Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/286,248

CULTIVATION METHOD FOR FRUIT VEGETABLE PLANT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 31, 2025
Examiner
KLOECKER, KATHERINE ANNE
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Fujifilm Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 136 resolved
-8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
179
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
53.5%
+13.5% vs TC avg
§102
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 136 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4 reads “a cultivation period before the nutrient solution having a nitrogen concentration of 10 ppm by mass or less is used is defined as a first cultivation period, a phosphorus concentration of the nutrient solution used in the second cultivation period is 1.4 times or more a phosphorus concentration of a nutrient solution used in the first cultivation period,” which should read “a cultivation period before the nutrient solution having a nitrogen concentration of 10 ppm by mass or less is used is defined as a first cultivation period, and a phosphorus concentration of the nutrient solution used in the second cultivation period is 1.4 times or more a phosphorus concentration of a nutrient solution used in the first cultivation period.” 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) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naoki (JP 6405260 B2, as cited by Applicant in IDS dated 11/27/2025) in view of Masayuki (JP-2003116383-A) and Kudo (WO-2011007868-A1). Regarding claim 1, Naoki discloses a cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant, comprising: a cultivation step of cultivating a fruit vegetable plant by using a hydroponic method (see pages 1 and 14), wherein in a part of a cultivation period in a state where a fruit vegetable plant body has fruit clusters and leaves, a nutrient solution having a lower nitrogen concentration is used (lower nitrogen concentration nutrient solution used during early stage of fruit enlargement, see page 2). Naoki fails to disclose irradiating the plant with artificial light, where a fruit vegetable plant body has two or more levels of flower clusters or fruit clusters and has two or more leaves with respect to one flower cluster or one fruit cluster, and the nitrogen concentration being 10 ppm by mass or less. Kudo teaches irradiating the plant with artificial light (led for illuminating plants, see page 2). 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 plant cultivation method with the artificial light of Kudo with a reasonable expectation of success as this will ensure the plant receives optimal lighting conditions for growth regardless of environmental conditions. Masayuki teaches where a fruit vegetable plant body has two or more levels of flower clusters or fruit clusters and has two or more leaves with respect to one flower cluster or one fruit cluster (see fig 1). 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 method with the time of fertilizing being when the fruit vegetable body has the fruit or flower clusters of Masayuki with a reasonable expectation of success as this will ensure the flowers and fruit receive increased nutrients for growth and improved fruit, rather than promoting tall shoot growth. The modified reference teaches the claimed invention, except wherein the nitrogen concentration used is 10 ppm by mass or less. 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 method with the nitrogen concentration being 10ppm by mass or less with a reasonable expectation of success as reduced nitrogen concentration during early fruiting is known to provide sweeter crops and curb excessive vegetative growth and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 2, the modified reference teaches the cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant according to claim 1, and Naoki further discloses wherein the start of the reduced nitrogen solution use is started before or after pinching (reduced nitrogen solution used during fruit enlargement, first pinching done at fruit enlargement stage, see pages 3 and 8-10). The modified reference teaches the claimed invention, except wherein the nitrogen concentration used is 10 ppm by mass or less. 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 method with the nitrogen concentration being 10ppm by mass or less with a reasonable expectation of success as reduced nitrogen concentration during early fruiting is known to provide sweeter crops and curb excessive vegetative growth and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The modified reference teaches the claimed invention, except wherein the start of the nitrogen solution occurs at any time point between 3 days before and 7 days after pinching of the fruit vegetable plant body. 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 method with the nitrogen solution occurring at any time point between 3 days before and 7 days after pinching of the fruit vegetable plant body as this will ensure the nutrients are taken up by the flowers and fruit to increase growth and improve fruit composition, and since it has been held that discovering an since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Regarding claim 3, the modified reference teaches the cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant according to claim 1. The modified reference fails to teach wherein the pinching of the fruit vegetable plant body is performed after flower clusters are formed at three to five levels of the fruit vegetable plant body. Masayuki teaches wherein the pinching of the fruit vegetable plant body is performed after flower clusters are formed at three to five levels of the fruit vegetable plant body (see fig 1 and page 8). 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 pinching at cluster levels of Masayuki with a reasonable expectation of success as this will ensure enough flower and fruit clusters remain on the plant such that there is an adequate harvest, while providing more nutrients to each specific fruit, improving taste and composition. Regarding claim 4, the modified reference teaches the cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant according to claim 1, and Naoki further wherein, in a case where a cultivation period in which the nutrient solution having a reduced nitrogen concentration used is defined as a second cultivation period (lower nitrogen concentration in solution during early fruit enlargement, see page 2), and a cultivation period before the nutrient solution having a reduced nitrogen concentration is defined as a first cultivation period (from planting to before fruit enlargement, see pages 2-3), a phosphorus concentration of the nutrient solution used in the second cultivation period is 1.4 times or more a phosphorus concentration of a nutrient solution used in the first cultivation period (phosphorus in planting to fruit enlargement, i.e. first period, is 3-10me/L, with 0.2L/strain, and therefore 0.6-1.6me/strain, and the concentration during fruiting to fruit enlargement, i.e. second period, is 2-2.3me/strain, see pages 5 and 7). The modified reference teaches the claimed invention, except wherein the nitrogen concentration used is 10 ppm by mass or less. 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 method with the nitrogen concentration being 10ppm by mass or less with a reasonable expectation of success as reduced nitrogen concentration during early fruiting is known to provide sweeter crops and curb excessive vegetative growth and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Regarding claim 5, the modified reference teaches the cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant according to claim 1, and Naoki further discloses wherein the fruit vegetable plant is a Solanaceae plant or a Cucurbitaceae plant (tomato plant, see page 3). Regarding claim 6, the modified reference teaches the cultivation method for a fruit vegetable plant according to claim 1, and Naoki further discloses wherein the fruit vegetable plant is a tomato (tomato plant, see page 3). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The art noted in the References Cited document is relevant as it pertains to similar systems for plant cultivation. Specifically, teaches growing vegetables with artificial light. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 31, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582059
Bioreactor And Method For Culturing Seaweed
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582057
AUTOMATED PLANT GROWING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12543673
EPIPHYTIC SYSTEM AND EPIPHYTIC METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12527267
PRODUCTION FACILITY LAYOUT FOR AUTOMATED CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT AGRICULTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12514181
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR PLANT POLLINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
43%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+35.5%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 136 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month