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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11, 13-14, 18-19, 24, 26, and 31-32 as set forth in applicant’s amendment filed 20 October 2025 are presently under consideration. Claims 12, 15-17, 20-23, 25, 27-30, and 33 are cancelled.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the prior art grounds of rejection and indefiniteness rejections of record, and thus are withdrawn.
Upon performing updated search and consideration of applicant’s newly amended claims, new prior art was uncovered and a new grounds of rejection is set forth below.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300), and further in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) and in further view of Krut (US 5,460,659).
Regarding claim 1 Munro discloses a Photovoltaic component (Fig. 14 see: solar conversion apparatus 80), comprising,
an outer pane ([0070], [0037]-[0038], Figs. 3-4, 14 see: condensing lenses 82 have Fresnel microstructure 68 are mounted on a glass substrate 60 said substrate meets the limitation of the claimed outer pane); and
an inner pane ([0070], [0041] Figs. 5, 14 see: bulkhead surface 34 supporting reflectors which as shown in Fig. 5 has a lowermost layer 201 as a glass substrate layer meeting the limitation of an inner pane);
an energy generating layer comprising a plurality of concentrator photovoltaic modules is arranged between the outer pane and the inner pane, the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprising
a condenser optic as the primary optic ([0070], [0037]-[0038], Figs. 3-4, 14 see: Fresnel microstructure 68 of the condensing lenses 82);
a partially transparent deflection optic as secondary optic ([0070]-[0071], [0082] Figs. 14-15 see: four reflector assemblies 86, 87, 88, and 89 which include reflective filtering Fresnels that are each reflective to a selected band of wavelengths and is transmissive to other wavelengths); and
a photovoltaic chip integrated into a surface mountable housing ([0070] [0072] Figs. 14-15 see: photovoltaic cells 90A, 90B, 90C, and 90D mounted on internal bulkhead 94); wherein
the condenser optic is arranged between the outer pane and the photovoltaic chip ([0070], [0037]-[0038], Figs. 3-4, 14 see: condensing lenses 82 have Fresnel microstructure 68 are mounted on a glass substrate 60 and thus are mounted between substrate 60 and photovoltaic cells 90A-D); and
the partially transparent deflection optic is arranged between the photovoltaic chip and the inner pane ([0070]-[0071], [0082] Figs. 14-15 see: reflector assemblies 86-89 mounted between bulkhead surface 34 and photovoltaic cells 90A-D.
Munro does not explicitly disclose photovoltaic chip integrated into the surface mountable housing as part of an integrated surface mountable module in SMD technology (Surface Mount Technology) with the surface mountable housing having a transparent cover and an integrated reflector as a tertiary optic; wherein the surface mountable module comprises a base body of plastic, comprising a recess forming a receiving tray with a recessed bottom portion for receiving the photovoltaic chip; the receiving tray has side walls with reflective regions which form the reflector; the surface mountable housing comprises at least two electrical contacts for contacting the photovoltaic chip, and an entrance opening of the integrated reflector face the inner pane.
Shook discloses an integrated surface mountable module in SMD technology (Surface Mount Technology) comprising photovoltaic chip integrated into the surface mountable housing (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0024], [0027], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: solar cell 220/390 provided within assembled leadframe package 200/300), with the surface mountable housing having a transparent cover (Shook, [0029]-[0030], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B, 4A-4B see: aperture 469 can be filled or provided with an additional optical element or optically active layer to provide additional protection for the solar cell from the environment) and an integrated reflector (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the wall of aperture 269/wall surface 375 of aperture 369 is reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell) as a tertiary optic; wherein the surface mountable module comprises a base body of plastic (Shook, [0026], Fig. 3A-3B see: mold compound 355 forming reflective wall surface 375 of the aperture wall 369 is a polymer such as an epoxy), comprising a recess forming a receiving tray with a recessed bottom portion for receiving the photovoltaic chip (Shook, [0021], [0024], [0027], Figs. Figs. 2B, 3A-3B see: mold compound 355 forms a recessed bottom cavity (receiving tray) encapsulating the solar cell 220/390); the receiving tray has side walls with reflective regions which form the reflector (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the wall of aperture 269/wall surface 375 of aperture 369 is reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell); the surface mountable housing comprises at least two electrical contacts for contacting the photovoltaic chip (Shook, [0019]-[0020], Fig. 3A-3B see: assembled leadframe package 200/300 includes at least two electrical contacts 340, 335 for contacting the positive and negative polarity terminals of the solar cell 390). Shook teaches this arrangement provides better protection against environmental conditions in concentrated photovoltaic systems and can provide reduced manufacturing costs by minimizing the number of parts in the overall receiver design (Shook, [0015]).
Shook and Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Shook such that the surface mountable housing and photovoltaic chip of Munro are part of a integrated surface mountable module in SMD technology (Surface Mount Technology) as in Shook (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0024], [0027], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: solar cell 220/390 provided within assembled leadframe package 200/300) with the surface mountable housing having a transparent cover as in Shook (Shook, [0029]-[0030], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B, 4A-4B see: aperture 469 can be filled or provided with an additional optical element or optically active layer to provide additional protection for the solar cell from the environment) and an integrated reflector as in Shook (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the wall of aperture 269/wall surface 375 of aperture 369 is reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell) as a tertiary optic; wherein the surface mountable module comprises a base body of plastic as in Shook (Shook, [0026], Fig. 3A-3B see: mold compound 355 forming reflective wall surface 375 of the aperture wall 369 is a polymer such as an epoxy), comprising a recess forming a receiving tray with a recessed bottom portion for receiving the photovoltaic chip as in Shook (Shook, [0021], [0024], [0027], Figs. Figs. 2B, 3A-3B see: mold compound 355 forms a recessed bottom cavity (receiving tray) encapsulating the solar cell 220/390); the receiving tray has side walls with reflective regions which form the reflector as in Shook (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the wall of aperture 269/wall surface 375 of aperture 369 is reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell) where the surface mountable housing comprises at least two electrical contacts for contacting the photovoltaic chip as in Shook (Shook, [0019]-[0020], Fig. 3A-3B see: assembled leadframe package 200/300 includes at least two electrical contacts 340, 335 for contacting the positive and negative polarity terminals of the solar cell 390) as Shook teaches this arrangement provides better protection against environmental conditions in concentrated photovoltaic systems and can provide reduced manufacturing costs by minimizing the number of parts in the overall receiver design (Shook, [0015]).
Furthermore, as the photovoltaic chips of Munro (Fig. 14 see: photovoltaic cells 90A-D) face the inner pane of Munro (Fig. 14 see: bulkhead surface 34 with reflector assemblies 86-89), it would logically follow to also arrange the transparent cover and an entrance opening of the integrated reflector to face the inner pane in Monro as modified by Shook to receive the reflected light.
Although the assembled leadframe package disclosed by Shook is considered to meet the limitations of an integrated surface mountable module in SMD technology (Surface Mount Technology), in the alternative where it’s not clear that the recited module is surface mountable, Krut also teaches such leadframe packages for concentrated solar cells can be formed as integrated surface mountable module in SMD technology (Krut, C3/L10-15, C5/L3-16, Figs. 2-3, and 4c-4f see: solar cell 2 mounted to a carrier 4(4c-4f) formed with pins 6c-6f as surface mounted packages for mounting to a substrate 16c-16f) where Krut teaches this allows the solar cells to be then mounted to a printed circuit board with existing electrical interconnections allowing any desired interconnection of the solar cells and allowing higher automation of the manufacturing process using existing microelectronics packaging equipment (Krut, C3/L1-10).
Krut and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Krut such that the integrated module of modified Munro is surface mountable in SMD technology (Surface Mount Technology) as in Krut (Krut, C3/L10-15, C5/L3-16, Figs. 2-3, and 4c-4f see: solar cell 2 mounted to a carrier 4(4c-4f) formed with pins 6c-6f as surface mounted packages for mounting to a substrate 16c-16f) as Krut teaches this allows the solar cells to be then mounted to a printed circuit board with existing electrical interconnections allowing any desired interconnection of the solar cells and allowing higher automation of the manufacturing process using existing microelectronics packaging equipment (Krut, C3/L1-10).
Regarding claim 2 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, wherein
the condenser optic is configured to focus sunlight incident through the outer pane onto one or more deflection regions of the deflection optic (Munro, [0070]-[0071], [0074], Fig. 14 see: Fresnel microstructure 68 of condensing lens 82 focuses solar radiation 22 into converging solar energy 84 onto reflector assemblies 86-89);
the deflection optic is configured to deflect the sunlight focused by the condenser optic onto the one or more deflection regions into the integrated reflector (Munro, [0071]-[0074], Fig. 14 see: reflector assemblies 86-89 reflect light as four groups of light 92A-92D towards photovoltaic cells 90A-D and thus also to the reflective aperture walls by the modification of Shook); and Shook teaches
the reflector is configured to concentrate the sunlight deflected by the deflection optic onto the photovoltaic chip (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the wall of aperture 269/wall surface 375 of aperture 369 is reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell).
Regarding claim 3 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and Munro teaches that at least one of the one or more deflection regions is arranged laterally offset from the surface-mountable housing (Munro, [0071]-[0074], Figs. 14-15 see: reflector assemblies 86-89 laterally offset from internal bulkhead 94 portions with photovoltaic cells 90A-D).
Regarding claim 4 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, where the deflection optic is configured to perform a multi-stage deflection of the sunlight into the integrated reflector (Munro, [0045]-[0046], Fig. 5 see: incoming white light ray 24 undergoes multiple stages of reflection first at upper surface 206 and at Fresnel microstructure 53).
Regarding claim 5 modified Munro discloses Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, wherein the one or more deflection regions are designed as reflective surfaces (Munro, [0070]-[0071], [0082] Figs. 14-15 see: four reflector assemblies 86, 87, 88, and 89 which include reflective filtering Fresnels (Figs. 5 and 11F)).
Regarding claim 7 modified Munro discloses Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and regarding the claim 7 limitation where “the photovoltaic component has a light transmission of more than 50%“ as Munro teaches the glass of substrates 60 at the surface of the solar conversion apparatus are made of glass which has excellent transmissivity (para [0038]), the photovoltaic component of Munro is thus considered to meet the limitation of having light transmission of more than 50%.
Regarding claim 9 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and Munro teaches where the condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprise a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side (Munro, Figs. 14-15 see: condensing lenses 82 with Fresnel microstructure 68 arranged side by side).
Regarding claim 26 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1,and Munro teaches that the deflection optic comprises one or more prisms (Munro, [0041] Fig. 5 see: Fresnel microstructures 50 each with a triangular prism shape).
Regarding claim 31 modified Munro discloses a Device or building comprising one or more photovoltaic components, each of the one or more photovoltaic components comprising the photovoltaic component according claim 1, wherein the device is in particular a vehicle, a container or a greenhouse (Munro, [0081] Fig. 18 see: heliostat (device) comprising the solar conversion apparatuses 80).
Regarding claim 32 modified Munro discloses Use of the photovoltaic component according to claim 1, for installation in or attachment to a building, a vehicle, a container, a greenhouse, and other devices or for arranging on agricultural land (Munro, [0081] Fig. 18 see: heliostat (device) using the attached/installed solar conversion apparatuses 80).
Claims 4, 9, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-3, 5, 7, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of Morgan’631 (US 2014/0261631).
Regarding claim 4 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and in the alternative where modified Munro does not explicitly disclose where the deflection optic is configured to perform a multi-stage deflection of the sunlight into the integrated reflector, Morgan’631 teaches a photovoltaic component with a rear deflection optic configured to perform a multi-stage deflection of the sunlight into a solar cell (Morgan’631, [0104], Figs. 10-11 see: light guide optic 240 with reflective surface 242 and conditioning surface 243 providing multi-stage deflection for light (13, 15, 17) into photovoltaic cell 24).
Morgan’631 and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Morgan’631 such that the deflection optic of Munro is configured to perform a multi-stage deflection of the sunlight into the integrated reflector of Munro as in Morgan’631 ([0104], Figs. 10-11 see: light guide optic 240 with reflective surface 242 and conditioning surface 243 providing multi-stage deflection for light (13, 15, 17) into photovoltaic cell 24) as such a modification would have amounted to the use of a known secondary optic for its intended use in the known environment of a concentrating photovoltaic component for its intended use to accomplish the entirely expected result of deflecting light towards an integrated reflector and solar cell.
Regarding claim 9 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and in the alternative where it’s not clear Munro teaches where the condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprise a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side and wherein the condenser lenses are arranged in particular rotationally symmetrical to a central axis of the concentrator photovoltaic module, Morgan’631 teaches a photovoltaic component with a condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprise a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side and wherein the condenser lenses are arranged rotationally symmetrical to a central axis of the concentrator photovoltaic module (Morgan’631, [0103] Figs. 8C and 10 see: Focusing optic 250 of side by side lenses 52 where lenses 52 are shown rotationally symmetric about central axis 44 of photovoltaic cell 24 optical unit 208).
Morgan’631 and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Morgan’631 such that the condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules of Munro comprise a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side and wherein the condenser lenses are arranged rotationally symmetrical to a central axis of the concentrator photovoltaic module as in Morgan’631 ([0103] Figs. 8C and 10 see: Focusing optic 250 of side by side lenses 52 where lenses 52 are shown rotationally symmetric about central axis 44 of photovoltaic cell 24 optical unit 208) as such a modification would have amounted to the use of a known primary focusing optic for its intended use in the known environment of a concentrating photovoltaic component for its intended use to accomplish the entirely expected result of focusing light towards a secondary reflecting optic.
Regarding claim 24 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose where the condenser optic is fixed or supported on the outer pane by means of webs (; and/or the deflection optic is fixed or supported on the inner pane by means of webs, wherein the webs are designed as optical waveguides.
Morgan’631 teaches a photovoltaic component with a rear deflection optic fixed or supported on an inner pane by means of webs wherein the webs are designed as optical waveguides (Morgan’631, Fig. 13 see: reflective surface 542a-542d fixed to a rigid sheet 12 by thinner portions of light guide optic 540 at surfaces 547 considered to meet the limitation of webs functioning as optical waveguides).
Morgan’631 and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Morgan’631 such that the deflection optic of Munro is fixed or supported on the inner pane of Munro by means of webs, wherein the webs are designed as optical waveguides as in Morgan’631 (Morgan’631, Fig. 13 see: reflective surface 542a-542d fixed to a rigid sheet 12 by thinner portions of light guide optic 540 at surfaces 547 considered to meet the limitation of webs functioning as optical waveguides) as such a modification would have amounted to the use of a known secondary optic for its intended use in the known environment of a concentrating photovoltaic component for its intended use to accomplish the entirely expected result of deflecting light towards an integrated reflector and solar cell.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of Chen (US 2003/0075212).
Regarding claim 6 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the deflection optic comprises an optical fiber.
Chen teaches a Photovoltaic component comprising a deflection optic including an optical fiber (Chen, [0023], Figs. 3a-3b see: optical fiber 30).
Chen and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Chen such that the deflection optic of Munro including an optical fiber as in Chen ([0023], Figs. 3a-3b see: optical fiber 30) for the express purpose of increasing light concentration to the photovoltaic cells of Munro as in Chen ([0023]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of BASOL (US 2010/0248415).
Regarding claim 8 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the deflection region or the deflection regions of the deflection optic cover a maximum of 20% of the horizontal cross-sectional area of the photovoltaic component.
However, as noted by BASOL, photovoltaic components can be made transparent or light transmissive by providing openings in an area of the device allowing the device to be utilized in building facades (BASOL, [0007]-[0008]). BASOL teaches the light transmittance of the device relative to the power conversion efficiency of the device can be adjusted by modifying this area (BASOL, [0020]).
As such the light transmittance of the device and the power conversion efficiency are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the area of the deflection region, with the light transmittance of the device increasing and the power conversion efficiency decreasing as the area of the deflection region is decreased, the precise area of the deflection region would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed area of the deflection region cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the area of the deflection region in the apparatus of modified Munro to obtain the desired balance between the light transmittance of the device and the power conversion efficiency (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of Hu (US 2017/0336527).
Regarding claim 10 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprises a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side, wherein at least one of the condenser lenses is arranged inclined at an angle, in particular a fifth angle, with respect to a horizontal plane of the photovoltaic component.
Hu teaches a photovoltaic component comprising condenser optic comprising a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side, wherein at least one of the condenser lenses is arranged inclined at an angle, in particular a fifth angle, with respect to a horizontal plane of the photovoltaic component (Hu,[0008], [0028] [0040], Figs. 2c-f, 9 see: composite Fresnel lens 501 having condenser lenses side by side with at least one angled with respected to a horizontal plane of sensing element 503).
Hu and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Hu such that the condenser optic of Munro comprises a plurality of condenser lenses arranged side by side, wherein at least one of the condenser lenses is arranged inclined at an angle, in particular a fifth angle, with respect to a horizontal plane of the photovoltaic component of Munro as in Hu ([0008], [0028] [0040], Figs. 2c-f, 9 see: composite Fresnel lens 501 having condenser lenses side by side with at least one angled with respected to a horizontal plane of sensing element 503) to increase the focus range of the condenser optic as in Hu ([0008]).
Regarding claim 11 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 10, and Hu teaches that the condenser optic of the concentrator photovoltaic modules comprises a first condenser lens arranged inclined at the fifth angle with respect to the horizontal plane of the photovoltaic component and a second condenser lens arranged parallel to the horizontal plane of the photovoltaic component (Hu, [0008], [0028] [0040], Figs. 2c-f, 9 see: composite Fresnel lens 501 having condenser lenses side by side with at least one angled with respected to a horizontal plane of sensing element 503 and a central lens arranged parallel to 503).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of Morgan’623 (US 2017/0125623)
Regarding claim 13 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, but Munro does not explicitly disclose wherein the concentrator photovoltaic modules are integrated into a transparent plastic material.
Morgan’623 teaches integrating concentrator photovoltaic modules into a transparent plastic material (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145], Figs. 4-5 see: bonding layer 120, encapsulation 136, bonding layer 122, (collectively transparent plastic material) integrating photovoltaic cells 134 and optical concentrating unit 104 and optical redirecting/collecting unit 114 together with upper and lower structural layers 124 and 126 in assembly 112) as Morgan’623 teaches these adhesive encapsulant materials provide protection and structural functions in the assembly (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145]).
Morgan’623 and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Morgan’623 such that the concentrator photovoltaic modules of Munro are integrated in into a transparent plastic material as taught by Morgan’623 (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145], Figs. 4-5 see: bonding layer 120, encapsulation 136, bonding layer 122, (collectively transparent plastic material) integrating photovoltaic cells 134 and optical concentrating unit 104 and optical redirecting/collecting unit 114 together with upper and lower structural layers 124 and 126 in assembly 112) for the purpose of providing adhesion, protection and structural support for these concentrator photovoltaic modules as in Morgan’623 (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145]).
Regarding claim 14 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1, and although Munro teaches wherein the energy generating layer is integrated between the outer and inner panes by means of an inner composite layer of plastic material (Munro, [0041] Fig. 5 see: adhesive encapsulant 51 bonding layers of reflector assembly 32 to glass substrate 201) Munro does not explicitly disclose an outer composite layer of plastic material.
Morgan’623 teaches integrating concentrator photovoltaic modules with outer and inner panes by means of an inner and an outer composite layer of plastic material (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145], Figs. 4-5 see: bonding layer 120, and bonding layer 122, (an inner and an outer composite layer of plastic material) integrating photovoltaic cells 134 and optical concentrating unit 104 and optical redirecting/collecting unit 114 together with upper and lower structural layers 124 and 126 in assembly 112) for the purpose of providing adhesion, structural support for these concentrator photovoltaic modules as in Morgan’623 (Morgan’623, [0140], [0145]).
Morgan’623 and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Morgan’623 such that the energy generating layer of Munro is integrated between the outer and inner panes of Munro by means of an outer and an inner composite layer of plastic material as in Morgan’623 (Morgan’623, [0134]-[0135], [0140], [0145], Figs. 4-5 see: bonding layer 120, and bonding layer 122, (an inner and an outer composite layer of plastic material) integrating photovoltaic cells 134 and optical concentrating unit 104 and optical redirecting/collecting unit 114 together with upper and lower structural layers 124 and 126 in assembly 112) for the express purpose of adhering the power generating layer of Munro to the outer and inner panes of Munro.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munro (US 2012/0160300) in view of Shook (US 2009/0159122) in view of Krut (US 5,460,659) as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 9, 26, and 31-32 above, and further in view of Ammar (US 2009/0223555).
Regarding claim 18 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 1 and Shook teaches that the receiving tray has sidewalls with at least first and second reflective regions, the first reflective region being oriented at a first angle with respect to a horizontal plane of the housing and the second reflective region being oriented at a second angle with respect to the horizontal plane of the housing (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the walls of aperture 269/wall surfaces 375 of aperture 369 are each angled and reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell) and although Shook does not explicitly disclose where the first angle is different from the second angle, Ammar further teaches such solar cell concentrators where such reflective surfaces can be formed such that the first angle is different from the second angle (Ammar, [0109] Figs. 4D-4E see: reflective side walls 129 with a first region angled perpendicular to a horizontal and a second region angled obliquely with respect to a horizontal).
Ammar and modified Munro are combinable as they are both concerned with concentrator solar cell apparatuses.
It would have been obvious ton one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the photovoltaic component of Munro in view of Ammar such that the first angle is different from the second angle in the first and second reflective regions of modified Munro as taught by Ammar (Ammar, [0109] Figs. 4D-4E see: reflective side walls 129 with a first region angled perpendicular to a horizontal and a second region angled obliquely with respect to a horizontal) as such a modification would have amounted to the mere selection of known reflective surface geometry in a reflective concentrator optic for its intended use in the known environment of a concentrator solar cell apparatus to accomplish the entirely expected result of focusing light onto the solar cell.
Regarding claim 19 modified Munro discloses the Photovoltaic component according to claim 18, and Shook teaches the receiving tray comprises side walls with a third and a fourth reflective region (Shook, [0021]-[0022], [0025], Figs. 2B and 3A-3B see: the walls of aperture 269/wall surfaces 375 of aperture 369 are each angled and reflective to assist in directing incoming light to the active area of the solar cell (four total)), and Ammar further teaches where such a third reflective region is oriented at a third angle with respect to the horizontal plane of the housing and the fourth reflective region is oriented at a fourth angle with respect to the horizontal plane of the housing (Ammar, [0109] Figs. 4D-4E see: reflective side walls 129 with a first region angled perpendicular to a horizontal and a second region angled obliquely with respect to a horizontal).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-11, 13-14, 18-19, 24, 26, and 31-32 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The prior art of Lau (US 8,778,704) and Tam (US 2013/0032203) are each cited as also disclosing solar cell modules integrated into plastic packaging for surface mounting.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J GOLDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7935. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm.
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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at 571-272-1307. 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.
ANDREW J. GOLDEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/ANDREW J GOLDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726