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 .
Summary
This is the response to the Amendment/Request for Reconsideration filed on 12/31/2025.
Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application with claims 19-20 are withdrawn from consideration.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN214154400 with provided machine English translation or Li ‘400). Further evidence is provided by Chowdhury et al. (US 2014/0004685) and Hattori (US 2009/0245975).
Addressing claims 1-2, Li ‘400 discloses a photovoltaic device (figs. 1-10), comprising:
a color steel tile 100 comprising at least one angle relaxation portion 102;
a bonding layer 103 (fig. 4) arranged on a top wall of the angle relaxation portion (fig. 4); and
a photovoltaic assembly 101 arranged on one side of the color steel tile and connected to the color steel tile through the bonding layer (fig. 4),
wherein the bonding layer comprises a first bonding portion and a second bonding portion arranged along a first direction (see annotated fig. 4 below); and in the first direction, a ratio of a dimension of the first bonding portion to a dimension of the second bonding portion ranges from 0.1 to 0.5 (paragraph [n0053] of the translation document discloses the top surface I has a width between 5 mm to 20 mm that corresponds to the dimension of the first bonding portion; paragraph [n0052] discloses the opening a has a width between 15 mm to 30 mm that corresponds to the dimension of the second bonding portion; therefore, the ratio of the dimension of the first bonding portion to the dimension of the second bonding portion is 5/15 or 0.3 or 5/20 or 0.25 that fall within the claimed range), and
a curing speed of the second bonding portion is lower than a curing speed of the first bonding portion (Li ‘400 implicitly discloses the claimed relationship between the curing speed of the second portion to the curing speed of the first portion because the second portion of Li ‘400 is thicker than the first portion; thus resulting in the curing speed of the second bonding portion being lower than the curing speed of the first bonding portion according to the follow evidence; Hattori discloses in paragraph [0165] that “if the glue layer is thick, glue hardening speed is slow”; Chowdhury discloses in paragraph [0037] that the first adhesive layer has a shorter curing time, i.e. higher curing speed, than the second adhesive layer and the difference in curing speed is accomplished by making the first layer thinner than the second adhesive layer and paragraph [0038] discloses “the adhesive with the longest cure time, or slowest curate rate (e.g., thickest adhesive layer)”; therefore, the preponderance of evidence indicates that the curing speed of the second bonding portion of Li ‘400 is lower than the curing speed of the first bonding portion because the second bonding portion is thicker than the first bonding portion).
PNG
media_image1.png
218
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 3, fig. 6 shows the groove 112, within which the adhesive layers 103 along with the first and second bonding portions are arranged, are arranged at an interval; therefore, the first and second bonding portions within teach groove are also arranged at interval relative to one another that meets the claimed limitation.
Addressing claim 4, fig. 4 shows the first and second bonding portions are alternately arranged.
Addressing claim 5, figs. 1-7 show that the first direction is parallel to the width direction of the color steel tile.
Addressing claim 6, fig. 4 shows the color steel tile comprises two angle relaxation portions that are arranged along the width direction of the color steel tile, and each of the two angle relaxation portions is provided with the bonding layer; annotated fig. 4 below further shows the first bonding portions of the two angle relaxation portions are arranged at a position where the two angle relaxation portions are close to each other and the second bonding portions of the two angle relaxation portions are arranged at positions where the two angle relaxation portions are away from each other as claimed.
PNG
media_image2.png
258
636
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 7, fig. 6 shows the extension direction of the bonding layer also includes a direction that is parallel to the length direction of the color steel tile, which meets the claimed limitation.
Addressing claim 8, fig. 6 shows along the length direction of the color steel tile, a dimension of the bonding layer is less than the dimension of the angle relaxation portion and fig. 7 shows along the length direction of the color steel tile, the dimension of the bonding layer is the same as the dimension of the angle relaxation portion.
Addressing claim 9, fig. 6 shows a plurality of grooves 112, within which the adhesive layer 103 along with the associated first and second bonding portions are arranged; therefore, each adhesive layer 103 within the groove 112 corresponds to a bonding part and the plurality of groves 112 include a plurality of bonding parts with each bonding part includes one first bonding portion and one second bonding portion.
Addressing claim 11, paragraph [n0055] discloses the thickness of the adhesive layer is greater than or equal to 2 mm, which meets the claimed limitation.
Addressing claim 12, paragraph [n0055] discloses the thickness of the adhesive layer is greater than or equal to 2 mm, which meets the claimed limitation.
Addressing claim 13, figs. 6-7 show the groove 112, within which the adhesive layer 103 is positioned, extend in the lengthwise direction of the color steel tile that intersects with the first direction.
Addressing claim 14, Li ‘400 discloses in paragraph [n0052] that the width of the top opening a is between 15 mm to 30 mm and the width of the top surface I is between 5 to 20 mm, which means the projection area of the top walls of all of the at least one angle relaxation portion is (2xI + a) x L = (between 25 mm to 70 mm) x L or T is (between 25 mm to 70 mm) x L. The projected area of the second bonding portions, which corresponds to the width of the opening a, is (between 15-30 mm) x L or S is (between 15 – 30mm) x L. Therefore, the ratio of S/T or ((between 15 – 30mm) x L)/ (between 25 mm to 70 mm) x L includes a value of 20/40 = 0.5 as claimed. The ratio between the width of the top wall and the width of the opening a satisfies the claimed area ratio because the length of the top wall and the length of the groove correspond to each other.
Addressing claim 15, fig. 6 shows the color steel tile comprises one angle relaxation portion with bonding layer comprises a plurality of bonding parts arranged at intervals along a length direction of the color steel tile and one of the plurality of bonding parts at least comprises one first bonding portion and one second bonding portion (the embodiment in fig. 6 shows a plurality of grooves 112, within which a bonding layer or bonding part is arranged that includes the corresponding first and second bonding portion, are arranged at intervals along a length direction of the color steel tile). Paragraph [n0065] discloses the total length of the groove is greater than or equal to 60% of the length of the color steel tile. Fig. 6 shows three grooves, which implies that each groove accounts for 20% of the length of the color steel tile. The projection area of the top wall is (between 25 mm to 70 mm) x L (as discussed above in the rejection of claim 14). The projection area of each second bonding portion is (between 15 – 30mm) x 0.2L. Therefore, the ratio of the projection area of the second bonding portion to a projection area of the top wall is ((between 15 – 30mm) x 0.2L) / (between 25 mm to 70 mm) x L or (between 15-30mm)x0.2/ (between 25-70mm) that includes values that fall within the claimed range. For example, (15mm x 0.2)/25 mm is 0.12.
Addressing claim 16, fig. 4 shows two angle relaxation portions arranged along a width direction of the color steel tile and each of the two angle relaxation portions is provided with the bonding layer. Figs. 6-7 implies that the bonding layers on the angle relaxation portions in each embodiment are the same; therefore, it is implicitly disclosed that a ratio of a total projection area of the second bonding portion on one of the two relaxation portions is the same as a total projection area of the second bonding portion on the other one of the two angle relaxation portions.
Addressing claim 17, see the rejection of claim 15 above.
Addressing claim 18, figs. 8-10 show the snap fit structure 106 as the claimed clamp that is connected to the color steel tile [n0080], and the photovoltaic assembly is connected to the clamp (via the intervening structures, the claim does not require the photovoltaic assembly to be in direct connection with the clamp).
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-9, 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao et al. (CN218103010 with provided machine English translation).
Addressing claims 1 and 5, Yao discloses a photovoltaic device (figs. 3-4), comprising:
a color steel tile 10 (paragraph [n0033] of the specification) comprising at least one angle relaxation portion (annotated fig. 4);
a bonding layer 40 arranged on a top wall of the angle relaxation portion (fig. 4); and
a photovoltaic assembly 30 arranged on one side of the color steel tile 10 and connected to the color steel tile through the bonding layer 40 (fig. 4),
wherein the bonding layer comprises a first bonding portion 42 (positioning portion 42) and a second bonding portion 41 (adhesive portion 41) arranged along a first direction; and in the first direction, a ratio of dimension of the first bonding portion 42 to a dimension of the second bonding portion 41 ranges from 0.1 to 0.5 (paragraph [n0053] discloses the dimension of the width of the double-sided foam glue or the disclosed first bonding portion 42 according to paragraph [n0047], which is the dimension in the first direction, is 40 mm and the length of the adhesive portion 41, which is the dimension in the first direction, is 70-120 mm or 80 mm, which results in ratio values that is 0.5 or less as claimed), and
a curing speed of the second bonding portion is lower than a curing speed of the first bonding portion (paragraph [n0047] discloses the positioning portion 42, as the structural equivalence to the claimed first bonding portion, is cured before the adhesive portion 41, as the structural equivalence to the claimed second bonding portion is cured, which implies that the curing speed of the second bonding portion 41 is lower than the curing speed of the first portion 42; paragraph [n0007] explicitly states “the positioning portion is used to fix the relative position of the photovoltaic module and the tile roof before the adhesive portion is cured”; paragraph [n0048] discloses “the positioning portion 42 can maintain the relative position between the photovoltaic module 30 and the tile roof 10 before the adhesive portion 41 is cured” (emphasis added), which is exactly the same as to how the claimed first and second bonding portions are used according to the originally filed disclosure).
PNG
media_image3.png
250
584
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 2, fig. 5 shows each first bonding portion and second bonding portion for a continuous structure in the first direction as claimed.
Addressing claims 3-4, fig. 5 shows the first bonding portion 42 and the second bonding portion 41 are arranged at an interval and alternately arranged relative to one another that satisfies the claimed limitation.
Addressing claim 8, annotated fig. 4 above shows that the dimension of the bonding layer is smaller than the dimension of the angle relaxation portion.
Addressing claim 9, positioning portions 42 and adhesive portions 41 are the claimed plurality of bonding parts arranged at intervals along a length direction of the color steel tile and one of the plurality of bonding parts at least comprises one first bonding portion and one second bonding portion as claimed (see annotated fig. 5 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
536
552
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 11, paragraph [n0053] discloses the width of the positioning portion 42 is between 40-80 mm, which is the dimension along the length of the steel tile, and the length of the adhesive portion 41 is 70-120, which is the dimension along the length of the steel tile, that results in the dimension of each bonding part between 110-200 mm that fall within the claimed range.
Addressing claim 13, fig. 5 shows that the first and second portions extend along a second direction (the direction parallel to the widthwise direction of the steel tile) that intersects with the first direction (the direction parallel to the lengthwise direction of the steel tile).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. (CN218103010 with provided machine English translation) in view of Li et al. (CN213602584 with provided machine English translation or ‘584).
Addressing claim 12, Yao is silent regarding the thickness of the bonding layer in the claimed range.
Li’584 discloses an adhesive layer 30 for bonding a photovoltaic assembly to the angle relaxation portion of a color steel tile (fig. 6); wherein, the thickness of the adhesive layer is 3 mm [n0053].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the photovoltaic device of Yao with the adhesive layer having a known thickness of 3 mm as disclosed by Li’584 in order to obtain the predictable result of bonding a photovoltaic assembly to the color steel tile.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7-10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN213602584 with provided machine English translation or Li ‘584) in view of Kanbara et al. (JP2011109072 with provided machine English translation).
Addressing claims 1-2, Li’584 discloses a photovoltaic device (figs. 1-13), comprising:
a color steel tile 1 (fig. 7) comprising at least one angle relaxation portion 3; and
a bonding layer (the bonding layer comprising the plurality of adhesive bodies 30, fig. 11) arranged on a top wall of the angle relaxation portion (fig. 11); and
a photovoltaic assembly 9 arranged on one side of the color steel tile and connected to the color steel tile through the bonding layer,
wherein the bonding layer comprising a plurality of bonding portions 30 arranged along a first direction (the lengthwise direction of the color steel pipe as shown in fig. 6).
Li’584 is silent regarding the bonding layer comprises a first bonding portion and a second bonding portion arranged along a first direction and in the first direction, a ratio of a dimension of the first bonding portion to a dimension of the second portion ranges from 0.1 to 0.5.
Kanbara discloses a photovoltaic device comprising a bonding layer 8 arranged on a top wall of a support member 1B for bonding the photovoltaic assembly 1 to the support member (fig. 1a-1c); wherein the bonding layer 8 comprises a first bonding portion 8b and a second bonding portion 8a arranged along a first direction (the lengthwise direction of the support member 1B (fig. 4) and in the first direction, a ratio of dimension of the first bonding portion to a dimension of the second bonding portion is less than 1 (fig. 4 shows the dimension of the first bonding portion 8b along the lengthwise direction of the support member 1B is less than the dimension of the second bonding portion 8a along the lengthwise direction of the support member 1B). Paragraph [0054] discloses the dimension of the first bonding portion 8b is 1.5 mm to 4 mm and the dimension of the second bonding portion 8a is 1.5 mm to 4 mm. Paragraph [0031-0033] discloses that the first bonding portion 8b acts as spacer to hold the photovoltaic assembly in the desired position while the second bonding portion 8a is cured, which is the inventive concept of current application.
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify bonding layer of Li’584 with the first bonding portion 8b and the second bonding portion 8a arranged in the manner disclosed by Kanbara in order to reduce stress between the photovoltaic assembly and the support structure so that a highly reliable solar cell module can be obtained with high manufacturing efficiency (Kanbara, [0033]). With regard to the limitation “a ratio of a dimension of the first bonding portion to a dimension of the second bonding portion ranges from 0.1 to 0.5”, it is noted that fig. 4 of Kanbara shows the dimension of the first bonding portion 8b is less than that of the second bonding portion 8a, the dimension of the first bonding portion 8a is 1.5 mm to 4 mm and the dimension of the second bonding portion 8b is 1.5 mm to 4 mm [0054]; therefore, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed ratio between the dimension of the first bonding portion and the dimension of the second bonding portion along the first direction when perform routine experimentation with the dimensions of the first and second bonding portions in the respective range disclosed by Kanbara in order to optimize the stress reduction and adhesiveness of the photovoltaic assembly to the support member during assembly. This is because the first bonding portion 8b acts as a spacer to maintain the thickness of the second bonding portion 8a [0032]; therefore, the first bonding portion is responsible for stress reduction during assembly while the second bonding portion 8a is responsible for adhering the photovoltaic assembly to the support structure. For example, when the dimension of the first bonding portion 8b is 1.5 mm and the dimension of the second bonding portion 8a is 4.0 mm, the ratio falls within the claimed range.
With regard to the limitation “a curing speed of the second bonding portion is lower than a curing speed of the first bonding portion”, the limitation is met because Kanbara discloses in paragraph [0031-0033] discloses that the first bonding portion 8b acts as spacer to hold the photovoltaic assembly in the desired position while the second bonding portion 8a is cured, which implies that the curing speed of the second portion 8a is lower than the curing speed of the first portion 8b in order for the first bonding portion 8b to adhere the photovoltaic assembly to the support member before the second bonding portion 8a is cured.
Addressing claim 4, fig. 4 of Kanbara shows that the first and second bonding portions are alternately arranged.
Addressing claim 7, fig. 4 of Kanbara shows the first direction is parallel to a length direction of the support structure and fig. 6 of Li’584 shows the first direction is parallel to a length direction of the color steel tile.
Addressing claim 8, fig. 4 of Kanbara shows along the length direction of the support member the dimension of the bonding layer is smaller than the dimension of the support member. Fig. 6 of Li’584 shows along the length direction of the angle relaxation portion, the dimension of the bonding layer 30 is smaller than the dimension of the angle relaxation portion.
Addressing claim 9, annotated fig. 1c of Kanbara below shows the bonding layer comprises a plurality of bonding parts arranged at intervals along a length direction of the support member and one of the bonding parts at least comprises one first bonding portion and one second bonding portion as claimed.
PNG
media_image5.png
244
570
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Addressing claim 10, annotated fig. 1c of Kanbara above shows the bonding parts are spaced apart by section 8b, which has a dimension of 1.5 mm to 4.0 mm as disclosed in paragraph [0054] that falls within the claimed range.
Addressing claim 12, Li’584 discloses in paragraph [n0053] that the thickness of the adhesive layer is 3 mm, that falls within the claimed range.
Addressing claim 13, fig. 2b shows the first and second bonding portions has width dimension that extends in a second direction that intersects with the first direction as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because the Applicants did not put forth any argument regarding the rejection of claims 1-18. As discussed above, the new limitation “a curing speed of the second bonding portion is lower than a curing speed of the first bonding portion” is met by Li ‘400, Yao and Li ‘584 in view of Kanbara.
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 BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, 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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 02/27/2026