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 Group I (Claims 1-2) in the reply filed on 3/4/2026 is acknowledged. The restriction requirement is now made FINAL with Claims 2-17 now withdrawn from further examination.
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 2 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 2, the recitation of, “the blade support” in Lines 3 and 5 lack antecedent basis. For the purposes of prior art examination, the recitation is considered to mean, “the blade support structure” and Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boatner et al. (US 2003/0235498 A1) hereinafter referred to as Boatner.
PNG
media_image1.png
302
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
516
388
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
453
451
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, Boatner discloses a rotor for a vertical axis turbine (10, figure 1 also reproduced above) comprising:
- a blade support structure (upper and lower arms, 16A-D, 17A-D, figure 1) extending from a center of the rotor (see figure 1),
- a blade (see airfoil(s) 14A-D, figure 1) pivotally coupled to the blade support structure at a distance from the center of the rotor (see figure 1), and
- a pitch regulating mechanism (see annotated figure 9 above; Note: figure 9 is an alternate stop arrangement with a resiliently deformable adjustable bumper mechanism) arranged between the blade support structure and the blade (see figure 1 and 9) to regulate the pitch of the blade in dependence of fluid dynamic forces acting on the blade (intended use recitation, see figure 9 and para 54),
wherein the pitch regulating mechanism comprises a damper system (pins 152, 153 and pins 154,155 forming stop means in radial/tangential directions, constraining the movement of the airfoils without abruptness, allowing a “soft stop” and providing a dampening action, see para 54-55 and figure 9), wherein the damper system has a first damping coefficient in a first rotational direction of the blade relative to the blade support structure and a second damping coefficient in a second rotational direction of the blade relative to the blade support structure (the radial and tangential stops may need to exhibit different dampening qualities and be fine-tuned individually in terms of ideal placement, see para 56, Lines 8-10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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.
Regarding Claim 2, the closest prior art considered to be Boatner discloses that the rotor defines an advancing rotational direction in which the rotor will rotate during operation (operation direction of wind engine 10). Boatner fails to disclose that the first rotational direction of the blade relative to the blade support is in the same direction as the advancing rotational direction, and wherein the second rotational direction of the blade relative to the blade support is in an opposite direction to the advancing rotational direction. Therefore, it is not known in, nor obvious from the prior art to construct a rotor as claimed.
Internet/E-mail Communication
In order to permit communication regarding the instant application via email, Applicant is invited to file form PTO/SB/439 (Authorization for Internet Communications) or include the following statement in a filed document or remarks of a filed response (see MPEP 502.03 Il): Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file. If such authorization is provided, please include an email address in the remarks of a filed response. The examiner’s e-mail address is sabbir.hasan@uspto.gov.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 9,903,339 B2 discloses a vertical axis wind turbine with variable pitch mechanism (see figures 1-2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sabbir Hasan whose telephone number is (571)270-7651. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 11am-7pm.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571- 272-8648. 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.
/Sabbir Hasan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights