DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office Action regarding application number 18/664,683, filed on 05/15/2024, which claim priority to PRO 63/466,899, filed on 05/16/2023.
This action is in response to the Applicant’s Response received 08/24/2026.
Election of Restricted Inventions
The Applicant’s election with traverse of claims 1-15 in the reply is acknowledged, and the restriction requirement is withdrawn.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-15 are pending and examined below.
No claim is allowed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Indefiniteness
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.
Claims 2, 3, 7-11, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “further comprising two cables”, but claim 1 already recites a cable, and lacks antecedent basis. It is not at all clear whether the already recited cable of claim 1 is included within the scope of these further “two cables”. Claims 3 and 7 depend from claim 2 are also unclear as they recite to cables but it is not clear to which cables the limitations are directed. Claims 9 and 10 also recite “further comprising a cable”, although claim 1 already recites a cable. The applicant must amend all of these claims to improve clarity related to the recited cables.
Claim 8 recites “further comprising at least one pulley” but claim 13 already recited “further comprising a pulley”, and it is not clear whether these newly recited pulleys also includes the already recited pulley of claim 1.
Claim 11 twice recites “two cables”. The claim lacks proper antecedent basis. Line 8 also lacks necessary punctuation.
Claims 14 and 15 recite “a plurality of pulleys” but claim 13 already recited “further comprising a pulley”, and it is not clear whether this newly recited plurality of pulleys also includes the already recited pulley.
Improper Dependent Claim
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claims uses the same “top” and “below” recitations as claim 11.
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ZHOU (CN 102621996 A; English machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, ZHOU teaches a solar tracker system comprising:
at least two solar trackers arranged substantially in parallel, each solar tracker including a torque tube and a plurality of piers supporting the torque tube (piers 84 and 801 support plurality of torque tubes 82, Figs. 10 and 11);
a drive mechanism (drive motor 802) mounted on one of the plurality of piers associated with a first of the at least two solar trackers to rotate the first of the at least two solar trackers (drive motor 802 is configured as recited);
a pulley (rotating sheave 83) mounted on each torque tube of the at least two solar trackers; and
a cable (transmission component 86, also referred to throughout the prior art document as a transmission cable) connecting the pulley of the first of the at least two solar trackers to the pulley of a second of the at least two solar trackers, wherein rotation of the first of the at least two solar trackers is translated to the second of the at least two solar trackers via the cable (connected trackers move as recited).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
433
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
177
403
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 2, wherein the pulley mounted on each solar tracker is mounted near a mid-point of the at least two solar trackers (Fig. 10 illustrates the recited mount point near the middle of each tracker).
Regarding claim 8, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 1, further comprising at least one pulley mounted on a first pier of the plurality of piers supporting the first of the at least two solar trackers and at least one pulley mounted on a second pier of the plurality of piers supporting the second of the at least two solar trackers (Figs. 10 and 11 illustrate that there is at least one pulley 83 mounted one each of the piers supporting the first and second of the at least two solar trackers).
Regarding claim 9, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 8, further comprising a cable connecting the pulley mounted on the torque tube of the first of the at least two solar trackers to the pulley mounted on the first pier of the plurality of piers supporting the first of the at least two solar trackers (Figs. 10 and 11 illustrate a cable connecting the pulleys of the two solar trackers as recited).
Regarding claim 10, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 9, further comprising a cable connecting the pulley mounted on the torque tube of the first of the at least two solar trackers to the pulley mounted on the first pier of the plurality of piers supporting the second of the at least two solar trackers (Figs. 10 and 11 illustrate a cable connecting the pulleys of the two solar trackers as recited).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 2, 3, 5-7, and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU (CN 102621996 A; English machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 2, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 1, further comprising two cables, one configured to connect on top of the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers and one configured to connect below the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers (please see how there can be two cables, one positions above tube and one below tube, connected by fasteners/turnbuckles, annotated Fig. 11).
PNG
media_image3.png
166
581
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The examiner notes that the recited use of the word “connect” is broadly interpreted consistent with the specification. However, the examiner asserts that it is not apparent what each of the two cables must connect to. For instance, the cables might need to connect to each other through their ends, or the ends of each cable might be required to connect to some other structural component. The examiner is not confident of the meaning of the applicant’s recitation, and consequently asserts that skilled artisans would find it obvious to rearrange the precise connection locations of the two cables, and said rearrangement would not materially change the operation of the prior art system and would be expected to yield entirely expected and unsurprising results. MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 3, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 2, further comprising a fastener connected to each end of the two cables and configured to secure the two cables to the pulley mounted on each torque tube of the at least two solar trackers (not called-out in Fig. 11 are the “transmission flanges” (e.g., 464), which are described as turnbuckles, that allow tightening/tensioning the cable, thus securing the tables to the torque tube pulleys; the claim does not require that the cable be directly secured to the pully, but instead may be indirectly secured to the pulley, such as through contact friction).
Regarding claim 5, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 2, where the pulley mounted on each solar tracker is mounted near an end of the at least two solar trackers (the examiner determines that moving the pulleys from a mid-point to an end of the trackers is a prima facie obvious rearrangement of parts that does not meaningfully modify the operation of the device, and is an obvious matter of design choice, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Regarding claim 6, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 2, further comprising a plurality of pulleys mounted on each torque tube of the at least two solar trackers (the examiner determines that adding multiple pulleys to each torque tube of the trackers is a prima facie obvious duplication of parts that does not meaningfully modify the operation of the device, and is an obvious matter of design choice, and would produce no new or unexpected result, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)).
Regarding claim 7, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 6, further comprising a pair of cables connecting the plurality of pulleys mounted on the torque tube of a first of the at least two solar trackers to the plurality of pulleys mounted on the torque tube of the second of the at least two solar trackers (the examiner determines that adding multiple cables to each of the plurality of pulleys of the tracker torque tubes is a prima facie obvious duplication of parts that does not meaningfully modify the operation of the device, and is an obvious matter of design choice, and would produce no new or unexpected result, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)).
Regarding claim 11, ZHOU teaches a solar tracker system comprising:
at least two solar trackers arranged substantially in parallel, each solar tracker including a torque tube and a plurality of piers supporting the torque tube (piers 84 and 801 support plurality of torque tubes 82, Figs. 10 and 11);
a drive mechanism (drive motor 802) mounted on one of the plurality of piers associated with a first of the at least two solar trackers to rotate the first of the at least two solar trackers (drive motor 802 is configured as recited);
two cables (transmission component 86, also referred to throughout the prior art document as a transmission cable) one configured to connect on top of the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers and one configured to connect below the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers (please see how there can be two cables, one positions above tube and one below tube, connected by fasteners/turnbuckles, annotated Fig. 11);
the two cables each connecting a first of the at least two solar trackers to a second of the at least two solar trackers, wherein rotation of the first of the at least two solar trackers is translated to the second of the at least two solar trackers via the cable (connected trackers move as recited).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
433
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
166
581
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 11, wherein one of the two cables is configured to connect on top of the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers and another one of the two cables is configured to connect below the torque tubes of the at least two solar trackers (please see annotated Fig. 11 above illustrating the above and below portions of the cables; also this is an obvious duplication and rearrangement of parts that is a matter of simple design choice not influencing the overall principle of operation of the tracker system).
Regarding claim 13, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 11, further comprising a pulley (rotating sheave 83 mounting on each torque tube) mounted on each torque tube of the at least two solar trackers, and wherein the two cables connecting the pulley of the first of the at least two solar trackers to the pulley of a second of the at least two solar trackers (cables are connected to the pulleys of each torque tube to effectuate cooperative rotation).
Regarding claim 14, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 13, further comprising a plurality of pulleys (rotating sheave 83 mounting on each torque tube) mounted on each torque tube of the at least two solar trackers, and the two cables connecting the plurality of pulleys mounted on the torque tube of the first of the at least two solar trackers to the plurality of pulleys mounted on the torque tube of the second of the at least two solar trackers (cables are connected to the pulleys of each torque tube to effectuate cooperative rotation).
Regarding claim 15, ZHOU teaches the solar tracker system of claim 13, further comprising at least one pulley mounted on a first pier of the plurality of piers supporting the first of the at least two solar trackers and at least one pulley mounted on a first pier of the plurality of piers supporting the second of the at least two solar trackers (see the Figures, such as 10 and 11).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELO TRIVISONNO whose telephone number is (571) 272-5201 or by email at <angelo.trivisonno@uspto.gov>. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY-FRIDAY, 9:00a-5:00pm EST. The examiner's supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI, can be reached at (571) 272-3433.
/ANGELO TRIVISONNO/
Primary Examiner
Prosecution Insights