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 17-32 are pending and have been examined in this application.
This communication is the first action on the merits.
Information disclosure statements (IDS) have been filed on 12/08/2025, 02/05/2026, 04/06/2026, and 06/03/2026 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 17-18, 20, 26, and 28-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Axley et al. (U.S. Pub. 20150289452) in view of Janssen (U.S. Pub 20190029194).
In regard to claim 17, Axley et al. discloses a stackable growth module comprising a vertically arranged growth board having a vertical surface for supporting plants (Figs. 1-9, where there is a stackable growth module comprising a vertically arranged growth board 11 having a vertical surface for supporting plants 25), the growth board comprising: a porous growth medium supported by the vertical surface (Figs. 1-9 and Paragraph [0050], where there is a porous growth medium 22 supported by the vertical surface); a watering trough arranged along an upper edge of the growth board, the watering trough having water distribution holes for distributing water to the growth medium (Figs. 1-9 and Paragraph [0044], where there is a watering trough 12 arranged along an upper edge of the growth board 11 and where the watering trough 12 has water distribution holes for distributing water to the growth medium 22); a water collection trough arranged along a lower edge of the growth board to collect water draining from the growth medium (Figs. 1-9 and Paragraphs [0046-0047], where there is a water collection trough 13 arranged along a lower edge of the growth board to collect water draining from the growth medium 22). Axley et al. is silent on the water collection trough having a valve that is configured to open and permit water to flow out of the collection trough when the valve is an open position and which prevents water from flowing out of the collection trough when the valve is in a closed position. Janssen discloses the water collection trough having a valve that is configured to open and permit water to flow out of the collection trough when the valve is an open position and which prevents water from flowing out of the collection trough when the valve is in a closed position (Figs. 1-5 and Paragraph [0082], where the water collection trough has a valve 12 that is configured to open and permit water to flow out of the collection trough when the valve is an open position and which prevents water from flowing out of the collection trough when the valve is in a closed position (“operable shutoff”)). Axley et al. and Janssen are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include agricultural devices. 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 body of Axley et al. such that the water collection trough having a valve that is configured to open and permit water to flow out of the collection trough when the valve is an open position and which prevents water from flowing out of the collection trough when the valve is in a closed position in view of Janssen. The motivation would have been to allow for water to drain out of the bottom of the device, to prevent overwatering and to easily empty for storage.
In regard to claim 18, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 17, further comprising a drain comprising a liquid passage from the watering trough to the water collection trough, said liquid passage bypassing the porous growth medium, the drain having an inlet within the watering trough (Axley et al., Figs. 1-9 and Paragraph [0050], where there is at least a drain comprising a liquid passage from the watering trough 12 to the water collection trough, said liquid passage bypassing the porous growth medium (via layer 21), and the drain at least having an inlet within the watering trough 12).
In regard to claim 20, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 17, the stackable growth module further comprising: a load-bearing frame comprising a first support member and a second support member held in a spaced apart and parallel configuration by the growth board (both Axley et al., in Figs. 1-9, and Janssen, Figs. 1-5); wherein the load-bearing frame is configured to enable the stackable growth module to occupy a cuboidal volume within which the growth board is supported; and wherein the load-bearing frame comprises upper and lower load-transferring edge surfaces (Axley et al., in Figs. 1-9, and Janssen, Figs. 1-5, show frames which are configured to enable the stackable growth module to occupy a cuboidal volume and which have upper and lower load-transferring edge surfaces).
In regard to claim 26, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 17, wherein the growth board is a functional component of a vertical farming system (both Axley et al., in Figs. 1-9, and Janssen, Figs. 1-5).
In regard to claim 28, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 20, wherein the first support member and second support member are each side support members (Axley et al., in Figs. 1-9, and Janssen, Figs. 1-5, show side support members).
In regard to claim 29, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 28, wherein the first support member and second support member are each side support members in the form of a strut (Janssen, Figs. 1-5, shows the side support members are at least a strut, such that they form a frame that at least resists compression).
In regard to claim 30, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 28, wherein the side support members have an I-shaped outline (Janssen, Figs. 1-5, where the side support members at least form an I shape on each side of the growth board).
In regard to claim 31, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 28, wherein each of the side support members comprises a vertical guide (Janssen, Figs. 1-5, where each of the side support members comprises a vertical guide which enables the placement of a growth board).
In regard to claim 32, discloses The stackable growth module according to claim 31, wherein the vertical guide is configured as a slot, for receiving a portion of the growth board (Janssen, Figs. 1-5, where the vertical guide is at least configured as a slot that receives the growth board for secure placement).
Claims 19 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Axley et al. (U.S. Pub. 20150289452) in view of Janssen (U.S. Pub 20190029194) as applied to claim 18 and 17, respectively, and further in view of Igarashi (U.S. Pub. 20260047537).
In regard to claim 19, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 18. Axley et al. as modified by Janssen is silent on the inlet is elevated at a distance D1 above a lowest point in the watering trough. Igarashi discloses the inlet is elevated at a distance D1 above a lowest point in the watering trough (Fig. 7 and Paragraphs [0097-0098], where the inlet is elevated at a distance (position of “A” and “B”) above a lowest point in the watering trough). Axley et al. and Igarashi are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include agricultural devices. 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 body of Axley et al. as modified by Janssen such that the inlet is elevated at a distance D1 above a lowest point in the watering trough in view of Igarashi. The motivation would have been to allow for the drain to empty out overflow fluid, at a level determined by the user.
In regard to claim 25, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 17. Axley et al. as modified by Janssen is silent on distance D1 is from 25% to 75% of the height of the watering trough. Igarashi discloses distance D1 is from 25% to 75% of the height of the watering trough (Fig. 7 and Paragraphs [0097-0098], where the inlet is elevated at a distance (position of “A” and “B”) from 25% to 75% of the height of the watering trough). Axley et al. and Igarashi are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include agricultural devices. 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 body of Axley et al. as modified by Janssen such that distance D1 is from 25% to 75% of the height of the watering trough in view of Igarashi. The motivation would have been to allow for the drain to empty out overflow fluid, at a level determined by the user.
Claims 21-23 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Axley et al. (U.S. Pub. 20150289452) in view of Janssen (U.S. Pub 20190029194) as applied to claim 17 and 20, respectively, and further in view Enghof (U.S. Pub. 20260047537).
In regard to claim 21, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 17. Axley et al. as modified by Janssen is silent on the valve comprises a liftable sealing member; wherein the growth board comprises a protruding body projecting upwardly above the upper edge of the growth board, the protruding body being in axial alignment with the sealing member; wherein the projecting body of a lower growth module is configured to push up the sealing member of the valve of an upper growth module when a plurality of growth modules are arranged in stack. Enghof discloses the valve comprises a liftable sealing member; wherein the growth board comprises a protruding body projecting upwardly above the upper edge of the growth board, the protruding body being in axial alignment with the sealing member; wherein the projecting body of a lower growth module is configured to push up the sealing member of the valve of an upper growth module when a plurality of growth modules are arranged in stack (Fig. 13a and Paragraphs [0092-0093], where the valve comprises a liftable sealing member and a protruding body 28 projecting upwardly above the upper edge of the growth board, where the protruding body 28 being in axial alignment with the sealing member of the valve such that the projecting body 28 of a lower growth module is configured to push up the sealing member of the valve of an upper growth module when a plurality of growth modules are arranged in stack). Axley et al. and Enghof are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include agricultural devices. 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 body of Axley et al. as modified by Janssen such that the valve comprises a liftable sealing member; wherein the growth board comprises a protruding body projecting upwardly above the upper edge of the growth board, the protruding body being in axial alignment with the sealing member; wherein the projecting body of a lower growth module is configured to push up the sealing member of the valve of an upper growth module when a plurality of growth modules are arranged in stack in view of Enghof. The motivation would have been to allow for fluid coupling between two growth units (Enghof, Paragraph [0092]).
In regard to claim 22, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen and Enghof discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 21, wherein the drain comprises a drain tube arranged along the vertical surface of the growth board (Janssen, Figs. 1-5 and Paragraph [0085], where the drain comprises a drain tube (4 can be considered a tube) arranged along the vertical surface of the growth board).
In regard to claim 23, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen and Enghof discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 22, wherein the drain tube is in axial alignment with the valve and the protruding body is an upper end, or a piece connected to an upper end of the drain tube (Janssen, Figs. 1-5 and Paragraph [0085], where the drain tube (4 can be considered a tube) is at least in axial alignment with the valve 12 and where there is at least a protruding body (protrusion of 11) is an upper end or a piece connected to an upper end of the drain tube).
In regard to claim 27, Axley et al. as modified by Janssen discloses the stackable growth module according to claim 20. Axley et al. as modified by Janssen is silent on the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism of a module handling vehicle of a vertical farming facility. Enghof discloses the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism of a module handling vehicle of a vertical farming facility (Figs. 1-2, where the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses (see recessed edges at top of portion 20) at least arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism). Axley et al. and Enghof are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include agricultural devices. 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 body of Axley et al. as modified by Janssen such that the upper load-transferring edge surface is provided with recesses arranged to be engaged by a gripping mechanism of a module handling vehicle of a vertical farming facility in view of Enghof. The motivation would have been to allow for easy manipulation and movement of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 24 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892, Notice of References Cited, for the full list of prior art made of record. Particularly the references were cited because they pertain to the state of the art of agricultural devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 am to 4:30 pm.
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.
/KEVIN M DENNIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights