DETAILED ACTION
Summary
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 13, 14, 17-19, and 21-25 in the reply filed on December 22, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no additional search burden. This is not found persuasive because the restriction requirement sent November 17, 2025 does not require, allege, or rely on an additional search burden.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-14, 17-19, and 21-25 are currently pending while claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-12 have been withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “said floating tube elements” on line 7 and 12, and throughout the remaining claims.
It is unclear if “said floating tube elements” recited on line 7 of claim 13 is referring to any of the “at least one group of at least two floating tube elements” recited on line 4-5 of claim 13 and, if so which of the at least one group of at least two floating tube elements, or unclear if “said floating tube elements” recited on line 7 of claim 13 is referring to entirely different floating tube elements altogether. Appropriate correction is required.
Amending “said floating tube elements” to “each of said floating tube elements” or “each said floating tube elements” would overcome the objection.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 18 recites, “said mooring lines”. Appropriate correction is required.
Amending “said mooring lines” to “said multiple mooring lines” would overcome the objection.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21 recites, “a short vertical cables or chains”. Appropriate correction is required.
Amending “a short vertical cables or chains” to “short vertical cables or chains” would overcome the objection.
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21 recites, “said horizontal cables”. Appropriate correction is required.
Amending “said horizontal cables” to “said plurality of horizontal cables” would overcome the objection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13, 14, 17-19, and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "(i.e. ˂ 1mm)" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) within the parentheses are part of the claimed invention and it is unclear limitation(s) following the phrase “i.e.” are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
For examination, the limitation(s) within the parentheses is/are interpreted to be exemplary and not a part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 22, the phrase "(or peripheral)" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) within the parentheses are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
For examination, the limitation(s) within the parentheses is/are interpreted to be exemplary and not a part of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 recites, “a substantially centered aperture”.
It is unclear as to the scope of structures encompassed by the phrase “substantially centered aperture” and what structures are specifically excluded by the phrase “substantially centered aperture” because it is unclear as to what limitations the phrase “substantially” definitely imparts on the claimed aperture.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "said floating photovoltaic system" on line 14 and 15-16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Amending “said floating photovoltaic system” to “said floating photovoltaic solar system” would overcome the rejections.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "said at least one array of float assembly" on line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Amending “said at least one array of float assembly” to “said at least one array of float assemblies” would overcome the rejections.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the floating tube element" on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “the floating tube element” to “each floating tube element” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the end-caps" on line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “the end-caps have” to “each end-cap has” would overcome the rejections.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "said floating tube element" on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “said floating tube element” to “each floating tube element” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "said array of float assemblies" on line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “said array of float assemblies” to “said at least one array of float assemblies” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "said launching device" on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “said launching device” to “said launching apparatus” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "said train of solar floats assemblies" on line 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “said train of solar floats assemblies” to “said train of connected float assemblies” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 21 recites the limitation " said array of float assemblies " on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Amending “said array of float assemblies” to “said at least one array of float assemblies” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 22 recites the limitation " said pair of lateral horizontal cables " on line 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Amending “said pair of lateral horizontal cables” to “said pair of corresponding external lateral horizontal cables” would overcome the rejection.
Claim 22 recites the limitation " said array of a plurality of horizontal cables " on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation " the upper side of the solar panels " on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the solar panels " on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the reservoir" on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the upper surface of said solar panel" on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "said solar panel" on line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim is rejected for dependency.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the output inlet of a first perforated water pipe" on line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the input inlet of the following float assembly" on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the following float assembly " on line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 13, 14, 17-19, and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alwitt et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0279557 A1) in view of Su et al. (CN 102669031 A).
With regard to claim 13, Alwitt et al. discloses a floating photovoltaic solar system on a water site having a shore and a water body, said system comprising
photovoltaic panels (photovoltaic panels 1510, Fig. 14-19) and
at least one array of float assemblies (see Fig. 14-16), each array of float assemblies comprising
at least one float assembly (see Fig. 14-16 depicting float assemblies formed by each adjacent pair of floating tube elements 1410), wherein each float assembly comprises
at least one group of at least two floating tube elements for supporting said photovoltaic panels (see Fig. 14-16 depicting at least one group of at least two floating tube elements, adjacent pair of floating tube elements 1410, for supporting the cited photovoltaic panels 1510),
each of said floating tube elements having a thin (i.e. <1mm) elongated wall extending along a primary axis (such as depicted in Fig. 14-15, each of said floating tube elements 410 having a thin wall extending along a primary axis of each tube cited to read on the claimed “thin (i.e. <1mm)” because the cited elongated walls are thin, or thinner than another wall such as a thicker wall),
each end of said floating tube elements being closed by an endcap (as depicted in Fig. 14-19, each end of said floating tube elements 410 being closed by an endcap 1430), wherein it comprises
frame assemblies to support said photovoltaic panels in order to form said at least one array of float assemblies for forming said floating photovoltaic system (such as depicted in Fig. 14-19, frame assemblies at 1470 to support the cited photovoltaic panels 510 in order to form said at least one array of float assemblies for forming said floating photovoltaic system), and
a launching apparatus of said at least one array of float assembly forming said floating photovoltaic system into the water body (see claim 19 teaching conveyor system having a launch end proximate a body of water).
Alwitt et al. does not disclose wherein said floating tube elements have the structural requirements of the generally recited product-by-process limitation “being formed by bending metal ribbons or sheets extracted from raw metal coils using a spiral tube forming machine or a roll-forming machine, to obtain an open cylinder with adjacent longitudinal edges facing each other, and having means of fixation by mechanical crimping, fastening, gluing or welding of such adjacent longitudinal edges of such open cylinder to close longitudinally such floating tube elements”; the structural requirements interpreted to require a hollow metal cylinder closed longitudinally at adjacent longitudinal edges.
However, Su et al. discloses a floating photovoltaic solar system (see Fig. 1) and teaches a floating tube element can be formed by closing adjacent longitudinal edges (see Fig. 7 depicting longitudinal edges 711; see [0079] exemplifying welding; see [0017] teaching aluminum alloy metal material).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the forming of the floating tube elements in the system of Alwitt et al. for the forming technique of Su et al. because the simple substitution of an element known in the art, in the instant case a forming of a floatation tube for a floating photovoltaic solar system, supports a prima facie obviousness determination (see MPEP 2143 B).
With regard to claim 14, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that
each float assembly comprises at least one group of three parallel floating tube elements for supporting said photovoltaic panels, and/or characterized in that the floating tube element not being waterproof, the end-caps have a substantially centered aperture authorizing overflow of water when said floating tube element is immerged, and/or characterized in that each floating tube element comprises at least one buoyancy element inside (as depicted in Fig. 14-19, or characterized in that each floating tube element 410 comprises at least one buoyancy element inside, such as air).
With regard to claim 17, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that the system comprises
multiple mooring lines operably connected to said array of float assemblies (as depicted in Fig. 38, multiple mooring lines 2416 operably connected to said array of float assemblies).
With regard to claim 18, dependent claim 17 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that the system comprises
anchoring lines connecting said mooring lines to an array of anchoring points (as depicted in Fig. 38, anchoring lines 2418 connecting the cited mooring lines 2416 to an array of anchoring points 2419).
With regard to claim 19, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that
each float assembly comprises a minimum of three frame elements extending along a direction which is perpendicular to said primary axis of said floating tube elements, and/or characterized in that the system comprises a plurality of arrays of float assemblies, forming a train of connected float assemblies and the launching device comprises two parallel guiding elongated rails elements arranged to support and guide said train of solar floats assemblies into the water body (as depicted in Fig. 14-17, each float assembly comprises a minimum of three frame elements 1470 extending along a direction which is perpendicular to the cited primary axis of each floating tube element 1410).
With regard to claims 21 and 22, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that the system comprises
a plurality of horizontal cables (as depicted in Fig. 38 and annotated Fig. 38 below, a plurality of horizontal cables 2416) and
PNG
media_image1.png
713
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 38
a short vertical cables or chains mechanically connected to said arrays of float assemblies (short vertical cables or chains 2614, Fig. 44) and
anchoring lines connecting said horizontal cables to an array of anchoring points installed on shore and/or at the bottom of the water body (as depicted in Fig. 38 and annotated Fig. 38 above, anchoring lines 2418 connecting the cited horizontal cables 2416 to an array of anchoring points 2419 installed on shore), characterized in that the system further comprises
for at least one array of float assemblies or a group of arrays of float assemblies, one pair of corresponding external (or peripheral) lateral horizontal cables and one pair of corresponding external longitudinal horizontal cables perpendicular to said pair of lateral horizontal cables and belonging to said array of a plurality of horizontal cables and securing such array or group of arrays with anchoring cables attached to a plurality of fixed foundation points (as depicted in Fig. 38 and annotated Fig. 38 above, for at least one array of float assemblies or a group of arrays of float assemblies, one pair of corresponding external (or peripheral) lateral horizontal cables, such as the diagonal most pair of 2416d and 2416b, and one pair of corresponding external longitudinal horizontal cables, such as the diagonal most pair of 2416c and 2416a, perpendicular to said pair of lateral horizontal cables and belonging to said array of a plurality of horizontal cables and securing such array or group of arrays with anchoring cables 2418 attached to a plurality of fixed foundation points 2419).
With regard to claim 19, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above. Alwitt et al. discloses characterized in that the floating photovoltaic solar system comprises
a maintenance platform comprising a pair of buoyancy elements which are joined together by a frame structure to form a catamaran type platform (see Fig. 14-16 depicting a maintenance platform 1620 comprising a pair of buoyancy elements 1410 which are joined together by a frame structure 1470 to form a catamaran type platform).
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alwitt et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0279557 A1) in view of Su et al. (CN 102669031 A), and in further view of Jang et al. (KR 101773883 B1) and Ni et al. (CN 108736805 A).
With regard to claims 24 and 25, independent claim 13 is obvious over Alwitt et al. in view of Su et al. under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed above.
Alwitt et al. does not disclose characterized in that is comprises a water drip system.
However, Jang et al. discloses a photovoltaic solar system (see Title and Abstract) and teaches a water drip system (see Fig. 3-4), said water drip system comprising at least one perforated water pipe (see Fig. 4 depicting photovoltaic panels 410; the portion supply component 550 immediately to the right of connector 552 at the upper side of the next two adjacent photovoltaic panels 410 is cited to read on the claimed first perforated water pipe and the portion of supply component 550 to the right of connector 552 at the upper side of the last two adjacent photovoltaic panels 410 is cited to read on a second perforated water pipe) attached along the upper side of the solar panels (see Fig. 3-4) and an external water pump for pumping fresh water from the reservoir onto the upper surface of said solar panel (pump 563 depicted in Fig. 3 for pumping fresh water from the reservoir 560 onto the upper surface of said solar panel 410), characterized in that the water drip system comprises multiple perforated water pipes connected in a series manner by connecting the output inlet of a first perforated water pipe to the input inlet of the following float assembly (as depicted in Fig. 4, connected in a series manner by connecting an output inlet of the cited first perforated water pipe to an input inlet of the following assembly at the cited second perforated water pipe).
Jang et al. teaches the water drip system provides for cleaning the photovoltaic solar system (see [0016]).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the system of Alwitt et al. to include the water drip system suggested by Jang et al. because it would have provided for cleaning the floating photovoltaic solar system.
Alwitt et al., as modified above, does not disclose wherein the cited perforated water pipes are attached to the upper side of the solar panels by an array of fixation clips.
However, Ni et al. discloses a photovoltaic solar system (see Title and Abstract) and teaches a perforated water pipe can be attached to an upper side of the solar panels by a fixation clip (see 26, Fig. 2).
Thus, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the attachment mechanism for the cited perforated water pipes of Alwitt et al., as modified above, for the attachment mechanism, fixation clip, suggested by Ni et al., because the simple substitution of an element known in the prior art, in the instant case an attachment mechanism for a perforated water pipe in a photovoltaic solar system, supports a prima facie obviousness determination (see MPEP 2143 B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN Q DAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5120. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/DUSTIN Q DAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721 March 5, 2026