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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1 and 3-11 set forth in the amendment submitted 7/27/2026 form the basis of the present examination.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the Abstract, set forth to the Non-Final Office action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn because of the amendment to the claim filed on 7/27/2026.
The objection to claim 1, set forth to the Non-Final Office action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn because of the amendment to the claim filed on 7/27/2026.
The interpretation of the claim limitation(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, set forth to the Non-Final Office action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn because of the amendment filed on 7/27/2026 regarding the claim interpretation.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 16, filed 7/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-11 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 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 16, of the remarks, filed on 7/27/2026, regarding the rejection(s) of Claims 1-11 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, that “Specifically, the Examiner stated that the claim features of claim 1: "light shielding rate acquisition unit configured to acquire a light shielding rate,' determine that the abnormality is not present the determination target photovoltaic cell," and "determine that the abnormality is present the determination target photovoltaic cell" as not being clear as to what exactly is being acquired or determined, and how the acquisition and determination are being done. See Office Action, pages 12-15. The Examiner advised that there were similar issues in claims 2 and 9. See Office Action, pages 15-17.
Without acquiescing in the Examiner's reasoning, but to expedite the prosecution, Applicant has amended the claims as noted above. Accordingly, Applicant requests that the rejections under § 112(b) be withdrawn from the independent claims. Applicant also requests that the rejections to the dependent claims be withdrawn for at least the reason that they depend from independent claims.”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 16 (stated above), filed 7/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-11 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, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 have been fully considered and is partially persuasive.
Claim limitation is still not clear as claim 1 does not recite how and what element is used to acquire light shielding rate. Amended claim 1 recites, “wherein the program acquires information indicating:
the light shielding rate;
the light shielding rate being transmitted from a light shielding rate change unit configured to:
shield the determination target photovoltaic cell by shielding solar
light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell,
set a light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the
determination target photovoltaic cell, and
change a shielding state to change the light shielding rate of solar
light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell to an arbitrary
value throughout an entire range of 0 to 1;
or
the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module”.
Therefore the limitation, “the light shielding rate being transmitted from a light shielding rate change unit configured to: shield the determination target photovoltaic cell by shielding solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, set a light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, and change a shielding state to change the light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell to an arbitrary value throughout an entire range of 0 to 1” not required by the claim. However, this limitation would make the steps of light shielding rate change clear. The limitation is not required by the claim as this limitation is added with conjunction, “or” with limitation, “the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module”. Therefore, if considering the only limitation, “the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module” which can not make the claim language clear. Therefore, claim language is still clear.
The rejection of claim 1 line 11-17 and Line 18-23 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, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn because of the amendment filed on 7/27/2026 because the claim limitation is now clear.
Therefore, the rejection of Claims 1-11 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, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been maintained, as set forth below.
However the rejection of claims 2 and 9 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, as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn as applicant has canceled claim 2 and amended claim 9 which clears the language of claim 9, as set forth below. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 16-18, filed 7/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by TATEMICHI HIDETOSHI et al. (Hereinafter, “Tatemichi”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 6621000 B2 (Date Published 2019-12-18) have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 16-18, of the remarks, filed on 7/27/2026, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by TATEMICHI HIDETOSHI et al. (Hereinafter, “Tatemichi”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 6621000 B2 (Date Published 2019-12-18), that “Specifically, applicant submits that at least the amended claim features including:
acquire a light shielding rate range of an output current change, (Remarks-Page 16)
………..
are not disclosed by Tatemichi.
As stated by the Examiner, Tatemichi, at paragraph 39, determines the deterioration (e.g., an abnormality) in the photovoltaic cell by, "measuring the current value and the voltage value of the solar cell string 5 while changing the value of the load resistance of the variable load resistance." Thus, Tatemichi describes a method were "an abnormality" is detected by changing a load resistance and monitoring corresponding current behavior (e.g., monitoring V = IR). The Applicant's claims, at least as amended, however, determine the "presence of an abnormality" based on the "output current change" in response to changes in the "light shielding rate." Specifically, an abnormality is present when "the output current of the photovoltaic module hardly changes even though the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell is increased or decreased." Thus, the abnormalities are being detected in substantively different ways.
The Applicant's claim monitor the current changes in response to changes in the shielding of the cell, and determine an abnormality when the current "hardly changes" even when the light (Remarks-page 17) shielding rate (e.g., the percentage of the photovoltaic cell that is shielded) changes. Tatemichi is silent as to changing the "light shielding rate."
Therefore, Applicant submits that Tatemichi does not disclose each and every feature of Applicant's amended independent claim, and therefore the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 to the independent claims should be withdrawn. Further, the rejection to the dependent claims should be withdrawn for at least the reason that they depend from allowable independent claims (Remarks-Page 18).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 16-18 (stated above), filed 7/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by TATEMICHI HIDETOSHI et al. (Hereinafter, “Tatemichi”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 6621000 B2 (Date Published 2019-12-18), as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 have been fully considered and is persuasive because applicant has amended the claims 1, 10 and 11. Therefore, the rejection of independent claims 1, 10 and 11 and dependent claims 3-9 has been withdrawn. Applicant has amended the claim 1, and added the limitation, “a processor configured to execute a program to:………wherein the program acquires information indicating: the light shielding rate; the light shielding rate being transmitted from a light shielding rate change unit configured to: shield the determination target photovoltaic cell by shielding solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, set a light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, and change a shielding state to change the light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell to an arbitrary value throughout an entire range of 0 to 1; or the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module; acquire a light shielding rate range of an output current change, wherein the light shielding rate range of the output current change is used to determine the presence of the abnormality in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell, and wherein the light shielding rate range of the output current change is a range of the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell in which the output current of the photovoltaic module decreases or increases according to an increases or decreases in the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell; and determine the presence or absence of the abnormality, wherein the abnormality is absent in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell when the light shielding rate range of the output current change is between a light shielding rate of 0 and 1 of the determination target photovoltaic cell and the output current of the photovoltaic module decreases or increases according to an increase or decrease in the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell, wherein the abnormality is present in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell when the light shielding rate range of the output current change is between the light shielding rate of 0 and 1 of the determination target photovoltaic cell and the output current of the photovoltaic module hardly changes even though the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell is increased or decreased, and” and similar amendment for independent claims 10 and 11, which overcomes the present rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by TATEMICHI HIDETOSHI et al. (Hereinafter, “Tatemichi”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 6621000 B2 (Date Published 2019-12-18), as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026. Therefore, the rejection of Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by TATEMICHI HIDETOSHI et al. (Hereinafter, “Tatemichi”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 6621000 B2 (Date Published 2019-12-18), as applied to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 5/07/2026 has been withdrawn. However, the amended claim language is not clear as explained above and therefore claims 1, 3-11 are now 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, as set forth below. Applicant’s argument is moot in view of newly applied rejection. See the rejection set forth below.
Examiner Note: Examiner contacted applicant’s representative Garrett J. Lee (Reg. No. 82,563) on 9/22/2026 to ask for explaining the claim limitation, “wherein the program acquires information indicating: the light shielding rate; the light shielding rate being transmitted from a light shielding rate change unit configured to: shield the determination target photovoltaic cell by shielding solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, set a light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, and change a shielding state to change the light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell to an arbitrary value throughout an entire range of 0 to 1; or the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module” to properly understand the limitation “or” and how the limitation “or” is applied to the amended claim and which limitation is required by the claim. After discussing the claim limitation, for expedite prosecution, examiner asked applicant’s representative to amend the claim so that there will be no 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) rejection and claim will be allowable. However, applicant’s representative preferred not to amend the claims and ask to issue the next office action. Therefore, a Final Rejection is mailed to applicant.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-11 are 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 1, Line 7 recites, “a light shielding rate acquisition unit configured to acquire a light shielding rate”. It is not clear from the claim what light shielding rate is and what parameter is used to detect light shielding rate. Is the parameter current or voltage or light signal? It is not clear how the light shielding rate is calculated and what instrument/apparatus is used to determine light shielding rate. Claim does not recite what light shielding rate change unit and how the light shielding rate is determined. Therefore, the claim language is not clear.
Therefore the limitation, “the light shielding rate being transmitted from a light shielding rate change unit configured to: shield the determination target photovoltaic cell by shielding solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, set a light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell, and change a shielding state to change the light shielding rate of solar light irradiated onto the determination target photovoltaic cell to an arbitrary value throughout an entire range of 0 to 1” not required by the claim. However, this limitation would make the steps of light shielding rate change clear. The limitation is not required by the claim as this limitation is added with conjunction, “or” with limitation, “the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module”. Therefore, if considering the only limitation, “the light shielding rate set by a person in charge of determining the abnormality of the photovoltaic module” which can not make the claim language clear. Therefore, claim language is still clear.
For the purpose of present examination “light shielding rate” construed to mean “light shielded IV characteristics.
Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Claims 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph because of the same reason stated above.
Therefore, the inventions according to Claims 1,10 to 11 are not clear.
Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 10 and 11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 3-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Singamsetti (US 20120065936 A1) discloses, “Systems And Methods For Identifying Faulty Sensors Within A Power Generation System- [0001] The embodiments described herein relate generally to a photovoltaic (PV) power generation system, and more specifically, to methods and systems for monitoring sensors included within with the PV power generation system. [0031] FIG. 2 is a flow chart 300 of an exemplary method 310 for monitoring operation of a plurality of sensors, for example, plurality of sensors 90 (shown in FIG. 1), included in PV power generation system 10 (shown in FIG. 1). As described above, PV power generation system 10 includes plurality of solar cells 28 and a plurality of sensors 96. In the exemplary embodiment, method 310 includes receiving 320 a first sensor signal from a first sensor associated with a first solar cell of plurality of solar cells 28. For example, a first sensor signal (i.e., an irradiance signal) is received 320 from second irradiance sensor 102, which is associated with second solar cell 32. Method 310 also includes receiving 322 a second sensor signal from a second sensor associated with a second solar cell of plurality of solar cells 28. For example, a second sensor signal (i.e., an irradiance signal) is received 322 from seventh irradiance sensor 112, which is associated with seventh solar cell 42. Method 310 also includes determining 324 a first power output of second solar cell 32 and a second power output of seventh solar cell 42. [0032] In the exemplary embodiment, method 310 also includes determining 326 second sensor 102 is faulty based at least partially on a comparison of the first sensor signal and the second sensor signal and a comparison of the first power output and the second power output. More specifically, determining 326 second sensor 102 is faulty includes determining that the first sensor signal is different from the second sensor signal and determining that the first power output is substantially similar to the second power output. [0033] Furthermore, determining 326 second sensor 102 is faulty includes determining that the first sensor signal is different from the second sensor signal, determining that the first power output is different from the second power output, and determining that at least one of the first power output and the first sensor signal is different from stored historical data. For example, the first power output may be determined to be different from the second power output when a difference between the first power output and the second power output is greater than or equal to a stored power output threshold value-However Singamsetti does not disclose acquire a light shielding rate range of an output current change, wherein the light shielding rate range of the output current change is used to determine the presence of the abnormality in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell, and wherein the light shielding rate range of the output current change is a range of the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell in which the output current of the photovoltaic module decreases or increases according to an increases or decreases in the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell; and determine the presence or absence of the abnormality, wherein the abnormality is absent in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell when the light shielding rate range of the output current change is between a light shielding rate of 0 and 1 of the determination target photovoltaic cell and the output current of the photovoltaic module decreases or increases according to an increase or decrease in the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell, wherein the abnormality is present in the parallel resistance component of the determination target photovoltaic cell when the light shielding rate range of the output current change is between the light shielding rate of 0 and 1 of the determination target photovoltaic cell and the output current of the photovoltaic module hardly changes even though the light shielding rate of the determination target photovoltaic cell is increased or decreased….”.
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 NASIMA MONSUR whose telephone number is (571)272-8497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am-6:00 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/NASIMA MONSUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
