DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This Office Action is in response to the Amendments to the Claims and Remarks filed November 20, 2025.
In view of the Amendments to the Claims filed November 20, 2025, the rejections of claims 1-3 and 5-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 previously presented in the Office Action sent May 21, 2025 have been substantially maintained and modified only in response to the Amendments to the Claims.
Claims 1-3 and 5-14 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites, “two monopole junction boxes arranged on the same slope side of the module”.
The specification, as originally filed, does not evidence applicant had in possession an invention including two monopole junction boxes arranged on the same slope side of the module.
The specification teaches “junction boxes of the photovoltaic module being close to the same slope side of the photovoltaic module” (see claim 1) and teaches junction boxes 15a, 15b are placed “on the same horizontal side” (see [0057]), but does not teach two monopole junction boxes arranged on the same slope side of the module. Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagiura (JP 2014-103132 A included in Applicant submitted IDS filed September 6, 2024) in view of Koehler (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0326177 A1).
With regard to claims 1 and 9, Yanagiura discloses a photovoltaic assembly for installation on a sloped roof and a photovoltaic module, comprising
a photovoltaic module comprising (see Fig. 1):
a laminate of rectangular shape (see Fig. 1), with
two slope sides to be placed parallel to the slope of the roof and two horizontal sides to be placed perpendicular to the slope (see Fig. 1 depicting two slope sides, such as the left and right sides, cited to read on the claimed “to be placed parallel to the slope of the roof” because the cited left and right sides are structurally capable of being placed parallel to the slope of the roof and depicting two horizontal sides, such as the top and bottom sides, cited to read on the claimed “to be placed perpendicular to the slope” because the cited top and bottom sides are structurally capable of being placed perpendicular to the slope),
a front surface arranged to face the sun and opposite to a glued surface (such as the top front surface of 11 depicted in Fig. 3 as arranged to face the sun and opposite a bottom most surface cited to read on the claimed “glued surface” because it is a surface structurally capable of being glued);
a plurality of photovoltaic cells, disposed in the laminate (as depicted in Fig. 1, a plurality of photovoltaic cells 12, disposed in the laminate),
two monopole junction boxes arranged on the same slope side of the module and on the front surface of the photovoltaic modules (as depicted in Fig. 1 and 3, two monopole junction boxes, the junction box 5 at the upper left corner between the left slope side and the top horizontal side and the junction box 5 at the bottom left corner between the left slope side and the bottom side, arranged on, or in close proximity to, the same slope side of the module, the cited left slope side, and on the front surface of the photovoltaic module), comprising
a first junction box attached respectively at a corner between one of the first or second slope side and a first horizontal side, and a second junction box attached at a corner between the same first or second slope side and the second horizontal side, connected to the photovoltaic cells (such as depicted in Fig. 1, a first junction box 5 at the upper left corner between a first left slope side and a first top horizontal side and a second junction box 5 at the bottom left corner between the same first left slope side and the second bottom side),
the two monopole junction boxes of the photovoltaic module being close to the same slope side of the photovoltaic module (as depicted in Fig. 1, the cited two monopole junction boxes 5 of the photovoltaic module being close to the same left slope side of the photovoltaic module).
Yanagiura teaches the photovoltaic module includes output wiring 6 drawn out of terminal box 5 in order to take out the generated electric power (see Fig. 1) but does not teach wherein the assembly includes a plurality of photovoltaic modules.
However, Koehler discloses a photovoltaic assembly (see Title and Abstract) and teaches a photovoltaic assembly for installation on a sloped roof (see Fig. 4 depicting a photovoltaic assembly which is structurally capable of being installed on a sloped roof).
Koehler teaches a plurality of photovoltaic modules (see Fig. 4 exemplifying three photovoltaic modules) which is cited to read on the claimed “arranged in at least one column parallel to a slope of the sloped roof and configured to be glued to the slope roof” because the cited plurality of photovoltaic modules depicted in Fig. 4 are structurally capable of, or have the configuration that allows for, being arranged in at least one column parallel to a slope of the sloped roof because the cited plurality of photovoltaic modules can be oriented vertically one after another in a column parallel to a slope of the sloped roof and are structurally capable of, or have the configuration that allows for, being glued to the sloped roof because the cited plurality of photovoltaic modules include a bottom most surface which is structurally capable of being glued to the sloped roof (also see [0028-0029] teaching panels installable in landscape or portrait mode).
Koehler teaches connection cables (22/21 depicted in Fig. 4 as connected to each other at connectors 2/3), spanning between the second junction box 1b of a photovoltaic module and the first junction box 1a of the next photovoltaic module in the plurality of photovoltaic modules arranged in at least one column (see Fig. 3a and Fig. 4); and collecting cables, configured to connect the plurality of photovoltaic modules to an electric collector (such as the cable 21 of the last photovoltaic module on the left and the cable 22 of the last photovoltaic module on the right depicted in Fig. 3a and implicit in Fig. 4 structurally capable of connecting the plurality of photovoltaic modules to an electric collector, such as a power optimizer to maximize the energy harvested from the plurality of photovoltaic modules; see [0064-0069]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the photovoltaic module of Yanagiura to include a plurality of photovoltaic modules, as suggested by Koehler, because it would have provided for maximization of the energy harvested from the plurality of photovoltaic modules.
Yanagiura discloses wherein the assembly comprises one return cable for each column of photovoltaic modules, which runs parallel to the slope sides of the photovoltaic modules, connecting the second junction box of the last photovoltaic module in the column to an electric collector (such as return cable 6 depicted in Fig. 1 as in the bottom right corner of the module structurally capable of connecting the second junction box of the last photovoltaic module in the column to an electric collector, such as a power optimizer, as modified by Koehler above).
With regard to claims 2, 3, and 10, independent claim 1 and dependent claim 9 are obvious over Yanagiura in view of Koehler under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above.
Yanagiura teaches a plurality of photovoltaic cells 12 in an electrical configuration between a top positive pole junction box 5 and a bottom negative pole junction box 5 (recall Fig. 1) but does not disclose the photovoltaic cells are arranged in columns, parallel to the slope sides.
However, Koehler discloses a photovoltaic assembly (see Title and Abstract) and teaches an electrical configuration of photovoltaic cells (300, 307, 308, 315, 316, and 323, Fig. 3b) between a top positive junction box 1a and a bottom negative junction box 1b (see Fig. 3b teaching electrical configuration of photovoltaic cells between a top positive junction box 1a and a bottom negative junction box 1b and including a bypass diode 24 and corresponding circuitry). While Koehler teaches “rows” of solar cells, in the orientation depicted in Fig. 3b wherein the positive junction box 1a and the negative junction box 1b is oriented vertically aligned, the cited solar cells of Koehler are cited to read on the claimed “arranged in columns” (also see [0028-0029] teaching panels installable in landscape or portrait mode).
Koehler teaches at least one connecting electric track comprising connection segments connecting one photovoltaic cell to the next in a column of photovoltaic cells and a first respectively last photovoltaic cell of a first respectively last column of the arrangement to a junction box, and U-shapes, connected the last photovoltaic cell of a column to the first photovoltaic cell of the next column in the arrangement (as depicted in Fig. 3b and annotated Fig. 3b below, at least one connecting electric track comprising connection segments connecting one photovoltaic cell to the next in a column of photovoltaic cells and a first respectively last photovoltaic cell of a first respectively last column of the arrangement to a junction box 1b, and U-shapes, connected the last photovoltaic cell of a column to the first photovoltaic cell of the next column in the arrangement).
PNG
media_image1.png
706
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3b
Koehler teaches the electrical configuration of the photovoltaic cells between the cited top positive junction box and cited bottom negative junction box provides a circuit design which enables use of a junction box with short cables and connectors at opposite corners while the module’s circuit is still protected by a bypass diode (see [0006-0007]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the electrical configuration of the photovoltaic cells in the assembly of Yanagiura, as modified above, to include the electrical configuration cited in Koehler because it would have provided for enabling use of a junction box with short cables and connectors at opposite corners while the module’s circuit is still protected by a bypass diode.
With regard to claims 5, 6, and 11, independent claim 1 and dependent claim 9 are obvious over Yanagiura in view of Koehler under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above.
Yanagiura teaches a plurality of photovoltaic cells 12 in an electrical configuration between a top positive pole junction box 5 and a bottom negative pole junction box 5 (recall Fig. 1) but does not disclose the photovoltaic cells are arranged in lines, parallel to the horizontal sides.
However, Koehler discloses a photovoltaic assembly (see Title and Abstract) and teaches an electrical configuration of photovoltaic cells (300, 307, 308, 315, 316, and 323, Fig. 3b) between a right positive junction box 1a and a left negative junction box 1b (see Fig. 2a teaching electrical configuration of photovoltaic cells between a right positive junction box 1a and a left negative junction box 1b and including a bypass diode 24 and corresponding circuitry). Koehler teaches “rows” of solar cells, in the orientation depicted in Fig. 2a wherein the positive junction box 1a and the negative junction box 1b is oriented horizontally aligned reading on the claimed “lines” (also see [0028-0029] teaching panels installable in landscape or portrait mode).
Koehler teaches at least one connecting electric track comprising connection segments connecting one photovoltaic cell to the next in a line of photovoltaic cells and a first respectively last photovoltaic cell of the first respectively last line of the arrangement to a junction box, and U-shapes, connected a last photovoltaic cell of a line to the first photovoltaic cell of the next line in the arrangement (as depicted in Fig. 3b and annotated Fig. 2b below, at least one connecting electric track comprising connection segments connecting one photovoltaic cell to the next in a line of photovoltaic cells and the first respectively last photovoltaic cell of the first respectively last line of the arrangement to a junction box 1b, and U-shapes, connected the last photovoltaic cell of a line to the first photovoltaic cell of the next line in the arrangement).
PNG
media_image2.png
542
699
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2b
Koehler teaches the electrical configuration of the photovoltaic cells between the cited right positive junction box and cited left negative junction box provides a circuit design which enables use of a junction box with short cables and connectors at opposite corners while the module’s circuit is still protected by a bypass diode (see [0006-0007]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the electrical configuration of the photovoltaic cells in the assembly of Azoulay to include the electrical configuration cited in Koehler because it would have provided for enabling use of a junction box with short cables and connectors at opposite corners while the module’s circuit is still protected by a bypass diode.
With regard to claim 14, dependent claim 5 is obvious over Yanagiura in view of Koehler under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Yanagiura teaches
one return cable for each column of photovoltaic modules, which runs parallel to the slope sides of the photovoltaic modules, connecting the second junction box of the last photovoltaic module in the column to an electric collector (such as return cable 6 depicted in Fig. 1 as in the bottom right corner of the module structurally capable of connecting the second junction box of the last photovoltaic module in the column to an electric collector, such as a power optimizer, as modified by Koehler above).
With regard to claim 7, dependent claim 14 is obvious over Yanagiura in view of Koehler under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Yanagiura teaches
the return cable and at least a portion of the connecting cables are enclosed inside a cable sheath, the cable sheath being parallel to the slope sides of the photovoltaic modules (as depicted in Fig. 3, the cited return cable 6 and the cited connecting cables are enclosed inside a cable sheath, such as the material of junction box 5 cited to read on the claimed “cable sheath” because it functions as an electrically insulating cover encasing a portion of the cited return cable 6 and cited connecting cables; see Fig. 3 depicting the cited cable sheath extending in three-dimensions which is cited to read on the claimed “being parallel to the slope sides of the photovoltaic modules” because it includes portions extending in a direction parallel to the cited slope sides).
With regard to claims 8 and 12, independent claim 1 is obvious over Yanagiura in view of Koehler under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Yanagiura, as modified by Koehler above, teaches
a return electric track embedded in the photovoltaic modules and parallel the slope side (Koehler: such as return electric track 35, Fig. 3a structurally capable of being parallel to the cited slope side), wherein
the return electric track of one photovoltaic module is connected to the return electric track o the next photovoltaic module in the plurality of photovoltaic modules arranged in at least one column (Koehler: as depicted in Fig. 3a and 4, the return electric track of one photovoltaic module is electrically connected to the return electric track o the next photovoltaic module in the plurality of photovoltaic modules arranged in at least one column),
the return electric track of a first photovoltaic module in a column being also connected to a collecting cable (Koehler: as depicted in Fig. 3a and 4, the return electric track of a first photovoltaic module in a column being also electrically connected to a cited collecting cable), and
the return electric track of a last photovoltaic module in a column being connected to the second junction box of said last photovoltaic module of the column (Koehler: as depicted in Fig. 3a and 4, the return electric track of a last photovoltaic module in a column being electrically connected to the second junction box of said last photovoltaic module of the column), the photovoltaic modules comprise
a return electric track, parallel to its slope side (such as return cable 6 depicted in Fig. 1 as in the bottom right corner of the module parallel to its slope side).
With regard to claim 13, Yanagiura, as modified by Koehler above, teaches a corrugated sheet, for installation on a roof or structure, characterized in that is comprises
at least one photovoltaic module according to claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above),
attached to its upper side, with the slope sides parallel to ridges of the corrugated sheet (Yanagiura: see Fig. 1-3 depicting ridges in the underlying material created by 4).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 20, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in the response that Yanagiura does not teach junction boxes attached at a corner between a slope side and a horizontal side because Yanagiura teaches junction boxes 5 are located in a central position along the edge of each solar cell panel 10. However, this argument is not persuasive.
The claims require junction boxes attached at the corner of the module, not the corner of each panel.
Applicant argues Yanagiura does not teach the claimed return cable and collection cable. However, the rejections of the claims do not allege or rely on Yanagiura, alone, to teach the claimed limitations.
Applicant argues that Yanagiura does not teach modules configured to be glued to a sloped roof because the back of the modules are non-flat, and the modules are of significant weight. However, these speculative arguments are not persuasive as they are conclusionary statements not based in evidence. No where in Yanagiura is a teaching that non-flat modules and modules of significant weight are not configurable to be glued to a sloped roof.
Applicant argues in the response that Yanagiura must have the X direction facing down the face of a roof surface because rain does not flow horizontally across a roof slope, which is different from the claimed invention.
However, this argument is not persuasive and the rejections of the claims do not modify Yanagiura to have the X direction facing down the face of a roof surface.
Additionally, Yanagiura is silent, explicitly and implicitly, on rain water flowing in the X direction. The cited portion of Yanagiura teaching water flowing the in X direction is referring to the direction of heated water flowing from port 31 to port 32, not rain water flowing across a sloped roof.
Applicant concludes in the response that Koehler fails to remedy the deficiencies of Yanagiura. However, this conclusion is not persuasive.
Applicant argues in the response that the reason for combining is hindsight. However, this argument is not persuasive and the rejections of the claims explicitly states the reason for modification is “because it would have provided for maximization of the energy harvested from the plurality of photovoltaic modules”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN Q DAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5120. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6:00 AM to 2:00 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (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 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.
/DUSTIN Q DAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721 January 22, 2026