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 .
Summary
This is the response to the Amendment/Request for Reconsideration filed on 12/12/2025.
Claims 1-9, 11-16, 18-19 and 21-23 remain pending in the application.
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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-16, 18-19 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akhavan-Tafti (US 2022/0263457) in view of Berezhnyy et al. (US 2011/0265851). It is noted that current application claims priority as CIP of applications 17/672,813, 17/408,925 and 16/677,912; however, none of the parent applications provide support for the limitation of current claims; therefore, the effective filing date of current claims is 02/12/2024.
Addressing claims 1-2 and 23, Akhavan-Tafti discloses a method comprising:
providing an electromagnetic energy converter having a photovoltaic unit comprising a plurality of discrete electromagnetic energy converting cells 104 encased in a tubular housing 102 and spaced apart in a longitudinal direction of the tubular housing (figs. 1-15), the tubular housing being at least partially transparent (transparent window 108, [0048] and fig. 2) about an entire perimeter of the tubular housing such that light from outside the housing can be transmitted through the housing in all directions perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (fig. 2), wherein an orientation of the electromagnetic energy converting cells 104 with respect to a base 106 of the electromagnetic energy converter is changeable or moveable (fig. 14 and [0085]).
Akhavan-Tafti discloses that the discrete electromagnetic energy converting cells’ orientation and position are changeable or moveable relative to the base in order to optimize collective power output [0086].
Akhavan-Tafti is silent regarding the steps of determining an electrical output of the electromagnetic energy converter in a first configuration and in a second configuration, wherein said orientation is different in the first configuration than in the second configuration; comparing the electrical output of the first configuration to the electrical output of the second configuration; and determining an optimum orientation of the electromagnetic energy converting cells with respect to the base.
Berezhnyy discloses a method for determining the optimum orientation of the solar cells [0005]. The method comprises determining an electrical output (via the ampere meter, [0005]) of the electromagnetic energy converter in a first configuration and in a second configuration , wherein said orientation is different in the first configuration than in the second configuration (paragraphs [0022-0023] disclose the ampere meter 160 measures the output current of the solar detector 150 in different arrangements, which includes the claimed first and second configurations that are different); comparing the electrical output of the first configuration to the electrical output of the second configuration (paragraph [0023] states “by measuring the output current of the solar detector 150, based on its different arrangements, an optimal arrangement corresponding to the maximum output current or an expected output current can be determined”, which implies comparing the output current associated with the different arrangements in order to determine the output current of a particular arrangement that is the largest); and determining an optimum orientation of the electromagnetic energy converting cells (paragraph [0023] states the optimal arrangement, i.e. tilt angle, of the plurality of solar cells is determined).
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the method of Akhavan-Tafti with the solar detector attached to the solar cell, the ampere meter and the steps of determining the current output of the solar detector with each angle of orientation, comparing the electrical output of the different arrangements and determining the optimum angle of orientation of the solar cells as disclosed by Berezhnyy in order to maximize the electrical output of the electromagnetic energy converter by orienting the solar cells in the optimum configuration (Berezhnyy, [0005-0006]).
Addressing claim 3, paragraph [0029] of Berezhnyy discloses the angle of the solar detector corresponds to the movement of the sun throughout the day, which corresponds to the claimed solar tracking system. The solar tracking system of Berezhnyy includes motor that is electrically powered that corresponds to the claimed electrical drive for adjusting the electromagnetic energy converter through multiple angles that include the first and second configurations. Likewise, paragraphs [0075 and 0087] of Akhavan-Tafti discloses solar tracking to improve the daily power output of the photovoltaic unit 102. Therefore, the limitation of current claim would have been obvious based on the teaching of Akhavan-Tafti in view of Berezhnyy.
Addressing claims 4 and 6, Berezhnyy discloses the light sensor in paragraph [0012] for measuring light intensity that corresponds to the step of determining electromagnetic energy input of the electromagnetic energy converter. The measurement of light intensity by the light sensor corresponds to the measurement of claim 6.
Addressing claim 5, Berezhnyy discloses in paragraph [0012] adjusting the tilt angle of the solar cells based on the output of the light sensor and the pre-defined profile as the claimed reference data.
Addressing claim 7, Akhavan-Tafti discloses in paragraph [0053] includes maximum power point tracking unit that corresponds to the step of determining maximum power point of the electrical output of the electromagnetic energy converter.
Addressing claims 8-9, Berezhnyy discloses measuring the output current associated with each arrangement, i.e. tilt angle, of the multiple arrangements which includes the step of measuring the electrical output of the electromagnetic energy converter after the step of adjusting the electromagnetic energy converter from the first configuration to the second configuration.
Addressing claim 11, paragraphs [0010, 0029-0031] and fig. 4 of Berezhnyy discloses a memory for recording the relationship between time and optimal arrangement of the solar detector that corresponds to the step of recording electrical output and configuration characteristics of the electromagnetic energy converter.
Addressing claim 12, Akhavan-Tafti discloses in paragraph [0024] the electromagnetic energy converter is adjusted, i.e. adjusting from one configuration to another configuration, to improve power output by optimizing light collection and configured to prevent cross-shading, which meets the claimed shading and shadowing environmental conditions.
Addressing claim 13, paragraph [0031] of Berezhnyy discloses that the rotating the solar cells at different angles also affect the amount of light intensity in a predefined area that corresponds to the claimed step of adjusting a heat transfer system of the electromagnetic energy converter from a first configuration to a second configuration because the light intensity corresponds to heat intensity from sunlight.
Addressing claim 14, Berezhnyy discloses the solar detector 150 as the claimed sensor selected to detect a physical parameter impacting electrical output of the electromagnetic converter (detect amount of sunlight), the method further comprising measuring an output of the sensor (detect current via the ampere meter 160).
Addressing claim 15, Berezhnyy discloses in fig. 4 the graphical presentation of the optimal arrangement of the solar detector during the day [0029], which is a form of communication by displaying information for user to examine. Akhavan-Tafti discloses in paragraph [0057] a communication unit for receiving and/or sending information. Therefore, the limitation would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of current application by modifying the communication module of Akhavan-Tafti to send information regarding the optimal arrangement of the solar detector during the day or the angle of optimal arrangement for maximizing power output.
Addressing claim 16, Berezhnyy discloses rotating the solar cells to the optimal arrangement based on the output current of the solar detector [0005, 0009, 0012 and 0022], which meets the limitation outputting a control signal based on the step of comparing and adjusting the electromagnetic converter in response to the control signal.
Addressing claim 18, Berezhnyy discloses in paragraph [0022] the output of the solar detector is measured by the ampere meter to find an optimal arrangement correspond to the maximum output current or an expected output current. The recited maximum output current or expected output current corresponds to the claimed reference data.
Addressing claim 19, Berezhnyy discloses in paragraph [0023] the output current of the solar detector 150 is measured at different arrangements until the optimal arrangement is determined, which includes measuring the electrical output of the current configuration as the claimed second configuration of the electromagnetic energy converter after adjusting the electromagnetic energy converter from the previous configuration as the claimed first configuration to the current configuration as the claimed second configuration.
Addressing claim 21, Berezhnyy discloses in paragraph [0023] that the different arrangements includes different tilt angle which requires the rotation of the solar detector along an axis of rotation. Akhavan-Tafti discloses in fig. 6 and paragraph [0015] rotating the photovoltaic unit 102 about the longitudinal axis. Therefore, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the method of Akhavan-Tafti in view of Berezhnyy by monitoring the output current by rotating the photovoltaic unit about the longitudinal axis at different orientations in order to determine the optimal orientation for maximize power output. The multiple orientations around the longitudinal axis as disclosed in fig. 6 of Akhavan-Tafti includes the claimed first and second configuration by rotating at least one of the photovoltaic unit with respect to the base about the longitudinal axis.
Addressing claim 22, Akhavan-Tafti discloses in fig. 14 and paragraph [0023] each photovoltaic cell 118 has at least translational degrees of freedom, i.e. the photovoltaic cell 18 is moveable in the vertical direction, which changes the spacing between the electromagnetic energy converting cells. Therefore, based on the teaching of Akhavan-Tafti, one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to modify the method of Akhavan-Tafti in view of Berezhnyy by designating the multiple arrangements in the method of Berezhnyy as the vertical positions of the photovoltaic cells 18 or the spacing between the electromagnetic converting cells as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9, 11-16, 18-19 and 21-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 EST.
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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 12/30/2025