UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`16/159,783
`
`10/15/2018
`
`Xinbing Liu
`
`MATB-443USl
`
`6681
`
`09/06/2019
`
`759°
`””2
`RATNERPRESTIA
`
`2200 Renaissance Blvd
`Suite 350
`
`King of Pmssia, PA 19406
`
`GONZALEZ RAMOS” MAYLA
`
`1721
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/06/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`PCorrespondence @ ratnerprestiacom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`16/159,783
`Examiner
`MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS
`
`Applicant(s)
`Liu, Xinbing
`Art Unit
`1721
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/15/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 10/15/2018 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)[:] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:I All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date 02/25/2019 and 08/21/2019
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190902
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013,
`
`is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`Claim(s) 1-7 are currently pending.
`
`Status of Claims
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
`(b) CONCLUSION—The specification shall concludewith one or more claims particularly
`pointing out and distinctlyclaiming the subject matterwhich the inventoror a joint inventor
`regards as the invention.
`
`The following is aquotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph:
`The specifications hall conclude with one or more claims particularfypointing outand distinctly
`claiming the subject matterwhich the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-7 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 pre-AIA the
`
`applicant regards as the invention.
`
`Regarding claim 1
`
`Claim1 recites the limitation "photovoltaic element" and “photovoltaic elements”.
`
`However, there is no prior recitation of said features in the claim. Claim 1 merely recites
`
`“photovoltaic cells”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`For purposes of applying art, it is interpreted that the photovoltaic elements correspond
`
`to the photovoltaic cells. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Regarding claims 2—7
`
`Page 3
`
`Claims 2-7 are rejected at least based on their dependency on claim 1.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`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 maynotbe obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed
`invention is not identicallydisclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the priorartare such that the claimed invention as awhole would have
`been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`ordinaryskill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentabilityshall notbe
`negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`6.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
`
`obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
`
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over US 2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau.
`
`Regarding claim 1
`
`Lu teaches a method for controlling a photovoltaic array (corresponding to panel
`
`concentrator module system 100 comprising concentrator assemblies 150, each having
`
`a PV chip having solar cells mounted on a base plate) [Figs. 1a-1b, 2a—2b, 4a-4b,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 4
`
`paragraphs 0016, 0024-0026 and 0031], the photovoltaic array (100) including atwo-
`
`dimensional array of photovoltaic cells having a plurality of rows (PV cells are attached
`
`in recess 51 of each concentrator assembly 150 which are arranged in a plurality of
`
`rows) [Figs. 1a-1b, 2a-2b, 4a-4b, paragraphs 0016, 0024-0026 and 0031], each row of
`
`photovoltaic cells having a pivot axis parallel to the row (each row of concentrator
`
`assemblies 150 having PV cells 20 pivot in an axes parallel to the row e.g., x-axis)
`
`[Figs. 1a-1b, 2a-2b, paragraphs 0016 and 0025], each cell having a lens (optics 10
`
`comprising a lens) [paragraphs 0026 and 0031] having a front surface configured to
`
`concentrate light normal to the front surface onto the photovoltaic element [paragraphs
`
`0026 and 0028]; the method comprising:
`
`tilting by a tilt actuator (motor) coupled to each of the rows of photovoltaic
`
`elements, the rows of photovoltaic elements to pivot about their pivot axes [paragraphs
`
`0025 and 0027].
`
`Lu does not teach a rotating, by a rotational actuator coupled to the array of
`
`photovoltaic cells, the array of photovoltaic cells about an axis perpendicular to a plane
`
`defined by the array of photovoltaic elements.
`
`Littau teaches a method for controlling a photovoltaic array comprising mounting
`
`said photovoltaic array (one or more solar energy collection elements e.g., PV cells) on
`
`a movable support (turntable) comprising a rotational actuator (rotational positioning
`
`system 130 comprises actuator/motor 135) coupled to said photovoltaic array, so that
`
`the photovoltaic device rotates about an axis perpendicular to a plane defined by the
`
`array of photovoltaic elements [Abstract, Figs. 1a-1b and 3, paragraphs 0011-0012 and
`
`0034-0035]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to providing such
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 5
`
`rotational movement in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, maximizes
`
`the power generation efficiency and further allows tracking to take place for most pitch
`
`angles [paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`Lu and Littau are analogous inventions in the field of method for controlling
`
`photovoltaic arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
`
`the effective filing date of the invention to modify the methof of Lu to comprise a step of
`
`rotating by a rotational actuator (which is coupled to a turntable) as in Littau in order to
`
`provide the rotational movement of the array (which allows tracking to take place for
`
`most pitch angles) in addition to the adjustment of the angular positions, thereby
`
`maximizing the power generation efficiency and effectively tracking the sun [Littau,
`
`paragraphs 0012 and 0042].
`
`Regarding claim 2
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 2 depends, have been set forth
`
`above.
`
`lVlodified Lu teaches rotating, by a rotational actuator, the array of photovoltaic
`
`elements [Littau, paragraphs 0011-0012 and 0034-0035]; and tilting, by a motor with a
`
`helical lead screw (see helical gear 203) as the tilt actuator, the rows of photovoltaic
`
`elements (x-axis rotation of concentrator assemblies 150 is accomplished by turning
`
`axles 142 from a gear set 203 through a handle 145 and a connecting bar 144) [Fig. 2a
`
`and paragraph 0027].
`
`The embodiment depicting the rotational actuator does not disclose a stepper
`
`motor.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 6
`
`However, Lu shows that stepper motors are generally used in the art to perform
`
`rotational adjustments in photovoltaic concentrator arrays [paragraphs 0025 and 0040].
`
`Further actuators include hydraulic or pneumatic systems and robotic adjustors.
`
`Therefore, because Lu teaches choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable types of actuators, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious
`
`to pursue the known options with reasonable expectation of success [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Since Lu teaches that a stepper leads to the anticipated success of performing perform
`
`rotational adjustments said type of actuating device is not of innovation but of ordinary
`
`skill and common sense [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Regarding claim 4
`
`Modified Lu teaches the method as set forth above, further comprising: pivoting,
`
`by a tilt actuator, the rows of the array by moving a pivot driver bar (axle 42) connected
`
`to each of the rows by a second pin (171) [Lu, Figs. 1a-1b and paragraph 0025] relative
`
`to a fixed axis bar (140) connected to each of the rows by a first pin (186) [Lu, Figs. 1a-
`
`1b, paragraphs 0025, 0027].
`
`8.
`
`Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US
`
`2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims 1-2 and
`
`4 above, and further in view of US 2014/0373903, Hashimoto et al.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 3 depends, have been set forth
`
`above.
`
`lVlodified Lu teaches conducting electrical current between the cells [Lu,
`
`paragraphs 0029 and 0036].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 7
`
`Modified Lu does not teach flexible wiring electrically connecting the photovoltaic
`
`cells to each other.
`
`Hashimoto teaches electrically connecting a plurality of photovoltaic cells using
`
`flexible wiring members which are known to effectively connect photovoltaic cells to
`
`each other and, due to their flexible nature, stress is even less likely to be applied
`
`between wiring member and each photovoltaic cell, thereby producing a photovoltaic
`
`device with improved endurance [paragraphs 0003, 0020 and 0025].
`
`Modified Lu and Hashimoto are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the photovoltaic cells of modified Lu to be
`
`connected to each other using flexible wiring because such achieves an effective
`
`electrical connection between cells and, due to their flexible nature, stress is even less
`
`likely to be applied between wiring member and each photovoltaic cell, thereby
`
`producing a photovoltaic device with improved endurance [Hashimoto, paragraphs
`
`0003, 0020 and 0025].
`
`9.
`
`Claims 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over US 2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims
`
`1-2 and 4 above, and further in view of US 2011/0067688, Reif etal.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claims 5 and 6 depend, have been set
`
`forth above.
`
`Regarding claim 5
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 8
`
`Modified Lu teaches controlling, by a controller, the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not an open loop controller for controlling the
`
`rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and
`
`date of year values provided by a clock circuit.
`
`Reif teaches atracking system including an open loop controller for controlling
`
`the rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values
`
`and date of year values provided by a clock circuit (an open-loop controller with an
`
`internal clock and a set of pre-calculated motor parameters effects the repositioning of
`
`one or more elements of the solar concentrator system based upon system settings
`
`such as, for example, geographical location of the solar concentrator system the
`
`positioning adjustments may vary) [paragraph 0156].
`
`Modified Lu and Reif are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic tracking
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the controller of modified Lu with an open loop
`
`controller as in Reif because such can effectively issue control signals that adjust the
`
`position the photovoltaic elements [Reif, paragraphs 0155-0156].
`
`Regarding claim 6
`
`Modified Lu teaches controlling, by a controller, the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 9
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not teach a closed loop controller for controlling the
`
`rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and
`
`date of year values provided by a clock circuit, and based on a signal output by the
`
`array.
`
`Reif teaches atracking system including an closed loop controller for controlling
`
`the rotational actuator and the tilt actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values
`
`and date of year values provided by a clock circuit (a closed-loop control system relying
`
`on both pre-derived calculated i.e., comprising a clock circuit, as well as external
`
`monitoring devices such as sensors which detect conditions affecting the system, effect
`
`the repositioning of the one of more elements) [paragraphs 0155, 0157 and 0160].
`
`Modified Lu and Reif are analogous inventions in the field of photovoltaic tracking
`
`arrays.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the controller of modified Lu with a closed loop
`
`controller as in Reif because such can effectively issue control signals that adjust the
`
`position the photovoltaic elements [Reif, paragraphs 0155, 0157 and 0160].
`
`10.
`
`Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US
`
`2007/0070531, Lu in view of US 2010/0206357, Littau as applied to claims 1 and 4
`
`above, and further in view of US 2011/0030672, Olsson and US 9,291,696, Adest et
`
`al.
`
`above.
`
`All the limitations of claim 1, from which claim 7 depends, have been set forth
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 10
`
`Modified Lu teaches controlling, by a controller, the rotational actuator and the tilt
`
`actuator to track sunlight based on time of day values and date of year values provided
`
`by a clock circuit [Lu, paragraphs 0016 and 0033-0034; Littau, paragraphs 0035].
`
`Modified Lu does not teach a capacitor.
`
`Olsson teaches that batteries or capacitors can be used to store the energy from
`
`the photovoltaic cells to provide power to operate both motorized rotation axes
`
`[paragraph 0055].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filing date of the invention to modify the method of modified Lu to comprise a step of
`
`storing a signal output in a capacitor in order to store energy generated from the PV
`
`cells which then can be used to provide power to operate the motorized rotations
`
`[Olsson, paragraph 0055].
`
`Lu modified by Littau does not teach the controller being a partially analog
`
`controller for controlling the rotational actuator and tilt actuator to track sunlight based
`
`on an analog comparison between a present signal output by the array and a previous
`
`signal output by the array stored in a capacitor.
`
`Adest teaches controlling the position of a photovoltaic array using an analog
`
`controller, a digital controller of a combination thereof [Col. 3, lines 62-64 and Col. 4,
`
`lines 57-67 to Col. 5, lines 1-13].
`
`Therefore, because Adest teaches choosing from a finite number of identified,
`
`predictable types controllers for controlling actuators that are adapted to adjust the
`
`position of photovoltaic arrays, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious
`
`to pursue the known options with reasonable expectation of success [see MPEP 2143].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 11
`
`Since Adest teaches that a combination of analog and digital circuitry leads to the
`
`anticipated success, said type of controller is not of innovation but of ordinary skill and
`
`common sense [see MPEP 2143].
`
`Conclusion
`
`11.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS whose telephone number
`
`is (571)272-5054. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 9:00-
`
`5:00 - 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, Allison Bourke can be reached on (303)297-4684. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`If you would like assistance from a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/159,783
`Art Unit: 1721
`
`Page 12
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
`
`