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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VETTER et al. (2012/0116542 A1) in view of SADKA (2015/0161442 A1).
RE claim 1, Vetter teaches providing detailed information associated with an object of interest in a received image [abstract]. Vetter teaches a method comprising:
(a)
receiving, at a processor, a first set of data packets pertaining to a pre-defined area of a region of interest (ROI), wherein the pre-defined area is selected by a user;
Fig. 2, operator terminal (12) includes user input unit (32), display (34), control unit (30) (said processor), graphical user interface [0033]. An overview picture is provided to the display (34) [0039-0040]. The overview picture can present any level of a hierarchy. The overview picture does not need to be geographical but a local overview picture [0040]. The system of Vetter provides a pointing and selection tool in which various locations of the overview picture (1) can be selected or marked [0041]. The work station can detect the positions of the pointer (P) on the display unit (34) and determine what objects are provided close to such positions. It is also possible to select an object with this pointer, such as clicking using a mouse or touch screen (said ROI, selected by a user) [0041].
(b)
receiving, at the processor, a second set of data packets comprising one or more parameters of a set of components associated with a solar installation at the ROI;
When the control unit (30) determines that the object is selected, a graphical symbol, icon (I1), indicating the presence of further information is displayed (Fig. 3B) [0044]. Selecting icon (I1) opens window (w1) (Fig. 3D), which presents a detailed information view (W1) for the object (O1) [0046-0047]. In the window (W1), it may be possible to present additional information about what content is linked to the object [0049]. As shown in Fig. 3D, a single line diagram of the station and a circuit diagram of an element in the station can be displayed (said parameters of a set of components associated with) [0050]. Vetter further provides an example of a power control device [0042] but further states it is open ended to the type of objects displayed and their additional information. Vetter suggest the technical process may be power generation [0029].
Vetter does not explicitly state the claimed solar installation; however, the open-ended possibilities of the technical processes could encompass solar installation within the system/method of Vetter. Additionally, Sadka is made of record as teaching a system/method for determining potential surfaces for installation of solar panels [abstract]. A location is received and an overhead image of the location is extracted [0018, 0026] from database (140) [0020]. A surface outline of a surface is identified. A pattern associated with the outlined surfaces as well as potential installation area of solar panels are determined based on the outlined area [0018-0022, 0026]. The potential installation area is displayed as an overlay on the overhead image of the location [0018, 0029].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further provide solar installation information as taught by Sadka within the display of Vetter because solar installation is another form power generation. As taught above by Vetter, Vetter provides an open ended list of technical prosses used in the visualization. Sadka provides support of displaying solar installation where solar installation is a much used type of power generation.
(c)
generating, a circuit diagram for the solar installation at the ROI by evaluating the first set of data packets and the second set of data packets; and
Vetter teaches in the window (W1), it may be possible to present additional information about what content is linked to the object [0049]. As shown in Fig. 3D, a single line diagram of the station and a circuit diagram of an element in the station can be displayed [0050]. The window can be opaque, transparent or halfway transparent [0051].
(d)
rendering, on a graphical user interface (GUI), a visualization indicative of the generated circuit diagram over the ROI, wherein the visualization is any of a single-line diagram and a three-line diagram.
In the window (W1), it may be possible to present additional information about what content is linked to the object [0049]. As shown in Fig. 3D, a single line diagram of the station and a circuit diagram of an element in the station can be displayed [0050].
RE claim 2, the language of claim 2 recites, “wherein the set of components comprises any or a combination of”, which limits the claim to needing only one of the limitations. Therefore, Vetter teaches circuit breakers. It should be noted that since only one limitation is required, the limitations of solar panel, inverter, DC disconnect, AC disconnect, meter, wire, charge controller, battery, junction box, combiner box, fuse, load center, rapid shutdown, and surge device are mute.
Vetter teaches process interface units can include elements directed towards measuring quantities such as current, voltage, and power. The process interface units can also or instead include elements directed towards control operations like circuit breakers [0030].
RE claim 3, the language of claim 3 recites, “wherein the set of parameters comprise any or a combination of”, which limits the claim to needing only one of the limitations. Therefore, Vetter in view of Sadka teaches attributes of solar panel. It should be noted that since only one limitation is required, the limitations of attributes of inverter, temperature, and a set of endpoints associated with the predefined area are mute.
Vetter teaches receiving measurements of the process via the process interface units (said parameters) [0031]. Vetter is silent to the claimed parameters listed however as discussed in the rationale of claim 1, provides an open-ended list of possibilities of the technical processes. In further view of Sadka, Sadka is relied upon as teaching solar installation. Fig. 2, a potential surface for installation of solar panels is determined, taking into account, for example, shade created by objects on or near the surface, position of the solar panels to be installed and the like (said attributes of solar panel) [0028]. By understanding the shadow patterns cast by an object on the identified surface, the effectiveness of the surface for generation of electricity by solar panels may be determined [0033].
The same motivation to combine as taught in the rationale of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
RE claim 4, Vetter in view of Sadka teaches wherein, the processor is configured for evaluating, wiring between the set of components associated with the solar installation at the ROI, corresponding to the first set of data packets and the second set of data packets.
As taught in the rationale of claim 1, Sadka is relied upon as teaching the art of solar installation information (said solar installation at the ROI) [0018-0022, 0026]. In view of Vetter, Vetter presents a detailed information view (W1) for the object (O1) [0046-0047]. In the window (W1), it may be possible to present additional information about what content is linked to the object [0049]. As shown in Fig. 3D, a single line diagram of the station and a circuit diagram (said wiring between components) of an element in the station can be displayed [0050]. Vetter further provides an example of a power control device [0042] but further states it is open ended to the type of objects displayed and their additional information. Vetter suggest the technical process may be power generation [0029].
Therefore, in the modified invention, the example of Fig. 3D of Vetter would provide the single line diagram and circuit diagram of the solar installation of Sadka. The same motivation to combine as taught in the rationale of claim 1 is incorporated herein.
RE claim 6, claim 6 recites similar limitations as claim 1 but in system form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 1 is applied. Furthermore, Vetter teaches the control unit (30) may be a processor with an associated program memory including program code for performing the functionality disclosed in claim 1 [0033].
RE claim 7, claim 7 recites similar limitations as claim 2 but in system form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 2 is applied.
RE claim 8, claim 8 recites similar limitations as claim 3 but in system form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 3 is applied.
RE claim 9, claim 9 recites similar limitations as claim 4 but in system form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 9 is applied.
Claims 5, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VETTER et al. (2012/0116542 A1) in view of SADKA (2015/0161442 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 6 respectively, and in further view of LUNT et al. (WO 2023/014990 A1).
RE claim 5, Vetter in view of Sadka teaches the limitations of claim 5 with the exception of wherein, the processor is configured for evaluating, spacing between the set of components associated with the solar installation at the ROI, corresponding to the first set of data packets and the second set of data packets.
As taught in the rationale of claim 1, Vetter is relied upon as teaching presenting additional information about what content is linked to the object [0049]. Sadka is further relied upon as teaching the art of solar installation information [0018-0022, 0026]. Sadka additionally teaches determining installation based on shadows [0028]. However, Sadka is silent to the spacing between components of the solar installation.
Lunt is made of record as teaching determining a spacing between the plurality of transparent solar panels based on reduction or minimization of shadow during midday solstice [0052]. With reference to Fig. 13, the method includes determining a spacing between adjacent arrays. The spacing may be determined based on desired water penetration between adjacent devices, desired equipment clearance between devices, and/or reduction or minimization of shadow during midday solstice (said evaluating, spacing between the set of components associated with the solar installation at the ROI) [0235].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further consider the spacing between the arrays of the solar installation as taught by Lunt within the method/system of Vetter in view of Sadka because Lunt teaches the determined spacing is based on the amount of shadows the array would receive. Sadka teach by understanding the shadow patterns cast by an object on the identified surface, the effectiveness of the surface for generation of electricity by solar panels may be determined [0033].
RE claim 10, claim 10 recites similar limitations as claim 5 but in system form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 5 is applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE L SAMS:
direct telephone number:
(571) 272-7661
email:
michelle.sams@uspto.gov
The examiner is currently part time and can be reached Mon.-Fri. 5:30am-9:30am.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Kee M. Tung can be reached on (571)272-7794. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHELLE L SAMS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
17 October 2025