Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/208,044

SOLAR RECEIVER WITH VARIED REFLECTIVITY

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jun 09, 2023
Examiner
PEREIRO, JORGE ANDRES
Art Unit
3799
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Qatar Foundation For Education Science And Community Development
OA Round
2 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
615 granted / 971 resolved
-6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1010
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.8%
+15.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
§112
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,735,262 (hereinafter “HOUTMAN”). PNG media_image1.png 800 2173 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claims 1-6, HOUTMAN discloses a solar receiver, comprising: a porous structure (10); wherein the porous structure comprises at least one channel (26), wherein the porous structure includes a uniform or varying porosity distribution (see Figs. 1 & 2), wherein the at least one channel comprises a first pair of opposing surfaces and a second pair of opposing surfaces (the illustrated channels 26 are hexagonally shaped however, porous structure 10 could alternatively be constructed of bundled tubes with circular, square or rectangular cross sections or a myriad of other alternative shapes to provide tightly bundled energy diffusing cavities. See Col. 4, Lns. 20-46. Thus, channels which have a hexagonal or circular or square or rectangular cross section will comprise pairs of opposing surfaces.), wherein the at least one channel has a length and an opening height (see Col. 6, Lns. 63-67: “An embodiment of diffuser 10 having a matrix of energy diffusing cavities which are approximately 10 millimeters across and 50 millimeters long is expected to produce a satisfactory diffusing effect and a uniform pattern of energy exiting the diffuser.”), wherein the length is larger than the opening height (see again Col. 6, Lns. 63-67: “An embodiment of diffuser 10 having a matrix of energy diffusing cavities which are approximately 10 millimeters across and 50 millimeters long is expected to produce a satisfactory diffusing effect and a uniform pattern of energy exiting the diffuser.”), wherein the first pair of opposing surfaces comprise a specular reflective region (indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above), and wherein the second pair of opposing surfaces comprise a diffuse reflective region (indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above); wherein the porous structure has at least one of the following: a monolithic or assembled honeycomb shape, a stacked shape plate, a corrugated structure, or a foam structure (see Col. 4, Lns. 61-64: “Alumina-based ceramic materials fabricated into honeycomb sheet structures are believed to be the best commercially available material for the manufacturing the inventive diffuser.”); wherein the specular reflective region has higher reflectivity compared to the total reflectivity of the diffuse reflective region (see Col. 6, Lns. 1-13: “Specular reflection is commonly referred to as mirror-like reflection, where the outgoing ray leaves the reflecting surface as a mirror image of the incoming ray. Specular reflection occurs when the surface is smooth compared to the wavelength of the incoming radiation (i.e. when the roughness of the surface is less than one-tenth of the wavelength of the reflected electromagnetic radiation). A second type of reflection, diffuse reflection, occurs when the surface roughness exceeds two times the wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation. When raypaths are diffusely reflected, the energy is reflected away from the surface in uniform hemispherical directions from the point of contact.”); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is opposite to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is opposite to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is adjacent to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is adjacent to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is the same surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is the same surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation). Regarding Claims 7-12, HOUTMAN discloses a solar receiver, comprising: a plurality of channels (26) forming a porous structure (10), each channel extending from a solar radiation collection side (24) to a heat transfer side (28), and each channel including a uniform or varying porosity distribution (see Figs. 1 & 2), wherein each channel comprises a first pair of opposing surfaces and a second pair of opposing surfaces (the illustrated channels 26 are hexagonally shaped however, porous structure 10 could alternatively be constructed of bundled tubes with circular, square or rectangular cross sections or a myriad of other alternative shapes to provide tightly bundled energy diffusing cavities. See Col. 4, Lns. 20-46. Thus, channels which have a hexagonal or circular or square or rectangular cross section will comprise pairs of opposing surfaces.), wherein the first pair of opposing surfaces comprise a specular reflective region (indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above), wherein the second pair of opposing surfaces comprise a diffuse reflective region (indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above), wherein each channel has a length and an opening height, and wherein the length is larger than the opening height (see Col. 6, Lns. 63-67: “An embodiment of diffuser 10 having a matrix of energy diffusing cavities which are approximately 10 millimeters across and 50 millimeters long is expected to produce a satisfactory diffusing effect and a uniform pattern of energy exiting the diffuser.”); wherein each channel is at least one of square- shaped, circular, or hexagonal (the illustrated channels 26 are hexagonally shaped however, porous structure 10 could alternatively be constructed of bundled tubes with circular, square or rectangular cross sections or a myriad of other alternative shapes to provide tightly bundled energy diffusing cavities. See Col. 4, Lns. 20-46.); wherein the specular reflective region has higher reflectivity compared to the total reflectivity of the diffuse reflective region (see Col. 6, Lns. 1-13: “Specular reflection is commonly referred to as mirror-like reflection, where the outgoing ray leaves the reflecting surface as a mirror image of the incoming ray. Specular reflection occurs when the surface is smooth compared to the wavelength of the incoming radiation (i.e. when the roughness of the surface is less than one-tenth of the wavelength of the reflected electromagnetic radiation). A second type of reflection, diffuse reflection, occurs when the surface roughness exceeds two times the wavelength of the electromagnetic radiation. When raypaths are diffusely reflected, the energy is reflected away from the surface in uniform hemispherical directions from the point of contact.”); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is opposite to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is opposite to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is adjacent to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is adjacent to the surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation); wherein the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is the same surface comprising the diffuse reflective region (as indicated in annotated Fig. 3 reproduced above, the surface comprising the specular reflective region is a surface of a channel of the porous structure that is the same surface comprising the diffuse reflective region; in other words a channel 26 having a hexagonal or square or rectangular cross section exhibiting the surface reflection pattern illustrated in Fig. 3 discloses this claim limitation). Regarding Claims 13-20, HOUTMAN discloses all of the limitations as is evident from the discussion of Claims 1-12 above. The only limitation not specifically addressed above is the limitation(s) recited in Claim 15. With regard to Claim 15, HOUTMAN further discloses wherein the reflectivity distribution is applied utilizing one of physical sputtering, physical polishing, chemical polishing, coating application, or chemical vapor distillation (see Col. 4, Lns. 60-61: “Suitable materials for constructing diffuser 10 include ceramics and coated metal materials.”). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1-20 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 because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven B. McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JORGE A PEREIRO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 09, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 22, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601497
FIRE PIT SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601498
UMBRELLA-SHAPED HEATER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590696
PULSE COMBUSTION APPARATUS WITH VIBRATION DAMPING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590734
DRIVE TRACKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584658
PARABOLIC TROUGH COLLECTOR MODULE, PARABOLIC TROUGH COLLECTOR MODULE UNIT, AND SOLAR THERMAL POWER PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+21.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 971 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month