DETAILED ACTION
This is the fourth Office Action regarding application number Office Action regarding application number 18/275,877, filed on 08/04/2023, which is a 371 of PCT/EP2022/053695, filed on 02/15/2022, and which claims foreign priority to NL 2027572, filed on 02/17/2021.
This action is in response to the Applicant’s Response received 07/20/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4, 6, and 10-13 are currently pending.
Claims 5, 7, and 9 are canceled.
Claims 1-3 and 13 are amended.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 10-13 are examined below.
The rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112 has been withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments.
The rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 been withdrawn in light of the Applicant’s amendments and remarks.
Upon further examination, the Office has set forth a new ground of rejection.
Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 11, and 13 are allowed.
Claim 12 is rejected.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments received 07/20/2026 have been carefully considered and they are found persuasive with respect to the 103 rejections.
The examiner finds compelling the applicant’s remarks noting that URIEN’s parallel slits are not mechanical stress-relief incisions, but rather isolation lines designed to electrically partition the active layers. Therefore, combination of URIEN with LALVANI would likely not logically generate the design of the claimed invention.
The examiner also finds compelling the applicant’s remarks that if LALVANI’s rotating slit pattern were applied to TAKECHI, the electrical tabbing design would likely produce a solar panel having a layout design not contemplated or desirable to skilled artisans in possession of the cited prior art references.
The examiner did not find any other of the applicant’s remarks to be particularly compelling.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Improper Dependent Claim
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 1 recites in its preamble “A double curved solar panel”. Claim 12 does not further limit the subject matter by reciting that “the solar panel is a double curved solar panel”.
The applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Conclusion
Claims 1-4, 6, 10, 11, and 13 are allowed.
Claim 12 is rejected.
The 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). The Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 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 mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELO TRIVISONNO whose telephone number is (571) 272-5201 or by email at <angelo.trivisonno@uspto.gov>. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY-FRIDAY, 9:00a-5:00pm EST. The examiner's supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI, can be reached at (571) 272-3433.
/ANGELO TRIVISONNO/
Primary Examiner
Prosecution Insights