DETAILED ACTION
This is the second office action for Support Structures for Solar Trackers.
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 without traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 23 February 2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 31 is 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 31 recites the limitation "the direction between the pair of legs" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 21-25, 31-33, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0313602 to West et al. Regarding claim 21, West et al. discloses a solar tracker support system (7B) comprising a pier comprised of an A-frame that includes a pair of legs (210) and a crown (500) extending between the pair of legs. There is a pivot (520 and 521) disposed at the crown and interposed between the pair of legs. There is also a bearing housing assembly comprising a first support bracket (131A, B) disposed at a first side of the pier, wherein the first support bracket is rotatably supported by the pivot such that the first support bracket is rotatable relative to the pier (see paragraph 0073, lines 6-8).
West et al. does not disclose a second support bracket provided on a second, opposite side of the pier from the first support bracket. However, the second support bracket is the same as the first support bracket, and the mere duplication of parts has not patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Providing a duplicate support bracket to the first support bracket to further support the torque tube does not produce a new and unexpected result. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided an additional, duplicate bracket for providing further support for the torque tube supported by the first support bracket.
Regarding claim 22, the pivot comprises a bore (receiving 521) extending transverse to the crown and a bearing (521) rotatably disposed at the bore (see figure 7B… pin 521 and the bore that receives it, which extends transverse to the crown). Regarding claim 23, the bearing (521) extends coaxial with the bore and transverse to the crown.
Regarding claim 24, the first support bracket comprises a first bearing receipt bore (131A, B have a hole that receives pin 521) at a central portion of the first support bracket, and the bearing extends from the first bearing receipt bore, transverse to the crown and between the pair of legs. The resultant structure of the 103 rejection of claim 21 would also have a second support bracket comprising a second bearing receipt bore at a central portion of the second support bracket, and the bearing would extend into the receipt bore of the second bearing. Regarding claim 25, the bearing hangs below the crown (see figure 7B).
Regarding claim 31, the crown comprises a central portion (510) disposed between the pair of legs, and the central portion comprises a planar profile extending at least in a direction between the legs. Regarding claim 32, the first support bracket is configured to receive a first module at the first side of the pier, and the second support bracket of the resultant structure from the 103 rejection of claim 21 would have a second support bracket configured to receive and support a second solar module at the second side of the pier. Regarding claim 33, at least the pivot, the first support bracket, and the second support bracket would be integrated across the A-frame.
Regarding claim 37, West et al. discloses a solar tracker support system (see figure 7B) comprising a torque tube (130) extending along a row of a solar tracker. There is an A-frame (210 and 500) extending from ground to rotatably support the torque tube (via 520, 521, 131A and 131B) relative to ground. The A-frame includes a pair of legs (210) and a crown (500) extending from a top of the first leg of the pair of legs to a top of a second leg of the pair of legs.
There is a pivot bearing (521) rotatable relative to the A-frame and interposed between the pair of legs, and a bearing housing assembly (131A and 131B) comprising a first support bracket disposed at a first side of the A-Frame, wherein the first support bracket is supported by the pivot bearing, and is rotatably with the pivot bearing relative to the A-frame.
West et al. does not disclose a second support bracket provided on a second, opposite side of the pier from the first support bracket. However, the second support bracket is the same as the first support bracket, and the mere duplication of parts has not patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Providing a duplicate support bracket to the first support bracket to further support the torque tube does not produce a new and unexpected result. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided an additional, duplicate bracket for providing further support for the torque tube supported by the first support bracket.
Claim(s) 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0313602 to West et al. in view of WO 2023/060315 to Carroll II. Regarding claim 34, West et al. does not disclose the pair of legs as comprising a first linear end portion at one end of the leg, a second linear portion at another opposite end of the leg, and a bend between the first linear end portion and the second linear end portion.
Carroll II discloses an A-frame comprising a pair of legs (43, 44). Each leg of the pair of legs comprises a first linear end portion (45, 47) at one end of the leg, a second linear end portion (46, 48) at another opposite end of the leg, and a bend between the first linear end portion and the second linear end portion (see figure 3 and paragraphs 00135 and 00136). Because both West et al. and Carroll II disclose A-frame structures for supporting solar tracker support systems, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have substituted one leg arrangement for the other, to achieve the predictable result of legs with a first linear end portion (45, 47) at one end of the leg, a second linear end portion (46, 48) at another opposite end of the leg, and a bend between the first linear end portion and the second linear end portion.
Regarding claim 35, each leg of the pair of legs of Carroll II is disposed at a non-zero angle relative to the crown such that the pair of legs extend away from one another moving in a direction along each leg away from the crown. Regarding claim 36, the first linear end portion of Carroll II comprises one or more bores (to receive 49 and 49A) configured to receive one or more fasteners (49 and 49A) to attach the leg to a ground embedded support (41, 42).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-30 and 38-40 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 26, 38, and 39, the closest prior art to West et al. (cited above) renders the features of claims 21 and 37 as obvious, but does not disclose or suggest the first and second support brackets as configured to support at least one solar module at a top of the first and second support brackets at the first and second sides of the A-frame, respectively. Regarding claims 27-30 and 40, West et al. does not disclose or suggest the features of claim 21 with a first torque tube clamp attached to the first bracket at the first side of the pier and a second torque tube clamp attached to the second support bracket at the second side of the pier.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2020/0072505 to Hudson
US 2021/0013828 to Hudson” US 2021/0017729 to Karkheck
US 2020/0076354 to West
US 2020/0313602 to West
US 2023/0054140 to Hudson
US 2021/0018225 to Hudson
The above prior art discloses various solar tracker support systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN M MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-6819. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9 am-7:30 pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
STEVEN M. MARSH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/STEVEN M MARSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632