DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-14 are presented for examination.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly
indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/16/25 and 8/12/24 and 10/31/23 were considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
6. Claim 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 14 recites “a computer-readable storage medium”. However, the specification in page 28, paragraph 177 defines the above medium, “The computer-readable storage medium may be, for example but not limited to, electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or, semiconductor system, apparatus or device, or any combination thereof”; and the context the medium was used in the claim would fairly suggest to one of ordinary skill signals or other forms of propagation and transmission media, typewritten or handwritten text on paper, or other items failing to be an appropriate manufacture under 35 USC 101 in the context of computer-related inventions. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation to the above medium would cover forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable storage medium (see MPEP 2111.01), particularly when the specification is silent, as in this case. A signal per se represents non-statutory subject matter because it is not tangible. In particular, the specification defines the term: “Such storage medium can be any available media that can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer or other machine with a processor. By way of example, such storage media can comprise RAM, ROM, EPROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to carry or store desired program code in the form of machine-executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer or other machine with a processor. Combinations of the above are also included within the scope of machine-readable media.” (see published specification 0016, 0023). Application is encouraged to clarify the medium by adding a phrase “non-transitory”, for example, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium. Applicant’s attention is directed to MPEP §§2106(IV)(B), 2106.01 and 2111.01. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. $101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2.
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 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.
7. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ma et al. (Ma), US publication no. 2021/0341951 A1.
As per claim 1, Ma teaches a tracking method, comprising:
in an astronomical tracking phase, determining a current weather type according to at least one of current weather data [para 55], or current power generation of modules on at least two photovoltaic trackers [para 52, 55];
determining first target tracking angles of the modules according to the current weather type, so that a tracking controller corresponding to the modules adjusts the corresponding photovoltaic trackers according to the first target tracking angles, so as to adjust the modules on the photovoltaic trackers [para 44, 49, 52].
Ma teaches:
[0052] As some examples, topography for the area containing an SPC is determined by orienting a photovoltaic on the SPC to the known location of the sun. The energy
readings compared to the known location of the sun can be used to determine a position of the associated solar panel, including any one or more of its x-y-z coordinates relative to a fixed point (i.e., its GPS coordinates) or its grade/slope
relative to normal or another fixed angle, to name only a few such coordinates. For example, as depicted in FIG. 11, knowing the angle of the angle of the sun to a particular location and measurement of the amount of shading experienced by a first panels as a result of a panel located between the first panel and the sun, (typically based on power output from the first panel), a calculation can be made as to the DH between the two panels. The two solar panels are oriented in similar ways and their local topographies similarly determined. FIG. 12 depicts this same determination as shown in FIG. 11 for an array of solar trackers ( e.g., as shown in FIG. 1). As shown in FIG. 12 the angle of the solar panels at which shading is experienced. This is angle
is relative to the O position where the solar panel is substantially flat or parallel to the ground. As shown in FIG. 12, solar trackers 2-6 experience shading at between 63 and 60.5 degrees. No angle of shading for solar tracker 1 (the eastern most solar tracker) is recorded as it does not experience shading during a morning DH estimation. Based on this determination of the angle at which each solar tracker experiences shading a first estimate of the DH for each tracker. Generally, these estimates compare well to the
original estimate of the DH measured as depicted in FIG.10. FIG. 13 describes a second determination of a second shading event when the sun as moved to the west (i.e., afternoon). Note the angles recorded in FIG. 13 are all negative, and the solar modules of each solar tracker 1-5 experience shading at between -64 and -69.7 degrees. Again, there is no shading experienced by the solar modules of solar tracker 6 (i.e., the western most solar tracker). Based on this determination of DH a determination of the order in which the solar trackers should be moved to avoid shading of the solar modules of the adjacent solar trackers as depicted in FIG. 14. The result is that at any given time, to avoid a shading situation, the solar trackers can be angled to a variety of different angles as depicted in FIG. 15. FIGS. 16 and 17 depict the process described above being carried out multiple times in order to determine the order of moving the solar trackers to eliminate shading. As will be readily understood, the movement to eliminate shading needs to be balanced with the energy costs associated with moving the solar tracker. In a preferred embodiment, the angle the solar panels on any given solar tracker are to be driven to are known in advance, such that for example at sunrise, the solar trackers are optimally angled to prevent shading, and that they never experience any shading, thus maximizing their continued power output through the day, even if not oriented in the optimum angular orientation to the sun as if there were no shading. FIG. 18 is a software implementation of the
processes described above with respect to FIGS. 10-17 that can be run on the SCADA 800, and as data is collected used to update the topography module.
[0055] In a second stage, periodic adjustments are made to the parameters of the performance model, such as by using weather conditions ( e.g., forecast and historical conditions), using, for example, satellite weather forecasts, cameras trained to the sky, power measurements on the solar panel modules, and voltage measurement from the SPCs.
As per claim 2, Ma teaches of determining, according to the current power generation of the modules, whether the current weather type belongs to a first type, wherein the first type comprises Snowy and Cloudy [para 32, 58]; and determining the current weather type from a second type according to the current weather data in a case that the current weather type does not belong to the first type, wherein the second type comprises Sunny and Overcast [figure 8; para 32, 41, 58].
As per claim 3, Ma teaches the determining, according to the current power generation of the modules, whether the current weather type belongs to the
first type comprises: determining a power generation dispersion ratio according
to the current power generation of the modules [para 33, 52, 55]; determining that the current weather type is Snowy in the first type in a case that the power generation dispersion ratio is equal to or greater than a first dispersion threshold [figure 3; para 33, 41]; determining that the current weather type is Cloudy in the first type in a case that the power generation dispersion ratio is equal to or greater than a second dispersion
threshold and a difference between cumulative power generation and reference power generation of the modules within a set time period is equal to or greater than
a fluctuation threshold [figure 3; para 32, 33, 41].
As per claim 4, Ma teaches of determining a proportion of direct irradiance according to the current weather data; determining that the current weather type is Sunny in the second type in a case that the proportion of direct irradiance is equal to or greater than a first threshold [para 32, 33, 41, 57]; determining that the current weather type is Overcast in the second type in a case that the proportion of direct irradiance is less than or equal to a second threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than the second threshold [para 33, 41, 57].
As per claim 5, Ma teaches of determining the current weather type according to the current power generation, a current solar altitude angle, and a dividing line between various weather types; wherein the dividing line between the various weather
types is determined according to a relationship among historical power generation, solar altitude angles, and historical weather data [para 41, 44, 52, 55].
As per claim 6, Ma teaches of determining basic information of the at least two photovoltaic trackers in a back tracking phase [figure 3; para 31], wherein the basic information of each of the photovoltaic trackers comprises size information and a first height difference between two endpoints of the photovoltaic tracker [para 33, 47, 51]; determining a second height difference between vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers [para 46]; determining second target tracking angles of the at least two photovoltaic trackers according to the basic information of the at least two photovoltaic trackers, the second height difference, and historical weather data in a photovoltaic tracking scene, so that the tracking controller adjusts the corresponding photovoltaic track [para 52-55].
As per claim 7, Ma teaches of determining, in a case that the modules on the vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers are in an unshaded state [para 46, 51], the second height difference between the vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers according to solar incidence angles, a current tracking angle and a module width of each of the vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers, and a distance between the vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers [para 46, 49, 52].
As per claim 8, Ma teaches of determining that the modules are in the unshaded state in a case of identifying that currents of the modules jump from a first value to a second value [para 46, 51], wherein the first value is less than the second value; or
determining that the modules are in the unshaded state in a case of identifying that a difference between the power generation of the modules on two vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers is within a set range [para 52, 54, 55].
As per claim 9, Ma teaches of constructing a three-dimensional array terrain model [performance model] according to the basic information of the at least two photovoltaic trackers and the second height difference [para 46]; determining target slope angles of the at least two photovoltaic trackers according to the three-dimensional array terrain model and the historical weather data; converting the target slope angles into the second target slope angles based on an angle conversion model [para 41, 52, 55].
As per claim 10, Ma teaches for each photovoltaic tracker, taking the photovoltaic
tracker of the at least two photovoltaic trackers that is in a vertical direction of the photovoltaic tracker as an auxiliary photovoltaic tracker [para 52]; determining at least two candidate slope angles [para 52]; determining first theoretical power generation of the photovoltaic tracker at each of the candidate slope angles and second theoretical power generation of the auxiliary tracker at each of the candidate slope angles
according to the three-dimensional array terrain model and the historical weather data [para 52-55]; determining the target slope angles according to the first theoretical power generation and the second theoretical power generation [para 52, 55].
As per claim 11, Ma teaches of determining, according to solar incidence angles, the basic information of the at least two photovoltaic trackers, and the second height difference, a theoretical tracking angle in a case that the modules on the at least
two groups of vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers are in an unshaded state [figure 1; para 52-53]; for each group of vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers, determining a theoretical adjustment angle of the group of vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers
according to a theoretical tracking angle and an actual tracking angle of the group of vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers [para 49, 52]; comparing the theoretical adjustment angles of the two adjacent groups of vertically adjacent photovoltaic
trackers in a case that adjustment angles of the two adjacent groups of vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers are different, and determining actual adjustment
angles of the vertically adjacent photovoltaic trackers in each group according to a comparison result [para 52, 53], so that the tracking controller adjusts the corresponding photovoltaic trackers according to the actual adjustment angles [para 49, 55].
As to claim 12, is the corresponding elements that are carried out the method of operating step in claim 1. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
As to claims 13 and 14, directed to a computer readable storage medium/memory storing the program instructions to perform the method of steps executed by the system as set forth in claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected on the same basis as set forth hereinabove.
9. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Jain et al,, US publication no. 2017/0070187, discloses a solar tracking
system for automatically controlling the tracking of at least one solar panel in a solar array table. The system comprises a weather information unit associated with the at least one solar panel.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached on 571-272-9. 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).
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115