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 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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP4792059 to Toshiro Ozaki (“Toshiro”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2010/0200063 to Djeu (“Djeu”). JP4792059 is also published as cited EP2133483 for English translation.
Regarding claim 1, Toshiro discloses a roof sheet (10, Fig, 1) that is fixed over a folded-plate roof 21 via fasteners 22, at least comprising: a main body sheet 10 provided with multiple ventilation permeation holes 11, wherein the ventilation permeation holes 11 are positioned above valley portions 501 and between top portions 502 of the folded-plate roof 20 and a temperature of the solar power module is lowered by airflow (arrows shown in Fig. 11) passing through the ventilation permeation holes to naturally cool the roof (Abstract).
Toshiro does not disclose a solar power module having flexibility that is fixed to a position on the surface of the main body sheet that does not block the ventilation permeation holes wherein the solar power module is positioned above top portions of the folded-plate roof.
Djeu discloses a solar power module 240 having flexibility that is fixed to a position on the surface of the main body sheet, the flexibility facilitating handling and installation (Djeu par 0036).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the roof sheet of Toshiro to have a solar power module having flexibility that is fixed to a position on the surface of the main body sheet as taught in Djeu with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably utilize a surface of a building exposed to sunlight for power generation with a solar power module that can be more easily handled and installed due to its flexibility. Moreover, it would have been obvious to place the solar power modules not to block the ventilation permeation holes such that the solar power module is positioned above top portions of the folded-plate roof because the rearrangement of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and such placement would not alter the performance of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 2, Toshiro discloses a roof sheet (10, Fig, 1) fixed over a folded-plate roof 21 via fasteners 22, comprising: the roof sheet comprising multiple ventilation permeation holes 11, wherein the ventilation permeation holes 11 are positioned above valley portions 501 and between top portions 502 of the folded-plate roof 20 and a temperature of the solar power module is lowered by airflow (arrows shown in Fig. 11) passing through the ventilation permeation holes but does not disclose that the sheet comprises a solar power module having flexibility and the solar power module is positioned above top portions of the folded-plate roof to naturally cool the roof (Abstract).
Djeu discloses a solar power module 240 having flexibility that is fixed to a position on the surface of the main body sheet, the flexibility facilitating handling and installation (Djeu par 0036).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the roof sheet of Toshiro to have a solar power module having flexibility that is fixed to a position on the surface of the main body sheet as taught in Djeu with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably utilize a surface of a building exposed to sunlight for power generation with a solar power module that can be more easily handled and installed due to its flexibility. Moreover, it would have been obvious to have the solar power module positioned above top portions of the folded-plate roof because the rearrangement of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and such placement would not alter the performance of the device. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Toshiro in view of Djeu discloses that the valley portions 501 and the top portions 502 extend linearly in the same direction, the ventilation permeation holes 11 are arranged along the extending direction of the valley portions (see annotated Fig. 5), and the solar power module extends along the extending direction of the top portions, and a plurality of the valley portions 501 and a plurality of the top portions 502 are alternately arranged in a direction perpendicular to the direction in which the valley portions and the top portions extend.
Annotated Fig. 5 of Toshiro
PNG
media_image1.png
314
314
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pages 5-6, the applicant argues that Toshiro does not disclose an arrangement of the ventilation permeation holes where the holes are above valley portions of the folded-plate roof. However, Fig. 1 in Toshiro shows fastening apertures 12 staggered in between rows of ventilation holes 11. Roof sheet 10 is attached to top portions/peak (annotated as 502) of the corrugated/folded-plate roof via apertures/eyelets 12. Because sheet 10 is attached at top portions of the roof plate 20, it necessarily follows that the ventilation holes 11 which are offset from holes 12, are positioned over valleys (annotated as 501) of the corrugated/folded-plate roof. Dashed lines on annotated Figure 5 of Toshiro also show alignment/location of the top portions of the folded-plate roof. Annotated Fig. 5 shows that Toshiro indeed discloses ventilation holes 11 that are positioned above valley portions of the folded-plate roof. Toshiro specifically teaches that ventilation holes 11 are positioned over the valley such that the roof can be cooled by heat dissipation via air flowing through the valleys and out of ventilation holes 11 (Toshiro; Abstract and see embodiment in Fig. 11 depicting air flow).
The applicant also argues that placement of the solar power module over the top portions of the folded-plate roof would not have been a mere rearrangement of components. However, the arrangement of the ventilation holes with respect to the solar power module is not merely arbitrary. Toshiro already teaches that ventilation holes are to be positioned over valleys of the folded-plate roof such that air can flow through and facilitate cooling via heat dissipation. One of ordinary skill would be led to the conclusion of placing the solar power modules between ventilation holes 11 in order not to obstruct the ventilation holes. As shown in Fig. 5, an area of the body 10 in between rows of ventilation holes 11 are positioned above top portions of the folded-plate roof. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to place the solar modules above top portions of the folded-plate roof.
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 CHRISTINE T CAJILIG whose telephone number is (571)272-8143. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Brian Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/CHRISTINE T CAJILIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights