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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
The reference character “146” refers to both the “Alternative first end portion of the alternative second surrounding sidewall” and the “Second end portion of the second surrounding sidewall.”
In Figure 1, 215 is pointing to the drain aperture. However, in the specification the drain aperture is 275 and 215 is the submerged side of the annular buoyant element.
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
Claims 2-12 and 14-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Dependent claims should begin with “The”. For example, claim 2 should read “The rotating planter apparatus according to claim 1.” See MPEP 608.01(n)(IV)
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 1-20 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, and similarly claim 13, states “A rotating planter apparatus that is in the form of a vertical planter that is disposed upon a resting surface and placed into an environment utilizing an external light source.” Claim 1 later states “wherein said first base outside surface is adjacent to the resting surface” and “to provide selectable exposure to the light source.” It is unclear what exactly is being positively claimed, thus rendering the claims indefinite. For example, are the resting surface, light source, and environment being positively claimed as parts of the invention? These, all appear to fall outside of the scope of “a rotating planter apparatus” however they are mentioned in other limitations, thus making it unclear what are parts of the invention and what are not. Similarly claims 3, 12, 15, and 19 recite elements introduced in the preamble, thus making it unclear if these elements are being positively claimed as parts of the invention or not.
Claim 3 states “that is disposed adjacent to a modified cover outer surface.” However, claim 1 introduces “a cover having a cover outer surface.” Since claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, it is unclear as to whether the planter apparatus comprises BOTH a cover outer surface and a modified cover outer surface, or if the applicant is listing two different embodiments of the same element. The Office recommends amending claim 3 to state “that is disposed adjacent to the cover outer surface.” In order to avoid claiming two different embodiments in claims that are dependent from one another.
Claims 11 and 12, and similarly claims 18 and 19, introduce “a suction fluid communication structure” and “a discharge fluid communication structure.” However these elements were already introduced in the independent claim. Therefore it is unclear if these are referring back to the parts introduced in the independent claim, or if these are introducing new parts, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 13 begins with “An alternative embodiment of the rotating planter apparatus.” It is unclear if this preamble is referring back to claim 1, and what the scope of claim 13 is. Independent claim preambles should only discuss elements included in the claim itself and not refer back to other claims. The Office recommends amending the preamble of claim 13 to state “A rotating planter apparatus” or “A vertical rotating planter apparatus” or the like for clarity purposes.
The term “quasi” in claim 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “quasi” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear what exactly the scope of the limitation “form a quasi Gerotor hydraulic motor” is. The Office recommends removing this limitation from the claim.
Claims 2, 4-11, 14, 16-7, and 20 are rejected to as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to disclose or make obvious the combined limitations of applicant's claimed invention. The closest prior art of record fails to specifically teach said discharge fluid communication structure also discharges the nutrient rich fluid through said secondary fluid communication structure to said spray nozzle to create a rotational movement of the nutrient rich fluid within said second interior to contact said annular buoyant element outer periphery and said submerged side to rotate said annular buoyant element that is resting on a buoyancy force and to support said tower structure that is in rotational lockstep with said annular buoyant element resulting in having rotation of said tower structure to provide the nutrient rich fluid to a plant disposed within said plant aperture and to provide selectable exposure to the light source through said tower structure rotation about said longitudinal axis. The closest prior art of record is Cross (US 9374952). Cross teaches a rotatable vertical growing system (Figures 1 and 2) with a first outer container (vessel 108), a vertical grow tower (102), the vertical grow tower supported by a buoyant device floating on liquid in the first container (“The base interior portion further includes at least one buoyant member 200 configured to enable the base portion 114 to maintain buoyancy in the growth fluid 220.” Col. 9 lines 56-58). Cross further discloses rotation of the buoyant device, through the use of pressurized liquid (“The pressure from the external fluid throughout the growth fluid 220 actuates the gear system 214 to rotate. In one embodiment, the gear system 214 can include wheels having teeth that are responsive to the pressure form the external fluid. The pressure actuates the gear system 214 to rotate the base portion 114.” Col 9 lines 44-49), however, there is no discussion of a fluid path that sends fluid from the first container into the second container via spray nozzles, thus circulating the fluid in the second container, causing the buoyant element and vertical grow tower to rotate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cross (US 11310976) and Park (US 2015/0181821) are considered relevant prior art as they pertain to similar rotating vertical grow towers with buoyant grow towers. Holm (US 2024/0349668), Blank (US 2014/0000162), and Orr (US 2012/0090236) are considered relevant prior art as they pertain to similar rotating vertical grow towers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALANNA PETERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, 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.
/A.K.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642