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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 recites “y direction” in lines 14, 21, and 29 and previously recites “Y direction” in line 10, please consider capitalizing the Y in y direction for consistency.
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 1-15 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “on the front side a protection arrangement is provided” in line 20 it is unclear if the front side is the same as “the front side of the string” recited in line 12. Further clarification and appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites “the connectors have a first contact surface and a second contact surface”, it is unclear if “a first contact surface and a second contact surface” is the same as the limitation “two contact surfaces”” in claim 1 which recites “the connectors each have two contact surfaces”. Further clarification and appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12382729 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims recite substantially the same structure for a protection arrangement comprising space solar cells.
Claim 1-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-8 of copending Application No. 19/280811. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims recite substantially the same structure for a protection arrangement comprising space solar cells.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 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 and the double patenting rejections, set forth in this Office action.
The closest prior art of record includes Boulanger (US 20060225779 A1), Crist (US 20180062011 A1), Okhubo (US 20110067746 A1), and Magnusdottir (US 20170170349 A1).
Boulanger discloses a protection arrangement comprising multiple space solar cell strings wherein each string comprises first (D1) and second (D2) string protection diode protection arrangements which are on the same side of one end of the string (see Single Figure [0023]-[0038]). Furthermore, Boulanger discloses that increasing the number of protection diodes increases reliability ([0036]). Crist discloses multiple solar cell strings wherein each solar cell within the string is coupled with a bypass diode (110 see Fig. 4A [0052]-[0053]), and also discloses a metallic connector wherein the metallic connector has a first head side, a spacer, and a second head side (see Fig. 3B 131, metallic connector 131 shown in detail [0051]) can be used to interconnect a diode and a solar cell. Okubo also discloses a solar cell (4) coupled with a bypass diode (2) via a metallic connector (1, see Fig. 3) wherein the connector has a first head side (3 or 5), a spacer (6,7,8), and a second head side (5 or 3) (see Figs. 1-7 [0017]-[0025]), and also discloses an adhesive layer (9) and a cover glass (10). Magnusdottir discloses a metallic interconnector with a bus region (134) and multiple tab regions (150) and meandering design for the connection between the bus and tab regions (See Figs. 4A 4B, and 4C [0053]-[0058]). No teaching, suggestion, or motivation could be found to modify the closest prior art of record to have the entirety of claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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 T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726