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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Species A, claims 1-17 and 19 in the reply filed on 9/11/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Species B has been shown and described as having similar components and operations as Species A, except for including 9 of the polyangular specular mini-structures, where a change in the number of the mini-structures does not create an undue, examination burden.
This is not found persuasive because the differences between the two species is not merely a change in the number of mini-structures as asserted, but that a completely different configuration is required for the optical-to-electrical module located below the polyangular mini-structure. It is noted that in Species A, the optical-to-electrical module comprises four sides and light-responsive elements on all four sides. It is unclear the configuration of the optical-to-electrical module located below the polyangular mini-structure in Species B, where the instant specification has only disclosed in paragraph [0070] that “compartment 1051 includes a plurality of light-responsive elements (such as those shown in Figs 8-9) and generates electrical potential and output power” and in paragraph [0071] that “compartment 1051 is configured so that respective light outputs from each of the mini-structures 823 impinge upon the light-responsive elements 823 within compartment 1051”, but no description of how one of ordinary skill would configure the light-responsive elements within compartment 1051 was provided. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that Figure 10 related to Species B does not show merely a change in number of the mini-structures of Species A as shown in Figures 8 and 9 and requires an entirely different search.
Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 18 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 9/11/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Paragraph [0061] recites “light-responsive elements 849…include two pairs of silicon surfaces 863” and paragraph [0064] states “a single pair of silicon surfaces 863 may be secured on a corresponding, opposing pair of inner sidewalls 853, with reflecting mirror 865 disposed between the two opposing silicon surfaces and oriented to reflect the light output toward the silicon surfaces 863”. However, Figure 9 only shows reference number 849 on inner sidewalls 853, where reference number 849 was disclosed to be “light-responsive elements” in paragraphs [0059] and [0061]. Additionally, it can be seen in Figure 9 that reference number 849 is located towards the bottom, such that nowhere does the instant specification disclose the light-responsive elements 849 to be located anywhere but the side walls.
Paragraph [0061] states “a second such reflecting mirror 865 may optionally be located on the inner surface of top wall 855” but reference number 865 is seen to be located near the bottom surface in Figure 9.
Paragraph [0066] states “solar energy system 821 has an upper surface 869 orientable toward the sky or other light source” but no reference number 869 can be located in the Figures.
Paragraph [0066] further states “a lower surface 871 opposite the upper surface 869” but no reference number 871 can be located in the Figures.
Paragraph [0073] states “polyangular specular mini-structures 823 may include focusing lenses 877 located within” but no reference number 877 or lenses can be located in Figure 9.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0071] recites “light-responsive elements 823”. However, reference numeral 823 is used to designate “mini-structures” and reference numeral 849 is used to designate light-responsive elements.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14-16 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
It is suggested to amend “the polyangular specular mini-structure” in claim 1 to “the polyangular, specular, mini-structure” for consistency and form. Similar suggestion also made for claims 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 19.
It is suggested to amend “the inner walls” in claim 6 to “the four inner walls” for consistency and form.
It is suggested to amend “the polyangular specular min-structure” in claim 7 to “the polyangular, specular, mini-structure” for consistency and form.
It is suggested to amend “the four walls” in claim 7 to “the four inner walls” for consistency and form.
It is suggested to amend “the interior, reflective facets” in claim 16 to “the interior reflective facets” for consistency and form.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-17 and 19 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 1 recites the limitation "a light output light" in the second clause. It is unclear what is meant by “a light output light”. It appears the intention is to recite “a light output”. Clarification is requested.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the light entering through the light receiving aperture” in the second clause. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because no light has been disclosed to enter through the light receiving aperture.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “the reflecting mirror” and “the silicon surface”. However, claim 1 also recites “at least one reflecting mirror” and “at least one silicon surface”, such that it is unclear which of the “at least one reflecting mirror” and “at least one silicon surface” are being referenced by the limitation. Clarification is requested.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an optical-to-electrical module…to receive the light output and convert the light output into electricity…the silicon surface…to generate an electric potential as a function of the light output”. It is unclear how the silicon surface generates an electric potential as a function of the light output as recited. It is best understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that silicon solar cells generate electricity through light absorption, which is not a function of light but a function of the solar cell. Clarification is requested.
Claim 1 also recites the limitation “optical-to-electrical module” in the third clause. It is unclear if the same or different optical-to-electrical module that was recited in the beginning of the clause is being referenced again. Clarification is requested.
It is noted that the same deficiencies found in claim 1 also apply to claim 19.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the silicon surface comprises a polysilicon photovoltaic wafer”. It is noted that a surface is a two dimensional structure, where a photovoltaic wafer is three dimensional, such that it is unclear how a silicon surface would comprise a photovoltaic wafer as recited. Similar deficiency can be found in claim 3. Clarification is requested.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the reflecting mirror”. However, claim 1 from which claim 4 depends upon recites “at least one reflecting mirror”, such that it is unclear which of the “at least one reflecting mirror” is being referenced by the limitation. Similar deficiency can be found in claims 5 and 7. Clarification is requested.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “generate 170,000 lux as the light output to ex” with no period or conclusion. Corrected is requested.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 19 recites the broad recitation “the light responsive elements including at least one silicon surface and at least one reflecting mirror, the silicon surface and the reflecting mirror oriented to be impinged upon directly or indirectly by the light output received in optical to electrical module”, and the claim also recites “the light-responsive elements comprise two pairs of the silicon surfaces extending in a spaced, opposing relationship, and wherein the reflecting mirror is disposed centrally between the opposing silicon surfaces and oriented to reflect the light output toward the silicon surfaces”, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Additionally, there are many broad recitations followed by a narrower statement of the limitation throughout the claim, such as “the interior surface having reflective facets…the mini structure having a light receiving aperture and a light transmission aperture” followed by “the interior reflective facets of the polyangular specular mini-structure comprises 120 triangular facets; wherein the interior surface of the chamber consists essentially of the 120 triangular facets and the two apertures” and “a polyangular, specular, mini structure in the form of a hollow chamber” followed by “the hollow chamber of the polyangular specular mini structure comprises a hollow sphere”, and many more. Appropriate correction is requested.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arab et al. (US 2010/0218806) in view of Sounni et al. (US 2014/0000705).
Regarding claim 1, Arab discloses a solar energy system (see Figure 3), comprising:
a polyangular, specular, mini-structure (collector) in the form of a hollow chamber (it is disclosed the inside is hollow with top and bottom covers; [0140]; see Figure 2) with an exterior surface and an interior surface (inherent to the collector structure as shown in Figure 2), the interior surface having reflective facets disposed at angular orientations on the interior surface to define a light reflective interior of the chamber (it is disclosed the inside walls of the containers are aluminized or made of reflective thin film; [0140]-[0141]),
the mini-structure having a light-receiving aperture (square top aperture; [0088]; see Figure 2) and a light transmission aperture (clear cell opening on the bottom in Figure 2) extending between the exterior and interior surfaces at respective locations on the mini-structure (see Figure 2), each of the apertures being in optical communication with the interior of the chamber (see Figure 1);
wherein the angularly oriented, reflective facets are located to reflect light having a first lux value when impinged upon by the light entering through the light receiving aperture sufficiently and to thereby generate a light output light having a second lux value greater than the first lux value (it is disclosed light is highly concentrated onto the solar cell; abstract and [0119]), the light transmission aperture located and configured to permit the light output to exit therethrough (the concentrated light exits through the clear cell opening on the bottom; see Figure 1);
an optical-to-electrical module (solar cell) secured relative to the polyangular specular mini-structure to receive the light output and convert the light output into electricity (see Figure 1), wherein the optical-to-electrical module comprises light-responsive elements (high concentration photovoltaic solar cell), the light responsive elements including at least one light conversion layer (it is inherent the photovoltaic solar cell comprises at least one light conversion layer) and at least one reflecting mirror (it is shown in Figure 8 that the reflective concentrator surrounds the sides of the photovoltaic cell), the at least one light conversion layer and the reflecting mirror oriented to be impinged upon directly or indirectly by the light output received in optical-to-electrical module to generate an electric potential as a function of the light output (abstract);
an electrical interface (electrical pipes; [0122]) electrically connected to the optical-to-electrical module for receiving the electric potential and outputting current over time for at least one of electrical charging and storage (it is disclosed the generated electricity can power a pump for circulation of cooling liquid; [0127]-[0133]).
Arab does not expressly disclose the light conversion layer includes at least one silicon surface.
Sounni discloses it is well known in the art to select a variety of solar cells to be used in a concentrating solar system, including polysilicon solar cells ([0035]).
As Arab is not limited to any specific examples of solar cells and as polysilicon solar cells were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Sounni above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected any suitable solar cell, including polysilicon in the device of Arab. Said combination would amount to nothing more than the use of a known element for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Regarding claim 2, modified Arab discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the silicon surface comprises a polysilicon photovoltaic wafer (as set forth above).
Regarding claim 3, modified Arab discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the silicon surface comprises electronic grade silicon in the form of one of a wafer and a chip (a polysilicon solar cell is an electronic grade silicon in the form of at least a chip).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA CHERN whose telephone number is (408)918-7559. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 AM-5:30 PM PT.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/CHRISTINA CHERN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722