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 1 & 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: the third paragraph should be reformatted to be in line with the other paragraphs, and “and” should be moved to the paragraph preceding; and “also having” in claim 1 should be replaced by reformatting the claim so that it is not needed (where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75(i).). 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 1-9 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.
RE Claim 1, lines 10, claim 3, lines 2-3, claim 9, line 2 & line 19: the phrase “which each” renders the subject of the phrase following unclear. It is recommended to replace “which each” with --each [of the positively claimed subjects] is-- (“each” is a singular subject and should be followed by a singular verb, e.g. “is”).
Claims 1 & 9 are further unclear due to the recitation of “via the post or a receiving recess” in the last paragraph of each claim, since it appears to be double including “a receiving recess” provided earlier in the claim. Each should be replaced with -- via the post or the receiving recess--.
Claims 2 & 4-8 are rejected as ultimately dependent from claim 1, rejected above.
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 & 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brady (US 20220078979 A1) in view of Liu (US 5810639 A) and Delahunty (US 4576664 A).
For Claim 1, Brady discloses a method for supporting a plant (in the normal use and provision of the trellis described by Brady), the method comprising the steps of:
providing a trellis (10) comprising a plurality of annular frames (frames 20) and a base structure (60 and/or 80) for supporting the plurality of annular frames (Fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of annular frames includes a front surface (surface 24, ¶0034), the front surface being disposed on a front plane (Fig. 2), and also having a rear surface (surface 26, ¶0034), the rear surface being disposed on a rear plane (Fig. 2), and wherein the front and rear planes are parallel and spaced apart from each other by a thickness of the annular frame (surfaces 24 & 26 are separated by the thickness of the respective frame, represented by element 30);
each annular frame defining a plurality of receiving members (connectors 90 & 100 accepted into holes 34 & 36, ¶0035);
providing a plant (in the normal usage of the trellis of Brady, a plant, such as a climbing rose discussed in ¶0004, would be mounted thereto);
attaching a first annular frame of the plurality of annular frames to a second annular frame (via connectors 90, two annular frames 20 are attached);
mounting the plurality of annular frames on the base structure (via 71/84, ¶0041).
Brady is silent to the front surface having a plurality of posts and the rear surface having a plurality of receiving recesses;
providing a plant support fastener that includes a fastener body that extends to ends which each include either a post or a receiving recess;
interlocking some of the plurality of posts of a first annular frame of the plurality of annular frames with some of the receiving recesses of a second annular frame, such that the front surface of the first annular frame abuts the rear surface of the second annular frame;
fastening the plant to one of the plurality of annular frames using the plant support fastener, such that the ends of the fastener body are attached to at least one of the annular frames via the post or a receiving recess, and the plant support fastener is positioned around a portion of the plant.
Liu, like prior art above, teaches a connection mechanism (title, disclosure) further comprising the front surface having a plurality of posts (“a plurality of pins 11 respectively raised from the top side,” Col. 5, line 57-Col. 6, line 111, in Figs. 13A-13B, represented by the cross-sectional arrangement found in Figs. 7B or 8C) and the rear surface having a plurality of receiving recesses (“six pairs of coupling recesses 12 respectively disposed at the bottom side,” 5:57-6:11, represented further by the cross-sectional arrangements seen at least in the embodiments shown in Figs. 7B & 8C);
interlocking some of the plurality of posts of a first annular frame (one of block elements 103) of the plurality of annular frames (a plurality of 103, in normal use of the system of Liu) with some of the receiving recesses of a second annular frame (“the block elements having pins and coupling recesses for coupling to one another directly,” 1:48-59), such that the front surface of the first annular frame abuts the rear surface of the second annular frame (as a consequence of attaching the front and rear sides of respective block elements 103).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the connection of the annular frames of Brady with a snap fit connection as taught by Liu, in order to make an easily manufacturable, replicatable, and reliably functional modular system, using well-known molding techniques, and yielding predictable results.
Delahunty, like prior art above, teaches a plant care device (title, disclosure) further comprising providing a plant support fastener (as shown in either Fig. 1 or Fig. 3, for purposes of brevity, the holding member of Figs. 3 & 4a is mapped) that includes a fastener body (35/36) that extends to ends (each end 35 & 36 is attached to cup 31) which each include either a post or2 a receiving recess (the fastener bodies each include one cooperative cup 31);
fastening a plant (43) to a frame (42) using the plant support fastener (30, Fig. 4a), such that the ends of the fastener body are attached to at least one of the annular frames via the receiving recess (each end, through the unitary nature of the connector 30, is attached to the frame 42 via the acceptance of post 41 into cup 31/socket 32), and the plant support fastener is positioned around a portion of the plant (Fig. 4a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Brady in view of Liu to further include a plant attachment device as taught by Delahunty, in order to provide a fully functional and modular system which further allows for the selective attachment and/or training of plants thereto, yielding predictable results.
For Claim 4, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1, and the resulting device further teaches further comprising the step of interlocking the rear surface of a third annular frame to the front surface of the second annular frame, such that the first, second, and third annular frames are aligned at a third plane that is perpendicular to the first and second planes (three of the plurality of frames of Brady are configured to be stacked in cooperating fashion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify three of the plurality of frames of Brady as modified above to be correspondingly stacked, since the Examiner takes Official Notice that such a stacked relationship is exceedingly well-known in the art to provide the smallest profile for shipment, yielding predictable results.
For Claim 5, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1, and Brady as modified above further renders obvious wherein the abutting annular frames are fastened together without the use of a separate fastener, but instead are fastened together by the posts and the receiving recesses which are integral to the annular frames (resulting annular frames of Brady as modified by the female and male connectors as taught by Liu).
For Claim 6, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1, and Brady as modified above further teaches wherein the annular frames are configured to stack in opposing forward and rearward directions about a shared mounting axis for offset load distribution and counterbalancing of asymmetric plant growth (the resulting frames are “configured” for such stacking using the corresponding male and female connectors, in much the same way as Lego ™ building blocks).
For Claim 7, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1.
Brady as modified above is silent to further comprising the step of arranging the annular frames in asymmetric or non-uniform offsets relative to a vertical axis to provide counterbalance.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the plurality of frames of Brady as modified above to be stacked in asymmetric or non-uniform offsets relative to a vertical axis, since the Examiner takes Official Notice that such a stacked relationship is exceedingly well-known in the art to provide not only the claimed counterbalance but also to allow a user to arrange the system according to their own environment and/or preferences, yielding predictable results.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brady in view of Liu and Delahunty as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wilson (US 2083678 A).
For Claim 2, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1.
Brady as modified above is silent to further comprising the steps of:
providing the plant in a planter filled with planting media; and
inserting at least one elongate support post of the base structure into the planting media of the planter adjacent the plant.
Wilson, like prior art above, teaches a plant supporting device (title, disclosure) further comprising the steps of:
providing the plant in a planter filled with planting media (the circular flower pot, in its normal use, with plants and supporting media, page 1, column 2, lines 41-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the plant of the above-modified reference by providing it in a pot as taught by Wilson, in order to provide the plant in a moveable container, allowing for the user to move the plant as they wish, yielding predictable results.
The resulting device renders obvious inserting at least one elongate support post of the base structure into the planting media (as discussed in ¶0042, Brady) of the planter (Wilson) adjacent the plant (in the normal operation of the above-modified system, the trellis would be near enough to the plant to provide support).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brady in view of Liu and Delahunty as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Scaletta (US 20170258017 A1).
For Claim 8, Brady as modified above teaches the method of claim 1.
Brady as modified above is silent to further comprising the step of providing hinge-based connectors which permit rotational articulation of the annular frames along at least one axis.
Scaletta, like prior art above, teaches a multi-part plant support frame (title, disclosure) further comprising providing hinge-based connectors (21) which permit rotational articulation of the annular frames along at least one axis ¶0012.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify one or more of the annular frames of the above-modified reference with one or more hinge connectors as taught by Scaletta, in order to increase the versatility of building the system, as well as relocating it and/or training a plant thereto, yielding predictable results.
7. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brady in view of Liu, Delahunty, and Wilson.
For Claim 9, Brady discloses a method for supporting a plant (in the normal use and provision of the trellis described by Brady), the method comprising the steps of:
providing a trellis (10) comprising a plurality of annular frames (frames 20), which each include a front surface (surface 24, ¶0034), and a rear surface (surface 26, ¶0034); and
each annular frame defining a plurality of receiving members (connectors 90 & 100 accepted into holes 34 & 36, ¶0035);
a base structure (60) for supporting the plurality of annular frames (Fig. 1), the base structure having at least one elongate support post (82) for supporting the base structure in the mounting surface ¶0041, the elongate support post extending upwardly to an interlocking structure that includes a plurality of posts or receiving recesses (the posts and recesses receiving the posts at the top(s) of 60, elements 80 extend in a vertical direction, toward and away from interlocking connectors, Fig. 1);
mounting a first of the annular frames with the interlocking structure of the base structure by connecting the first annular frame with the interlocking structure (Fig. 1);
mounting additional annular frames by connecting at least one of the plurality of posts or receiving recesses of the additional annular frames with at least one of the plurality of posts or receiving recesses of the first of the annular frames (connector 90 is received within the recesses of two frames, Fig. 1);
fastening the plant to one of the plurality of annular frames (in the normal usage of the trellis, it would be connected with the supported plant).
Brady is silent to the method being in a planter;
the front surface having a plurality of posts and the rear surface having a plurality of receiving recesses; wherein the annular frames are configured to be joined together by interlocking some of the plurality of posts with the receiving recesses of an adjacent annular frame of the plurality of annular frames;
providing a plant support fastener that includes a fastener body that extends to ends which each include a post or a receiving recess; and
fastening the plant to one of the plurality of annular frames using the plant support fastener, such that the ends of the fastener body are attached to at least one of the plurality of annular frames via the post or a receiving recess, and the plant support fastener is positioned around a portion of the plant.
Wilson, like prior art above, teaches a plant supporting device (title, disclosure) further comprising the steps of:
providing the plant in a planter filled with planting media (the circular flower pot, in its normal use, with plants and supporting media, page 1, column 2, lines 41-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Brady to be supported in a pot as taught by Wilson, in order to provide the plant in a moveable container, allowing for the user to move the plant as they wish, yielding predictable results.
Liu, like prior art above, teaches a connection mechanism (title, disclosure) further comprising the front surface having a plurality of posts (“a plurality of pins 11 respectively raised from the top side,” Col. 5, line 57-Col. 6, line 11 , in Figs. 13A-13B, represented by the cross-sectional arrangement found in Figs. 7B or 8C) and the rear surface having a plurality of receiving recesses (“six pairs of coupling recesses 12 respectively disposed at the bottom side,” 5:57-6:11, represented further by the cross-sectional arrangements seen at least in the embodiments shown in Figs. 7B & 8C), wherein the frames are configured to be joined together by interlocking some of the plurality of posts with the receiving recesses of an adjacent frame of the plurality of frames (“the block elements having pins and coupling recesses for coupling to one another directly,” 1:48-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to replace the connection between each of the annular frames and with the base of Brady with snap fit connections as taught by Liu, in order to make an easily manufacturable, replicatable, and reliably functional modular system, using well-known molding techniques, and yielding predictable results.
Delahunty, like prior art above, teaches a plant care device (title, disclosure) further comprising providing a plant support fastener (as shown in either Fig. 1 or Fig. 3, for purposes of brevity, the holding member of Figs. 3 & 4a is mapped) that includes a fastener body (35/36) that extends to ends (each end 35 & 36 is attached to cup 31) which each include a receiving recess (the fastener bodies each include one cooperative cup 31);
fastening a plant (43) to a frame (42) using the plant support fastener (30, Fig. 4a), such that the ends of the fastener body are attached to a frame via the receiving recess (each end, through the unitary nature of the connector 30, is attached to the frame 42 via the acceptance of post 41 into cup 31/socket 32), and the plant support fastener is positioned around a portion of the plant (Fig. 4a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to modify the system of Brady in view of Liu to further include a plant attachment device as taught by Delahunty, in order to provide a fully functional and modular system which further allows for the selective attachment and/or training of plants thereto, yielding predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 might be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose or teach the combination of recited features directed to the claimed method for supporting a plant of claim 1, further requiring the steps of: providing a set of spacer blocks each having a front surface and a rear surface, each of the front and the rear surfaces of the spacer block includes a post or a receiving recess; interlocking the post or receiving recess of the front surface of each spacer block with the post or receiving recess of one of the ends of the support fastener, and interlocking the post or receiving recess of the rear surface of each spacer block with the posts or recesses of one of the plurality of annular frames. Claim 3 amounts to an intermediate connector which is interlocked with both the front surface of one of the annular frames and the rear surface of one of the ends of one of the support fasteners. This particular method cannot be found in the prior art, and it would be impermissible hindsight to reconstruct the combination of claimed elements.
This statement is not intended to necessarily state all the reasons for allowance or all the details why the claims are allowed and has not been written to specifically or impliedly state that all the reasons for allowance are set forth (MPEP § 1302.14).
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Special attention is drawn to the disclosures of US 3487579 A, US 4183167 A, EP 0027840 A1, DE 3925401 A1, US 6401385 B1, US 7416166 B1, US 20120055083 A1, and US 20160346707 A1 as disclosing an invention or aspects of the invention which are similar to those claimed and/or disclosed in the instant invention. The remaining references cited establish the state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Morgan T. Jordan whose telephone number is (571)272-8141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30.
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.
/MORGAN T JORDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
1 hereinafter referred to as “column:line(s)”
2 Interpretation note: only one aspect is required due to the alternative construction triggered by the “or” limitation.