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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 6, 2026 has been entered.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1-12, 14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harikumaran et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2021/0079544) in view of Dutta (US Patent Application Publication no. 2017/0301810).
Regarding claim 1, Harikumaran discloses a system for photovoltaic energy production and hydrogen generation having a repeatable layout (abstract), comprising:
a plurality of hydrogen generating units (figure 8; paragraph 74); wherein each hydrogen generating unit comprises: an electrolyzer module (820); and
photovoltaic panels (800), the electrolyzer module electrically connectable to the photovoltaic panels (800; paragraph 74), wherein the photovoltaic panels (800) are arranged or positioned around the electrolyzer module (as shown in figure 8; paragraph 74 – electrolyzer stacks are surrounded by photovoltaic arrays).
Harikumaran teaches all of the features discussed above, but fails to teach that the photovoltaic panels are provided on one or more pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that the photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to produce electricity.
Dutta discloses a photovoltaic device comprising a plurality of pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency (paragraphs 65, 76, 107; figures 8, 16A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the photovoltaic panels of Harikumaran on pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun, as taught by Dutta, to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, Harikumaran teaches wherein the photovoltaic panels are arranged concentrically around the electrolyzer module (paragraphs 74-75 – electrolyzer stacks are surrounded by photovoltaic arrays).
Regarding claim 3, Harikumaran further teaches wherein each hydrogen generating unit of the plurality of hydrogen generating units is generally similar to other hydrogen generating units of the plurality of hydrogen generating units (paragraphs 72; 74-75 – the design is defined as requiring two or more repeat units).
Regarding claim 4, Harikumaran discloses wherein the plurality of hydrogen generating units comprises a first hydrogen generating unit (820) and a second hydrogen generating unit (820; figure 8 shows multiple hydrogen generating units surrounded by photovoltaic panels), wherein the photovoltaic panels (800) of the first hydrogen unit are arranged in a same pattern as photovoltaic panels of the second hydrogen unit (as shown in figure 8; paragraphs 72; 74-75 - the design is defined as requiring two or more repeat units).
Regarding claim 5, the photovoltaic panels (800) of each hydrogen unit (820) of the plurality of hydrogen generating units of Harikumaran are arranged in a pattern around the electrolyzer module (figure 8), wherein the plurality of hydrogen generating units in the system are arranged in the same pattern (as shown in figures 8-9).
Regarding claim 6, the photovoltaic panels (800; 900) of each hydrogen unit (820; 920) of the plurality of hydrogen generating units of Harikumaran are arranged in a square or rectangular shaped pattern around the electrolyzer module (figures 8-9), wherein the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820) in the system are arranged in the same pattern (as shown in figure 8).
Regarding claim 7, the hydrogen generating units (820) of the plurality of hydrogen generating units of Harikumaran are arranged in a repeating rectangle or square shaped pattern (as shown in figures 8-9).
Regarding claim 8, each electrolyzer module of Harikumaran includes a power electronic system that is electrically connectable to the photovoltaic panels (paragraphs 4; 34-35, 38, 67 – the system includes power electronics and switching to modify the configuration or selection of the photovoltaic array to deliver at its maximum power point).
Regarding claim 9, each electrolyzer module of Harikumaran includes a fluidic connection (840) that is fluidically connectable to a water supply (figure 8; paragraphs 34-36).
Regarding claim 10, Harikumaran discloses wherein access paths (840) are formed between the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820; figure 8).
Regarding claim 11, the access paths (840) of Harikumaran form generally straight passageways or paths between the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820; figure 8).
Regarding claim 12, the access paths (840) of Harikumaran pass directly by the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820; figure 8).
Regarding claim 14, the photovoltaic panels of Dutta are arranged in a pyramidical shape (paragraphs 76, 107; figures 8, 16A).
Regarding claim 16, Harikumaran discloses a system for photovoltaic energy production and hydrogen generation having a repeatable layout (abstract), comprising:
a first hydrogen generating unit comprising: a first electrolyzer module (820; figures 8-9); a first set of photovoltaic panels (800), wherein the first set of photovoltaic panels (800) are arranged or positioned around the first electrolyzer module (820; paragraphs 74-75 – electrolyzer stacks are surrounded by photovoltaic array),
the first electrolyzer module electrically connectable to the first set of photovoltaic panels (800) (by electrical wiring - paragraph 75);
a second hydrogen generating unit (all units are identified by reference numeral 820; figure 8) comprising:
a second electrolyzer module (820); a second set of photovoltaic panels (800), wherein the second set of photovoltaic panels (800) are arranged or positioned around the second electrolyzer module (paragraph 75 – all electrolyzer stacks are surrounded by photovoltaic panels 800); the second electrolyzer module electrically connectable to the second set of photovoltaic panels (by electrical wiring; paragraphs 74-75).
Harikumaran teaches all of the features discussed above, but fails to teach that the photovoltaic panels are provided on one or more pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that the photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to produce electricity.
Dutta discloses a photovoltaic device comprising a plurality of pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency (paragraphs 65, 76, 107; figures 8, 16A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the photovoltaic panels of Harikumaran on pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun, as taught by Dutta, to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 17, Harikumaran further teaches wherein each hydrogen generating unit of the plurality of hydrogen generating units is generally similar to other hydrogen generating units of the plurality of hydrogen generating units (paragraphs 72; 74-75 – the design is defined as requiring two or more repeat units).
Regarding claim 18, Harikumaran further comprises a third hydrogen generating unit (820 – figure 8 shows multiple hydrogen generating units; paragraphs 72, 74, 75) comprising: a third electrolyzer module (820); and a third set of photovoltaic panels (800), wherein the third set of photovoltaic panels 9800) are arranged or positioned around the third electrolyzer module (820; paragraph 75 – all electrolyzer are surrounded by photovoltaic panels 800; figure 8); the third electrolyzer module electrically connectable to the third set of photovoltaic panels (by electrical wiring; paragraphs 74-75).
Regarding claim 19, Harikumaran further teaches wherein each hydrogen generating unit of the plurality of hydrogen generating units is generally similar to other hydrogen generating units of the plurality of hydrogen generating units (paragraphs 72; 74-75 – the design is defined as requiring two or more repeat units).
Regarding claim 20, Harikumaran discloses a system for photovoltaic energy production and hydrogen generation having a repeatable layout (abstract), comprising:
a plurality of hydrogen generating units (paragraphs 72; 74-75 – the design is defined as requiring two or more repeat units);
wherein each hydrogen generating unit (820) comprises:
an electrolyzer module (820); photovoltaic panels (800), the electrolyzer module electrically connectable to the photovoltaic panels (by electrical wiring 930; paragraphs 74-75),
wherein the photovoltaic panels (800) are arranged or positioned concentrically around the electrolyzer module (as shown in figure 8; paragraph 74 – electrolyzer stacks are surrounded by photovoltaic arrays; and
wherein the photovoltaic panels (800) of each hydrogen unit of the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820) are arranged in a rectangle or square shaped pattern around the electrolyzer module (figures 8-9), wherein the plurality of hydrogen generating units (820) in the system are arranged in the same rectangle or square -shaped pattern (figures 8-9).
Harikumaran teaches all of the features discussed above, but fails to teach that the photovoltaic panels are provided on one or more pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that the photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to produce electricity.
Dutta discloses a photovoltaic device comprising a plurality of pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun such that photovoltaic panels receive sunlight directly to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency (paragraphs 65, 76, 107; figures 8, 16A).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the photovoltaic panels of Harikumaran on pyramidal shaped supports having an inclination toward the sun, as taught by Dutta, to provide an enhanced light-trapping mechanism to boost absorption and therefore improve efficiency.
Claims 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harikumaran in view of Dutta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ramirez Rodriguez et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2019/0131914).
Regarding claims 13, 15, Harikumaran in view of Dutta teaches all of the features discussed above, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the photovoltaic panels have a varying angle of inclination.
Ramirez Rodriguez discloses a system for generating electrical energy and hydrogen from electrolysis (abstract; paragraphs 10; 28), wherein the system is provided with moveable anchoring means that allow the photovoltaic panels to be inclined at an appropriate angle as a function of the latitude of the location of the system with the aim of optimizing the generation of photovoltaic energy (paragraph 38).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to vary the angle of inclination of the photovoltaic panels of the modified Harikumaran, as taught by Ramirez Rodriguez, with the aim of optimizing the generation of photovoltaic energy.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 16, 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The applicant argues that the prior art made of record fails to teach wherein the photovoltaic panels have an inclination toward the sun such that they receive sunlight directly to produce electricity, as amended. Therefore, after further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection have been presented in view of Dutta.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZULMARIAM MENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9805. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30p.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/ZULMARIAM MENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794