Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/570,408

Single-Point-Mooring Wind Turbine with Two Wind Energy Conversion Units Each Having a Rotor

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 14, 2023
Examiner
KASENGE, CHARLES R
Art Unit
2116
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Aerodyn Consulting Singapore Pte. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
1089 granted / 1290 resolved
+29.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1328
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§103
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§102
43.3%
+3.3% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1290 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 § 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 4 and 13 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. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the predetermined yaw angle" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the grid" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1-10, 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kondou WO 2019031077 (hereinafter “Kondou”, wherein citations refer to provided English Translation). Regarding claim 1, Kondou discloses a single-point-mooring wind turbine comprising: at least two wind energy conversion units (e.g. wind turbines) each having a rotor (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 3; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11), a turbine controller (i.e. control device) assigned to each energy conversion unit and designed to regulate the energy conversion unit in question independently of the other energy conversion unit in accordance with the operating parameters (e.g. control commands) relating to the energy conversion unit in question (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 3; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11); and a master controller (i.e. general control unit), which acts on the turbine controllers and is designed to specify operating parameters (e.g. yaw angle control command) adapted to both energy conversion units (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 2, Kondou discloses the single-point-mooring wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the energy conversion units are structurally identical with respect to the rotor diameter, the power, and/or the thrust characteristic (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 3; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 3, Kondou discloses the single-point-mooring wind turbine according to claim 1, further comprising at least one device for detecting a yaw angle that deviates from the average wind direction (e.g. general measured wind direction) on the single-point-mooring wind turbine, wherein the master controller is configured to position the single-point-mooring wind turbine at a predetermined yaw angle (e.g. yaw angle control command) relative to the average wind direction (e.g. pg. 5, last ¶ - pg. 12). Regarding claim 4, Kondou discloses the single-point-mooring wind turbine according to claim 1, in that wherein the master controller is configured to position the single-point-mooring wind turbine within the predetermined yaw angle range (i.e. within yaw angle threshold/error) when the single-point-mooring wind turbine is oriented at an angle relative to the average wind direction outside of the predetermined yaw angle range (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 5, Kondou discloses the single-point-mooring wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein when a yaw angle change occurring within a predetermined time is detected, the master controller is configured to effect a yaw angle change counteracting the amount of yaw angle change that has occurred (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 6, Kondou discloses the single-point-mooring wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the rotors of the energy conversion units are configured to rotate in opposite directions (e.g. Fig. 1, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 7, Kondou discloses a method for operating a floating single-point-mooring wind turbine having at least two energy conversion units in grid operation, wherein each energy conversion unit has a rotor, said method comprising independently regulating the energy conversion units according to the operating parameters relating to the particular energy conversion unit within a predetermined yaw angle range (i.e. within yaw angle threshold error) that deviates from the average wind direction acting on the single-point-mooring wind turbine (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11), and regulating the other energy conversion unit that is matched to the operating parameters of the one energy conversion unit when the single-point-mooring wind turbine is oriented at an angle to the average wind direction outside the predetermined yaw angle range to reposition the single-point-mooring wind turbine within the predetermined yaw angle range (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11), or when a yaw angle change (e.g. via yaw angle command) occurring within a predetermined time is detected, to cause a yaw angle change counteracting the amount of yaw angle change that occurred (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 8, Kondou discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the energy conversion units are regulated in a coordinated manner under the condition that the single-point-mooring wind turbine is oriented outside the predetermined yaw angle range (i.e. exceeded the yaw angle threshold) for a predetermined time (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 9, Kondou discloses The method according to claim 7, wherein the predetermined yaw angle range is ±5° to ±10° from the average wind direction (e.g. pg. 6, 2nd ¶). Regarding claim 10, Kondou discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the single-point-mooring wind turbine is repositioned in particular by changing the torque of at least one of the energy conversion units (e.g. pg. 5, 2nd ¶), changing the pitch angle (i.e. controlling pitch angle) of at least one of the energy conversion units, and/or changing the rotor rotational speed (i.e. controlling rotational speed) of at least one of the energy conversion units (e.g. pg. 3, 1st ¶). Regarding claim 12, Kondou discloses the method according to claim 7, further comprising shutting down the single-point-mooring wind turbine when a maximum yaw angle deviating from the average wind direction is exceeded (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Regarding claim 14, Kondou discloses a method for shutting down a floating single-point-mooring wind turbine having at least two energy conversion units, wherein each energy conversion unit has a rotor, comprising: shutting down one energy conversion unit (i.e. stopping wind power generation device) according to shutdown parameters relating to the one energy conversion unit independently of the other energy conversion unit (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11), detecting the shutdown of the one energy conversion unit, and shutting down the other energy conversion unit with shutdown parameters identical to the shutdown parameters of the one energy conversion unit (e.g. pg. 2, last ¶ - pg. 5; Fig. 1-3, 10 and 11). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record does not disclose a method wherein the single-point-mooring wind turbine is repositioned by reducing the difference in rotor rotational speeds of the energy conversion units by means of a predetermined table reflecting the dependence of the yaw angle on the difference in rotor rotational speeds. Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record does not disclose operating one energy conversion unit at a constant rotational speed until the other energy conversion unit reaches a predetermined limit rotational speed, and increasing the rotational speed of both energy conversion units after reaching the predetermined limit rotational speed until grid operation is achieved by coupling both energy conversion units to the grid. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES R KASENGE whose telephone number is (571)272-3743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am to 4pm 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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. CK February 7, 2026 /CHARLES R KASENGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 14, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600264
THERMAL MANAGEMENT OF VEHICLE ENERGY STORAGE MEANS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596340
ELECTRONIC DEVICE CONTROLLING EXTERNAL DEVICE AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590283
Hybrid Predictive Modeling for Control of Cell Culture
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586055
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NEAR FIELD COMMUNICATIONS PAYMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579453
Safety Interlock Failure Prediction Method and Roll Production System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1290 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