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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed February 4th, 2026 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The 112(b) rejection of claim 39 is withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The rejections over Livsey et al. are maintained.
New rejections follow.
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 21-36, 38-39, and 41-42 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,009,781. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
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 (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 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 21-36, 38-39, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Livsey et al. (US 2011/0048507 A1).
In view of Claim 21, Livsey et al. teaches a system comprising a plurality of photovoltaic modules installed on a roof deck, wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on the roof deck (Figure 22-23 & Paragraph 0101-0102), wherein each of the plurality of photovoltaic modules includes a plurality of solar cells (Figure 7, #756), wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on a slope of the roof deck (Figure 26 & 29 – see slope); wherein the array includes a first subarray and a second subarray, wherein the first subarray includes a first plurality of the PV modules arranged in a first column comprising a first plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the second subarray includes a second plurality of PV modules arranged in a second column comprising a second plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the first subarray is horizontally adjacent to the second subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below), and at least one jumper module installed on the roof deck and electrically connects the first subarray of the array and the second subarray of the array, wherein the at least one jumper module is vertically adjacent to an upper end of the first subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image1.png
464
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Livsey et al. teaches the jumper module includes a lower surface and a plurality of electrical wires, wherein each of the electrical wires includes a first end and a second end, wherein the second end of each of the electrical wires extends from the lower surface, and a conduit having a first end and a second end, wherein the conduit is on the lower surface, and wherein the second end of each of the plurality of electrical wires is adapted to extend from the second end of the conduit (See Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12, below – Paragraph 0091). Livsey et al. teaches that the at least one jumper module includes the plurality of electrical wires (Figure 14, see wiring), wherein the plurality of electrical wires connects the first subarray to the second subarray (The device produces electrical energy, any of the electrical components that electrical connect the system are considered electrically connected, including the bussing connecting the arrays).
Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12
PNG
media_image2.png
646
730
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 22, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 21. Livsey et al. teaches that the jumper modules includes a frontsheet (Fig. 7, #752-#754 – Paragraph 0073), that includes a first layer (Fig. 7, #752) and a polymer layer attached to the first layer (Fig. 7, #754), wherein the first layer forms an upper surface of the at least one jumper module (Fig. 7, #752 is the top layer of the module).
In view of Claim 23, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 21. Livsey et al. teaches the at least one jumper module includes a backsheet that forms a lower surface of the at least one jumper module (Fig. 7, #758 is the bottom layer of the module).
In view of Claims 24-27, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons give above in addressing Claim 22. Livsey et al. teaches the at least one jumper includes a first end and a second end opposite the first end, a first side lap located at the first end, a second side lap located at the second end, a first junction box located on the first side lap, a second junction box located on the second side lap (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 17, below) at least one electrical bussing (Figure 17 & Paragraph 0097) an encapsulant encapsulating the at least one electrical bussing (Figure 15, #1480 & Paragraph 0093), wherein the encapsulant includes a first surface and a second surface (Figure 15, top and bottom of #1480), wherein the at least one electrical bussing electrically connects the first subarray to the second subarray (Figure 14, #1420 & #1422 connect to the adjacent first and second subarrays, See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, above) and wherein the first junction box is electrically connected to a first one of the at least one electrical bussing (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 17, below), wherein the second junction box is electrically connected to a second one of the at least one electrical bussing (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 17, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 17
PNG
media_image3.png
535
860
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In view of Claims 28-29, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 27. Livsey et al. teaches at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the first subarray includes a third junction box, wherein the third junction box is electrically connected to the first junction box and at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the second subarray includes a fourth junction box, wherein the fourth junction box is electrically connected to the second junction box (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image4.png
379
859
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 30, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 29. Livsey et al. discloses a configuration where at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of a first subarray includes a head lap portion and wherein one of the at least one jumper module overlaps the head lap portion (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below – the leftmost jumper module in the middle row overlays the headlap portion of the first subarray).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image1.png
464
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 31, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 30. Livsey et al. teaches that at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the first subarray includes a first side lap, and wherein the first side lap of the one of the at least one jumper module is proximate to the first side lap of the at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the first subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below & Fig. 23).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image5.png
433
901
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 32, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 31. Livsey et al. teaches that at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the first subarray includes a second side lap, and wherein the second side lap of the one of the at least one jumper module is proximate to the second side lap of the at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the first subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below & Fig. 23).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image5.png
433
901
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 33, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 27. Livsey et al. teaches at least one jumper module includes a plurality of jumper modules, and wherein the first side lap of another one of the plurality of jumper modules overlaps the second side lap of the one of the plurality of jumper modules (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image6.png
402
768
media_image6.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 34, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 33. Livsey et al. teaches the first junction box of the another one of the plurality of jumper modules is proximate to an electrically connected to the second junction box of the one of the plurality of jumpers modules (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image7.png
402
768
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 35, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 34. Livsey et al. teaches at least one of the second plurality of photovoltaic modules of the second subarray includes a head lap portion, and wherein the another one of the plurality of jumper modules overlaps the head lap portion of the at least one of the plurality of photovoltaic modules of the second subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image8.png
458
865
media_image8.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 36, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 24. Livsey et al. teaches the first side lap does not include the first layer (Figure 10-11, the first layer is a component of the stack of 950).
In view of Claim 38, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 21. Livsey et al. teaches the at least one jump modules includes at least one solar cell (Figure 14, #1450 & Paragraph 0093).
In view of Claim 39, Livsey et al. teaches a system comprising a plurality of photovoltaic modules installed on a roof deck, wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on the roof deck (Figure 22-23 & Paragraph 0101-0102), wherein each of the plurality of photovoltaic modules includes a plurality of solar cells (Figure 7, #756), wherein each of the plurality of photovoltaic modules includes a first end and a second end opposite the first end (Fig. 7 & 22, left and right edges of each module) wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on a slope of the roof deck (Figure 26 & 29 – see slope); wherein the array includes a first subarray and a second subarray, wherein the first subarray includes a first plurality of the PV modules arranged in a first column comprising a first plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the first ends of the first plurality of the photovoltaic modules in the first subarray are substantially vertically aligned with one another (Fig. 7, #756 cells are aligned at the left edge), wherein the second ends of the first plurality of the photovoltaic modules in the first subarray are substantially vertically aligned with one another (Fig. 7, #756 cells are aligned at the right edge), wherein the second subarray includes a second plurality of PV modules arranged in a second column comprising a second plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the first subarray is horizontally adjacent to the second subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 23, below), and at least one jumper module installed on the roof deck and electrically connects the first subarray of the array and the second subarray of the array, wherein the at least one jumper module is vertically adjacent to an upper end of the first subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 23, below) and that the first end of the jumper module is vertically aligned with the first ends of the first plurality of the photovoltaic modules, and wherein the second end of the jumper module is vertically aligned with the second ends of the first plurality of the photovoltaic modules (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 23, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 23
PNG
media_image9.png
518
871
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Livsey et al. teaches the jumper module includes a lower surface and a plurality of electrical wires, wherein each of the electrical wires includes a first end and a second end, wherein the second end of each of the electrical wires extends from the lower surface, and a conduit having a first end and a second end, wherein the conduit is on the lower surface, and wherein the second end of each of the plurality of electrical wires is adapted to extend from the second end of the conduit (See Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12, below – Paragraph 0091). Livsey et al. teaches that the at least one jumper module includes the plurality of electrical wires (Figure 14, see wiring), wherein the plurality of electrical wires connects the first subarray to the second subarray (The device produces electrical energy, any of the electrical components that electrical connect the system are considered electrically connected, including the bussing connecting the arrays).
Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12
PNG
media_image2.png
646
730
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 41, Livsey et al. teaches a system comprising a plurality of photovoltaic modules installed on a roof deck, wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on the roof deck (Figure 22-23 & Paragraph 0101-0102), wherein each of the plurality of photovoltaic modules includes a plurality of solar cells (Figure 7, #756), wherein the photovoltaic modules are arranged in an array on a slope of the roof deck (Figure 26 & 29 – see slope); wherein the array includes a first subarray and a second subarray, wherein the first subarray includes a first plurality of the PV modules arranged in a first column comprising a first plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the second subarray includes a second plurality of PV modules arranged in a second column comprising a second plurality of rows (Figure 7, #756 & Paragraph 0073), wherein the first subarray is horizontally adjacent to the second subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below), and at least one jumper module installed on the roof deck and electrically connects the first subarray of the array and the second subarray of the array, wherein the at least one jumper module is vertically adjacent to an upper end of the first subarray (See Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22, below).
Annotated Livsey et al. Figure 22
PNG
media_image1.png
464
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Livsey et al. teaches the jumper module includes a lower surface and a plurality of electrical wires, wherein each of the electrical wires includes a first end and a second end, wherein the second end of each of the electrical wires extends from the lower surface, and a conduit having a first end and a second end, wherein the conduit is on the lower surface, and wherein the second end of each of the plurality of electrical wires is adapted to extend from the second end of the conduit (See Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12, below – Paragraph 0091). Livsey et al. teaches that the at least one jumper module includes the plurality of electrical wires (Figure 14, see wiring), wherein the plurality of electrical wires connects the first subarray to the second subarray (The device produces electrical energy, any of the electrical components that electrical connect the system are considered electrically connected, including the bussing connecting the arrays).
Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12
PNG
media_image2.png
646
730
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Livsey et al. (US 2011/0048507 A1) in view of Okawa et al. (US 2020/0266759 A1).
In view of Claim 42, Livsey et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 41. Livsey et al. does not explicitly tech that the at least one electronic device is a rapid shutdown device, an optimizer, or a microinverter.
Okawa et al. discloses a module with a microinverter (Fig. 1A, #170) that may serve to improve performance and avoid in field DC wiring that can reduce subassembly costs (Paragraph 0042). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to include a microinverter on the jumper module of Livsey et al. for the advantages of improving performance and obviating in field DC wiring that can reduce subassembly costs.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that Livsey et al. does not disclose the jumper module includes a lower surface and a plurality of electrical wires, wherein each of the electrical wires includes a first end and a second end, wherein the second end of each of the electrical wires extends from the lower surface, and a conduit having a first end and a second end, wherein the conduit is on the lower surface, and wherein the second end of each of the plurality of electrical wires is adapted to extend from the second end of the conduit and that the at least one jumper module includes the plurality of electrical wires (Figure 14, see wiring), wherein the plurality of electrical wires connects the first subarray to the second subarray.
Its respectfully pointed out to Applicant that Livsey et al. teaches the jumper module includes a lower surface and a plurality of electrical wires, wherein each of the electrical wires includes a first end and a second end, wherein the second end of each of the electrical wires extends from the lower surface, and a conduit having a first end and a second end, wherein the conduit is on the lower surface, and wherein the second end of each of the plurality of electrical wires is adapted to extend from the second end of the conduit (See Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12, below – Paragraph 0091). Livsey et al. teaches that the at least one jumper module includes the plurality of electrical wires (Figure 14, see wiring), wherein the plurality of electrical wires connects the first subarray to the second subarray (The device produces electrical energy, any of the electrical components that electrical connect the system are considered electrically connected, including the bussing connecting the arrays). Accordingly, this argument is unpersuasive.
Annotated Livsey et al. Fig. 12
PNG
media_image2.png
646
730
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
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 DANIEL P MALLEY JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-1638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm EST.
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 571-272-1307. 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.
/DANIEL P MALLEY JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights