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 23-25 and 34 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 23 recites “a strip which includes… a series of sections, wherein each series of sections…”. Only one series of sections is defined; however, “each series of sections” implies that a plurality of series has been defined. Therefore the scope of “a series of sections”, and the claim, is unclear; Is every section intended to include a series of solar cells, or is a solar cell in each section? Claims 24 and 25 are also rejected based on their dependence from claim 23.
Claim 25 recites “the solar cell”, which lacks antecedent basis, as claim 23 recites at least a series of solar cells.
Claim 34 also recites “a series of sections, where each series of sections includes a series of solar cells”, which renders that claim indefinite for the reasons stated above.
Claim 34 recites a photovoltaic window covering strip, including details about the positioning of solar cells and adherent on the strip, and thereafter recites “including a first photovoltaic energy harvesting module”. This implies that the photovoltaic window covering strip includes a series of solar cells and, in addition, a photovoltaic energy harvesting module. As best as can be determined by the instant disclosure, a photovoltaic energy harvesting module itself includes a series of solar cells (instant Figures 22). Therefore, in a reasonable interpretation, the claim requires structure including a series of solar cells, and a distinct photovoltaic energy harvesting module. It is unclear that if this scope is discussed in the instant disclosure. At best, the disclosure describes a photovoltaic energy harvesting module that itself includes a series of solar cells, and does not coherently describe a photovoltaic window covering strip that comprises a series of solar cells and a distinct photovoltaic energy harvesting module.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0367553 to Molinero.
Regarding claims 23, Molinero teaches a photovoltaic window covering strip (Figs. 4, 5) comprising:
A strip 41 which includes an inner surface (the designation of an inner surface is arbitrary, the surface of 41 in Figs. 4A, 4B, 5 that faces the bottom of the page reads on an inner surface), an outer surface (the surface of 41 that faces top of page) and a series of sections 40, 40’ (¶0048-0059, 0073), wherein each section of the series of sections includes a series of solar cells (¶0060, 0061 teach that each element 40, 40’ comprises plural solar cells in an embodiment), and wherein each solar cell is mounted on the outer surface, and an adherent 37 on the outer surface (Fig. 5, ¶0111, 0112).
Claim(s) 32 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0158019 to Hall II (of record).
Regarding claims 32 and 33, Hall II teaches a combination of a photovoltaic window covering strip 608 (¶0072, 0077, 0027) for mounting on a window and a photovoltaic blind (not labeled in Fig. 10A; Figs. 6, 8) for mounting on a window frame (¶0009, 0071, 0075), wherein the photovoltaic window covering strip and the photovoltaic blind together cover an entirety of the window (¶0025, 0026).
Hall II teaches, in the embodiment of Fig. 6, that the individual photovoltaic elements of the photovoltaic blind are mechanically connected with a cable (602) to a connector (604 connects all individual photovoltaic elements, ¶0072). In the embodiment of Fig. 10A, the photovoltaic window covering strip is mechanically connected with a header (620), which is mechanically connected to a similar (unlabeled) cable. In the embodiment which comprises both individual photovoltaic elements of a photovoltaic blind and a photovoltaic window covering strip, which would be at once envisaged by a person having ordinary skill in the art (¶0027; MPEP §2131.02.III), the photovoltaic window covering strip and the photovoltaic blind are mechanically coupled (either through mutual connection to a header or direct connection by a cable) with a cable to a connector, wherein the connector connects to the photovoltaic blind.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molinero as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of US 2007/0175599 to Froese.
Regarding claims 24 and 25, Molinero teaches the limitations of claim 23. Hall teaches that an electronic device is in electrical communication with the solar cells (¶0101, 0133), but does not teach that the inner surface is a colored surface or that the electronic device is a light emitting device. Froese teaches a similar window covering strip (Fig. 7), and teaches that an opposite surface to the surface on which solar cells are formed on may be formed of elements (53) which carry colored light from a light emitting diode in electrical communication with the solar cells to illuminate a room (63, Fig. 8, ¶0021, 0041-0043, 0046). Therefore it would have been obvious as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a person having ordinary skill in the art to form the inner surface of the strip as a colored surface, and further comprise a light emitting diode in electrical communication with the solar cells in order to illuminate a room.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Hall II does not teach a photovoltaic window covering strip and a photovoltaic blind. From ¶0077 of Hall II: “FIG. 10A is a perspective view of a set of horizontal blinds with PV modules shown overlapping each other on the header of the blinds.” (emphasis added). Therefore Hall II teaches a “a photovoltaic blind” within the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Further, Hall II is clear that the aspects of the invention of that reference can be combined (¶0027). Therefore, even if no particular Figure comprises both a window covering strip and a photovoltaic blind, narrowly interpreted to require photovoltaic modules on the slats of the blind, such an embodiment would be at once envisaged by a person having ordinary skill in the art. A reference disclosure can anticipate a claim even if the reference does not describe "the limitations arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination." Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co., 780 F.3d 1376, 1381, 114 USPQ2d 1250, 1254 (Fed. Cir. 2015), MPEP §2131.02.III.
The examiner notes that claim 34 has not been compared to prior art because its scope is indefinite; this is not to be taken as a conclusion that the claim is free of the art.
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 Ryan S Cannon whose telephone number is (571)270-7186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5:30pm PST.
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.
Ryan S. Cannon
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/RYAN S CANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights