DETAILED ACTION
The Amendment filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered. Claim(s) 9 and 12 has/have been amended, claim(s) 3-8, 13-18, and 20 has/have been cancelled, and claim(s) 22-27 has/have been added. Therefore, claims 1, 2, 9-12, 19, and 21-27 are now pending in the application.
Response to Amendment
The previous 35 USC 112 rejections are withdrawn in light of applicant's amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 25, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 25, at line 1, the recitation “the truss brackets” renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis. For purpose of this Office Action, it is assumed that the claim is meant to depend from claim 11, which discloses a pair of truss brackets.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 is allowed. In particular, the limitation “a pair of double truss brackets interconnecting the first and second truss foundations and the pair of leg braces to provide a tracker motor support that resists lateral loads and bending moments” would overcome the prior art of record since no prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches the configuration of truss brackets and leg braces and such a modification to include the combined elements would involve impermissible hindsight reconstruction. Claims 2, 22, and 23 depend from claim 1 and is therefore allowed as well.
Claims 11 and 21 are 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. In particular, the limitation “wherein the at least one motor truss foundation comprises a pair of truss brackets interconnecting the pair of interconnected adjacent truss foundations and the pair of leg braces” would overcome the prior art of record since no prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches the configuration of truss brackets and leg braces and such a modification to include the combined elements would involve impermissible hindsight reconstruction. Claim 25, as best understood, depends from claim 11 and is rejected as detailed in the 112 second paragraph above.
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. In particular, the limitation “the pair of interconnected adjacent truss foundations are constructed from the same components as a standard bearing truss but with different truss leg angles or wider leg spacing to raise the work point of the motor truss foundation” would overcome the prior art of record since no prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches the configuration of having the same components but with different angles or wider leg spacing to raise the work point, and any a modification to include the combined elements would require modifying the modifier reference and would destroy the combination.
Claim 26 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. In particular, the limitation “at least one of the first truss foundations comprises a damper brace assembly attached to the truss legs via leg brackets” would overcome the prior art of record since no prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches the configuration of having a damper brace assembly attached to the truss legs via leg brackets, and any a modification to include the combined elements would require modifying the modifier reference and would destroy the combination. Claim 27 depends from claim 26 and is therefore objected to as well.
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 of this title, 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) 9, 10, 12, 19, and 24, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wynn (WO 2019113650 A1) in view of Grushkowitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0073773).
Regarding claim 9, Wynn teaches a single axis tracker (solar tracker; abstract; with single axis; figure 6) comprising: a plurality of first truss foundations (annotated figure 6 below) comprising a pair of upper leg portions (annotated figure 6) each having a central axis extending therethrough (axis through the center of each leg portion) and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each upper leg portion crosses (see figure 5), each first truss foundation supporting a tracker torque tube (annotated figure 6) so that a rotational axis of the tracker torque tube is aligned with the work point of each first truss foundation (as illustrated, the rotational axis of the tracker torque tube is aligned with the work point of each first truss foundation; figure 5 and annotated figure 6); and at least one motor truss foundation (annotated figure 6) supporting a tracker motor assembly (34), wherein the at least one motor truss foundation comprises a pair of interconnected adjacent truss foundations (annotated figure 6).
Wynn does not specifically disclose a pair of upper leg portions extending on opposite sides of the rotational axis of the torque tube and each having a central axis extending therethrough and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each upper leg portion crosses so that the rotational axis of the tracker torque tube is positioned at a vertical distance to the work point of the at least one motor truss foundation.
Grushkowitz et al. discloses a solar tracking support housing (abstract; 136) including a pair of upper leg portions (see annotated figure 8B below) extending on opposite sides of the rotational axis of the torque tube (annotated figure 8B) and each having a central axis extending therethrough (annotated figure 8B) and a work point (annotated figure 8B) defined as a point at which the center axis of each upper leg portion crosses (annotated figure 8B) so that the rotational axis of the tracker torque tube is positioned at a vertical distance to the work point of the at least one motor truss foundation (annotated figure 8B).
Therefore, from the teaching of Grushkowitz et al., 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 tracker motor assembly of Wynn to include a pair of upper leg portions extending on opposite sides of the rotational axis of the torque tube and each having a central axis extending therethrough and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each upper leg portion crosses so that the rotational axis of the tracker torque tube is positioned at a vertical distance to the work point of the at least one motor truss foundation, as taught by Grushkowitz et al., in order to further withstand rotational and lateral loads on the tracker motor assembly for greater stability and an optimal lifespan.
Regarding claim 10, Wynn teaches the at least one motor truss foundation comprises a pair of leg braces (annotated figure 6) each connected to one truss of the pair of interconnected adjacent truss foundations (annotated figure 6).
Regarding claim 12, Wynn teaches a single axis tracker (solar tracker; abstract; with single axis; figure 6) comprising: a plurality of first truss foundations (annotated figure 6), each first truss foundation comprising a pair of angled truss legs (annotated figure 6) each having a central axis extending therethrough (axis through the center of each angled truss leg) and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each truss leg crosses (see figure 5) and joined together with a first truss cap (intermediate stand 30) and supporting a bearing assembly of the tracker (bearings 39, 41); and at least one second truss foundation (annotated figure 6), the at least one second truss foundation and joined together with a second truss cap (support stand 28) and supporting a torque tube drive motor assembly (34), wherein each of the plurality of first truss foundations substantially aligns a rotational axis of the single-axis tracker at the work point of each of the plurality of first truss foundations (as illustrated, the plurality of first truss foundations substantially aligns a rotational axis of the single-axis tracker at the work point of each of the plurality of first truss foundations; figure 5 and annotated figure 6).
Wynn does not specifically disclose a pair of angled truss legs each having a central axis extending therethrough and perpendicularly away from the rotational axis of the torque tube and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each truss leg crosses and the at least one second truss foundation aligns the rotational axis of the tracker at a vertical distance relative to the work point of the at least one second truss foundation.
Grushkowitz et al. discloses a solar tracking support housing (abstract; 136) including a pair of angled truss legs (annotated figure 8B) each having a central axis extending therethrough (annotated figure 8B) and perpendicularly away from the rotational axis of the torque tube (annotated figure 8B) and a work point (annotated figure 8B) defined as a point at which the center axis of each truss leg crosses and the at least one second truss foundation aligns the rotational axis of the tracker at a vertical distance relative to the work point of the at least one second truss foundation (annotated figure 8B).
Therefore, from the teaching of Grushkowitz et al., 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 tracker motor assembly of Wynn to include a pair of angled truss legs each having a central axis extending therethrough and perpendicularly away from the rotational axis of the torque tube and a work point defined as a point at which the center axis of each truss leg crosses and the at least one second truss foundation aligns the rotational axis of the tracker at a vertical distance relative to the work point of the at least one second truss foundation, as taught by Grushkowitz et al., in order to further withstand rotational and lateral loads on the tracker motor assembly for greater stability and an optimal lifespan.
Regarding claim 19, Wynn teaches the first truss foundation comprises a pair of legs angled such that an axis of each of the legs intersects one another at the work point above the pair of legs (see figure 5).
Regarding claim 24, Wynn does not specifically disclose the pair of interconnected adjacent truss foundations are constructed from the same components as a standard bearing truss but with different truss leg angles or wider leg spacing to raise the work point of the motor truss foundation.
PNG
media_image1.png
533
1061
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
630
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and amendments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
New reference(s) Grushkowitz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0073773) has been added to overcome the newly added limitations. Applicant’s amendments and arguments to claims 9 and 12, regarding the new limitations “extending on opposite sides of the rotational axis of the torque tube” and “perpendicularly away from the rotational axis of the torque tube” were found persuasive and overcome the previous rejection. The new limitations are overcome in view of secondary reference Grushkowitz et al.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR F HIJAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5790. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-6 EST Monday-Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached on (571) 270-3238. 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 USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F HIJAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3633