DETAILED ACTION
Final Rejection
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, filed 10/06/2025 to claims are accepted. In this amendment, claims 1and 28 have been amended. Claim 5: cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 15, 20-24 and 100 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luukkala et al. (US 2005/0174720).
Regarding Claim 1. Luukkala teaches an apparatus comprising(fig. 1):
1) a detection plate (2)
2) a supporting frame (5 and bottom 8 to gather : fig. 1); and
3) a force sensor (3) between said supporting frame (bottom 8) and said detection plate (2: fig. 1)
a sensor affixed (3) to the underside of said detection plate(2)(figs. 1, 2a-2b; resilient mounting adapter component Typically, detector 3 is rigidly mounted on the detector surface 2:[0048]),
wherein said force sensor attaches said detection plate (resilient mounting adapter component Typically, detector 3 is rigidly mounted on the detector surface 2:[0048])to said supporting frame(bottom 8)(The cover 2 is rigidly attached at its edges to the body 5 of the box and in the middle of it a ceramic piezo element 3 is attached to its underside by gluing or soldering with electronics and bolted with bottom 8: [0047]-[0050] , [0055]; figs 2a-2b).
Regarding Claim 15. Luukkala further teaches said force sensor comprises a load cell ([0017],[0050]).
Regarding Claim 20. Luukkala further teaches said microprocessor(4) is configured to calculate hydrometer impact data([0047]-[0048]).
Regarding Claim 21. Luukkala further teaches said microprocessor is configured to receive inputs from a plurality of sensors (claims 3-5)
Regarding Claim 22. Luukkala further teaches said microprocessor is configured to calculate hydrometeor impact data from multiple sensor signals ([0017], [0060]-[[0064],[0073])
Regarding Claim 23. Luukkala further teaches microprocessor is configured to calculate hydrometeor impact data comprising hydrometeor size, hydrometeor volume, hydrometeor mass, hydrometeor momentum, hydrometeor energy, and/or hydrometeor velocity ([0011], [0047], [0083], [0085]).
Regarding Claim 24. Luukkala further teaches said microprocessor(4) is configured to calculate a distribution, range, mean, mode, and/or median of one or more of hydrometeor impact data comprising hydrometeor size, hydrometeor volume, hydrometeor mass, hydrometeor momentum, hydrometeor energy, and/or hydrometeor velocity for a plurality of hydrometeors(an estimate on the incremental value ΔP of cumulative rainfall detected over the cycle, a fixed measurement cycle time increment, typically selected to be in the range 1-10 minutes : [0060]; summing the incremental rainfall values of successively recorded measurement cycles , average intensity R of rainfall during a measurement cycle: [0066]; computing rainfall intensity (mm/h) and cumulative rainfall (mm): [0047], [0055], [0073]; ).
Regarding Claim 100. Luukkala further teaches a system comprising an apparatus of claim 1(fig. 1) and a computer configured (4) to collect hail data from the apparatus and provide real-time or predicted weather information (precipitation/hail sensor and method for precipitation rate measurement: title, abstract; an estimate on the incremental value ΔP of cumulative rainfall detected over the cycle: [0060]-[0068]; computing rainfall intensity (mm/h) and cumulative rainfall (mm): [0047]).
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) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luukkala in view of Schiff.
Regarding Claim 11. Luukkala silent about said detection plate comprises a solar panel.
Schiff further teaches said detection plate comprises a solar panel([0041]-[0042].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Luukkala, said detection plate comprises a solar panel, as taught by Schiff, so as to accurate hail detection and other site-specific measurements and parameters in compact and inexpensive way.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luukkala in view of Sutter et al. (US 2016/0265993).
Regarding Claim 17. Luukkala silent about said detection plate has an area of at least 3.5 square feet to 100 square feet.
However, Sutter teaches said detection plate has an area of at least 3.5 square feet to 100 square feet ([0068], fig. 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Luukkala, aid detection plate has an area of at least 3.5 square feet to 100 square feet, as taught by Sutter, so as to Hail strike recording device of roof assembly used for building structure.
Claim(s) 28, 95 and 99 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luukkala in view of Warude et al. (Harnessing of Kinetic Energy of Raindrops, 2015)
Regarding Claim 28. Luukkala teaches an elastic covering component that partially or fully covers the top of the detection plate (covering the detector surface, such as piezoelectric PVDF polymer film:[0050]-[0052], [0073]).
Luukkala silent about said elastic covering, i.e. PVDF polymer film, maximizes transfer of impactor kinetic energy to the detection plate.
However, Warude teaches said elastic covering, i.e. PVDF polymer film, maximizes transfer of impactor kinetic energy to the detection plate(PVDF material as it best suits the requirement in terms of flexibility, strength, and sensitivity to mechanical strain. The diagram fig 6. Shows the experimental setup for collection of vibration energy. several piezoelectric membranes are used to obtain the impact vibration without loss page 196-198, section 3.2; table 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the invention of Luukkala, PVDF polymer film, maximizes transfer of impactor kinetic energy to the detection plate, as taught by Warude, so as to calculate procurable energy of the raindrops in compact and inexpensive way.
Regarding Claim 95. Luukkala further teaches said elastic covering component comprises a rubber, foam, membrane, meshed material, or net PVDF polymer film:[0050]-[0052], [0073].
Regarding Claim 99. Luukkala further teaches a sensor pack affixed to the underside of said detection plate(3: fig. 1; fig. 2a-2b; [0048]).
Claim(s) 96-98 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luukkala in view of Warude, further in view of Lomasney (US 2018/0183383).
Regarding Claim 96. The modified Luukkal silent about said elastic covering component permits transmission of light.
However, Lomasney teaches said elastic covering, i.e. PVDF, component permits transmission of light (The solar absorber may consist of any of the materials that are capable of converting sunlight into electricity. Examples are monocrystalline or amorphous silicon, CIGS, gallium arsenide, and cadmium telluride.The solar absorber is covered with a suitable polymeric covering. Examples of polymers that can be employed for such purpose include fluorinated polymers such as ethylene tetrafluoroethylene copolymer (ETFE), fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP), and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). Such polymers provide extended lifetimes under ambient exposure conditions. These also exhibit light transmission property : [0100]-[0101]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the modified invention of Luukkala, said elastic covering, i.e. PVDF, component permits transmission of light, as taught by Lomasney, so as to manage the excess heat to mitigate an adverse effect on an electrical output of a semiconductor and electronics systems, thus extending operational lifetime of a photovoltaic system and improving energy conversion efficiency.
Regarding Claim 97. The modified Luukkal silent about said elastic covering component permits transmission of light sufficient to produce electric current by a photovoltaic panel.
However, Lomasney teaches said elastic covering component permits transmission of light sufficient to produce electric current by a photovoltaic panel ((The solar absorber may consist of any of the materials that are capable of converting sunlight into electricity. Examples are monocrystalline or amorphous silicon, CIGS, gallium arsenide, and cadmium telluride.The solar absorber is covered with a suitable polymeric covering. Examples of polymers that can be employed for such purpose include fluorinated polymers such as ethylene tetrafluoroethylene copolymer (ETFE), fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP), and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). Such polymers provide extended lifetimes under ambient exposure conditions. These also exhibit light transmission property : [0100]-[0101])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the modified invention of Luukkala, said elastic covering component permits transmission of light sufficient to produce electric current by a photovoltaic panel, as taught by Lomasney, so as to manage the excess heat to mitigate an adverse effect on an electrical output of a semiconductor and electronics systems, thus extending operational lifetime of a photovoltaic system and improving energy conversion efficiency.
Regarding Claim 98. Luukkal further teaches a layer of piezoelectric ceramic material ([0052]).
The modified Luukkal silent said elastic covering component comprises silicone.
However, Lomasney teaches said elastic covering component comprises silicone([0087], [0100]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the modified invention of Luukkala, said elastic covering component comprises silicone, as taught by Lomasney, so as to manage the excess heat to mitigate an adverse effect on an electrical output of a semiconductor and electronics systems, thus extending operational lifetime of a photovoltaic system and improving energy conversion efficiency.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 28, applicant argus that cited prior arts does not teaches amended limitation.
In response , the Examiner respectfully disagree because cited prior art teaches the amended limitation as wherein said force sensor attaches said detection plate (resilient mounting adapter component Typically, detector 3 is rigidly mounted on the detector surface 2:[0048])to said supporting frame(bottom 8)(The cover 2 is rigidly attached at its edges to the body 5 of the box and in the middle of it a ceramic piezo element 3 is attached to its underside by gluing or soldering with electronics and bolted with bottom 8: [0047]-[0050] , [0055]; figs 2a-2b). As such 102 is maintained.
Conclusion
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 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Garrett et al. (US 2020/0326456) disclose the heating elements 212 do not capture light or otherwise receive visual data from the hydrometeors, visualization of the hydrometeors or other data processing may nevertheless be carried out based on the pattern of heating elements that are activated to heat the hydrometeors.
b) Tolmachev (US 2014/0170511) disclose The porous solid matrix is, for example, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), a dielectric such as silicon carbide, silicon dioxide, a silicate, other ceramic materials, other polymer materials, etc. The ion conducting liquid is, for example, water, an acid, a base, a salt, a molten electrolyte, an organic solvent, or a combination thereof.
Contact information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD K ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0328. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached on 571-272-6334. 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.
/MOHAMMAD K ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights