpreted as a general valve assembly to near the threaded end of the hollow pipe for regulating flow rate.
Claim 10 line 1 “the soil surface” lacks antecedent basis and should be –a soil surface--.
Claim 10 line 9 “the desired location” lacks antecedent basis and should be –a desired location--.
Claim 10 lines 13, 16 recite “fertilizer”, however it is unclear if this fertilizer is the same or different form the previously recited ‘water-fertilizer’. As best understood, this fertilizer is meant to indicate the same ‘water-fertilizer’ as previously mentioned, and should be amended to –water-fertilizer--.
Claim 10 line 15 “the desired amount of water” lacks antecedent basis and should be –a desired amount of water--.
Claim 13 “the requirement” lacks antecedent basis and is further indefinite as it is unclear as to what applicant defines as the ‘requirement’.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-8, 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (US 1601778 A) to Stauffer.
In regards to claim 1, Stauffer anticipates a plant feeding spike device for sub-surface irrigation and fertilization, the device comprising: a hollow pipe (Stauffer; 1), wherein the hollow pipe has a pointed end configured to penetrate soil (Stauffer; pointed end at 2), wherein the hollow pipe has a threaded end opposite to the pointed end (Stauffer; threaded end at 4); a plurality of hole positioned on along the circumference of the hollow pipe (Stauffer; see holes 3 around the circumference of the pipe in FIG 1), the holes configured to deliver water or a water-based fertilizer mixture (Stauffer; “By the use of the device hereinbefore described, plants can be supplied with water, or liquid fertilizer, at a point below the surface of the ground, and, preferably, below the main roots.” Lines 64-68), wherein the holes are placed near the pointed end (Stauffer; see FIGs where holes 3 are near the pointed end at 2), wherein the holes are arranged to direct fluid flow away from the root ball and toward the walls of an excavated planting hole (Stauffer; in a condition in which the pointed end is facing a root ball, the holes are arranged to direct fluid flow away from the root ball and towards a planting hole); and a threaded adapter connected to the threaded end of the hollow pipe (Stauffer; threaded adaptor being the threads which connect with the threaded end at 4 on 5), the threaded adapter configured to connect to a spray gun (Stauffer; spray gun comprised of 8, 7, 12, see FIG 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
746
517
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Stauffer anticipates the device of claim 1, wherein the hollow pipe is made of rigid material (Stauffer; 1 being rigid such that it can be inserted into a ground).
In regards to claim 6, Stauffer anticipates the device of claim 1, wherein the holes occupy half of the hollow pipe's circumference (Stauffer; the holes 3 occupying at least half of the circumference as seen in FIG 1).
In regards to claim 7, Stauffer anticipates the device of claim 1, wherein the pointed end of the hollow pipe is conical in shape to facilitate soil penetration (Stauffer; 2 being conical in shape due to the tapered point and tube shape of 1).
In regards to claim 8, Stauffer anticipates the device of claim 1, the device further comprising a valve assembly integrated near the threaded end of the hollow pipe to regulate flow rate (Stauffer; valve assembly comprising 8, 15, 16, 11, 13, 14, 12).
In regards to claim 10, Stuaffer anticipates a method for delivering water or a water-fertilizer mixture to plant roots below the soil surface, the method comprising: using a hollow pipe made of metal or rigid material (Stauffer; tube 1 which is made of a rigid material in order to be inserted into the ground), wherein the hollow pipe comprises a pointed end for penetrating the soil (Stauffer; 2), a threaded end opposite the pointed end (Stauffer; threaded end at 4), and a plurality of holes positioned along the circumference of the hollow pipe (Stauffer; see holes 3 around the circumference of the pipe in FIG 1); attaching the threaded end of the hollow pipe to a conventional tree spraying gun or a spray gun using a threaded adaptor (Stauffer; spray gun comprised of 8, 7, 12, see FIG 1; connected via adapter being the threads which connect with the threaded end at 4 on 5); positioning the pointed end of the hollow pipe at the desired location near the plant roots; activating the spray gun to deliver water or a water-fertilizer mixture through the hollow pipe; allowing the water or fertilizer to flow through the holes near the pointed end, ensuring targeted delivery to the plant roots; and removing the hollow pipe from the soil after the desired amount of water or fertilizer has been delivered (Stauffer; “By the use of the device hereinbefore described, plants can be supplied with water, or liquid fertilizer, at a point below the surface of the ground, and, preferably, below the main roots.” Lines 64-68; “My invention relates to certain improvements in devices for watering plants under the surface of the ground in order to apply moisture at a point near, or under, the roots of the plant.” Lines 1-5; in normal use, the device is used to penetrate soil by a plant near its roots, inject water or fertilizer through pipe 1 and through the holes 3 to delivery fluid to the plant roots, and the device is removed when this process is finished).
In regards to claim 11, Stauffer anticipates the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the method also includes inserting the pointed end of the pipe into the soil to the desired depth, ensuring that the holes are positioned to direct fluid towards the desired area (Stauffer; Lines 6-11 “One object of the invention is to construct the device so that the handle will be in direct alignment with the penetrating tube so that pressure can be applied with such force as to cause the tube to penetrate the ground to the depth required.”).
In regards to claim 12, Stauffer anticipates the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the insertion is performed at a pre- determined angle to further direct fluid flow towards the roots (Stauffer in normal use would require a user to select an angle of insertion to direct fluid flow towards the roots).
In regards to claim 13, Stauffer anticipates the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the depth of the insertion is adjusted as per the requirement (Stauffer; as best understood, in normal use a user adjusts a depth of insertion based on the “depth required”; Lines 6-11 “One object of the invention is to construct the device so that the handle will be in direct alignment with the penetrating tube so that pressure can be applied with such force as to cause the tube to penetrate the ground to the depth required.”).
In regards to claim 14, Stauffer anticipates the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the holes are angled to direct fluid flow outward from the hollow pipe (Stauffer; see FIG 1 where the holes 3 are positioned such that when pressure is applied to fluid flowing through pipe 1 and out of openings 3, fluid will flow outwards from 1).
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) 3, 5, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US 1601778 A) to Stauffer in view of (US 20070274783 A1) to Hibbard.
In regards to claim 3, Stauffer teaches the device of claim 2, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the hollow pipe is resistant to corrosion.
Hibbard teaches wherein the hollow pipe is resistant to corrosion (Hibbard; [0026] rigid tube 110 PVC, plastics, metals, fiber glass; PVC, plastics, and fiber glass being resistant to corrosion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stauffer such that the device is made of a material which is resistant to corrosion, such as taught by Hibbard. The motivation for doing so would be to prevent the device from degrading under use when transferring water or water-fertilizers to the ground.
In regards to claim 5, Stauffer teaches the device of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the length of the hollow pipe varies from 10 inches to 24 inches.
Hibbard teaches wherein the length of the hollow pipe varies from 10 inches to 24 inches (Hibbard; [0026] the length of tube 110 is about 15” to about 60” which overlaps with the range 10-24 inches, and thus teaches lengths within the range of 10-24 inches).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stauffer such that the hollow pipe is 10-24 inches in length, such as taught by Hibbard. The motivation for doing so would make the pipe of a size that would be able to reach a depth for injecting water or water based fertilizers beneath different desired plants and plant types.
In regards to claim 9, Stauffer teaches the device of claim 1, but fails to teach the hollow pipe includes measurement markings to indicate the depth of penetration.
Hibbard teaches the hollow pipe includes measurement markings to indicate the depth of penetration (Hibbard; [0031] and FIG 1, 195; the outer surface of the tube having depth markings).
PNG
media_image2.png
585
335
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stauffer such that the pipe includes measurement markings to indicate depth of penetration, such as taught by Hibbard. The motivation for doing so would be to allow a user to more accurately dispense water or water-fertilizers into the ground at a depth suitable for a particular plant or plant at known stages of root growth.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US 1601778 A) to Stauffer in view of (US 20100329786 A1) to Gesser.
In regards to claim 4, Stauffer teaches the device of claim 2, but fails to teach wherein the hollow pipe includes an internal coating to prevent clogging by mineral deposits.
Gesser teaches wherein the hollow pipe includes an internal coating to prevent clogging by mineral deposits (Gesser; [0011] [0034] where the tubes are coated with a water-insoluble hydrophilic polymer as a surface coating to prevent clogs by preventing mineral buildup from water from closing up the pores).
Stauffer and Gesser are analogous art from similar fields of endeavor i.e. fluid and nutrient irrigation systems to plants via tubing and small holes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Stauffer such that the material of the pipe has a coating to prevent clogging by mineral deposits, such as taught by Gesser. The motivation for doing so would be to prevent mineral buildup from water deposits, by preventing the closing up of the pores of the device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DE 202017005293 U1 teaches a pipe with a pointed end and openings near the pointed end for applying water and fertilizer, the pipe connected to a gun shaped sprayer.
US 20170021486 A1 to Reissmann teaches a pointed tube with openings and a threaded end with an adapter for connecting to a hose spray handle.
US 20130216705 A1 to Sprung teaches a tube with a pointed end for inserting into soil, with openings near the pointed end, a threaded end, and the device explicitly made of non-corrosive materials.
US 20100258043 A1 to Dyson-Coope teaches a pipe with a pointed end having holes, the pipe connected to a sprayer handle.
US 20040255512 A1 to Burgess teaches a pipe with a pointed end connected to a sprayer handle.
US 5802996 A to Baxter teaches a pipe with openings near a conical pointed end, with a threaded end connected to an adapter.
US 5558030 A to Ward teaches a pipe with a conical, pointed end, with openings and a valve.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATELYN T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-0023. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8-6.
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, KIMBERLY BERONA can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/KATELYN T TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647