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 2 is objected to because “the roof attachments of the first pair, the second pair, and the third pair are attached to the roof” should be –each of the first, second, and third pair of roof attachments are attached to the roof--.
Claim 17 is objected to because “roof attachments are configured” should be, for example, “first, second, and third pair of roof attachments are configured”.
Claim 20 is objected to because “roof attachment is configured” should be, for example, “first, second, and third pair of roof attachments are configured”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10, 15-17, 20-23 and 25-26 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan (11,848,636) in view of Jasmin (10,211,773).
1. Stephan, fig. 6, teaches a mounting system for mounting solar modules, the system comprising:
a first-row solar module (the module on the bottom left) having a bottom edge, a top edge opposite the bottom edge, and two side edges each extending a first length between the bottom edge and the top edge, wherein a first half of the first-row solar module extends from the bottom edge to half of the first length, and a second half of the first-row solar module extends from the top edge to the half of the first length;
a second-row solar module (the module above the bottom left module) having a bottom edge, a top edge opposite the bottom edge of the second-row solar module, and two side edges each extending a second length between the bottom edge of the second-row solar module and the top edge of the second-row solar module, wherein a first half of the second-row solar module extends from the bottom edge of the second-row solar module to half of the second length, and a second half of the second-row solar module extends from the top edge of the second-row solar module to the half of the second length;
a first roof attachment (401) configured to secure the first half of the first-row solar module to a roof surface, wherein the first roof attachment is within the first half of the first-row solar module such that the roof attachments is positioned under the two side edges of the first-row solar module, fig. 6;
a second roof attachment (402) configured to secure the second half of the first-row solar module to the roof surface, wherein the second roof attachment is within the second half of the first-row solar module such that the roof attachment is positioned under the two side edges of the first-row solar module;
a third roof attachment (404) configured to secure the second (top) half of the second-row solar module to the roof surface, wherein the third roof attachment is within the second half of the second-row solar module such that the third roof attachment is positioned under the two side edges of the second-row solar module, fig. 6; and
a structural clamp 501 that connects the top edge of the first-row solar module to the bottom edge of the second-row solar module at a position between the second and third roof attachments.
Stephan does not teach a pair of roof attachments spaced apart within the modules such that each of the roof attachments is positioned under a respective one of the two side edges of the modules. Jasmin, fig. 1, teaches a pair of roof attachments (base 15) spaced apart within modules 11. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Stephan to have a pair of roof attachments (by replacing the Stephan rails with the Jasmin attachments) “to adjust the position and height of the mounting hardware”, col. 1, lines 34-35, the Stephan in view of Jasmin roof attachments positioned under a respective one of the two side edges of the modules as claimed because when the Stephan rails are replaced with the Jasmin attachments, the attachments are situated at clamps 400 just as clamps 400 are attached to the rails in Stephan.
2. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Jasmin further teaching the roof attachments of one or more of the first pair, the second pair, and the third pair are attached to the roof surface using one or more fasteners, bolts, 31.
3. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Jasmin further comprising one or more module clamps 17 configured to attach the first-row solar module to the first pair of roof attachments.
4. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan further teaching the structural clamp includes an up-roof side configured to connect two solar modules in a second row of solar modules.
5. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan, fig. 9, further teaching solar modules in the first-row solar module is oriented in portrait orientation in which the first length extends up along a slope of the roof surface and the second row solar modules is oriented in the portrait orientation.
6. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan, fig. 10, further teaching the first-row solar module is oriented in portrait orientation in which the first length extends up along a slope of the roof surface, and the second row solar module is oriented in landscape orientation in which the top edge of the second-row solar module and the bottom edge of the second-row solar module extend up along the slope of the roof surface.
7. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan, fig. 11, further teaching a first-row solar module is oriented in landscape orientation in which the top edge of the first-row solar module and the bottom edge of the first-row solar module extend up along a slope of the roof surface and the second row solar module is oriented in portrait orientation in which the top edge of the second-row solar module and the bottom edge of the second-row solar module extend up along the slope of the roof surface. Stephan does not teach second row solar module is oriented in landscape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the second row solar module to be oriented in landscape for uniformity.
8. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan further teaching a distance from the first pair of attachments to the second pair of attachments is less than the first length, fig. 9.
10. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Stephan further teaching the structural clamps provides an electrical bond path from the first row solar module to the second row solar modules, col. 2, lines 7-11.
15. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the mounting system of claim 1, Jasmin further teaching a roof surface is metal, col. 1, line 7.
16. Stephan, figs. 4-10, teaches a method for installing a mounting system for solar modules, the method comprising:
installing a first roof attachment (401) to the roof surface using a first set of fasteners, wherein the roof attachment supports a first half of a first-row solar module under two side edges extending a first length between a top edge and a bottom edge the first-row solar module, the first half extending from the bottom edge to half of the first length,
installing a second roof attachment (402) to the roof surface using a second set of fasteners, wherein the second roof attachments supports a second half of the first-row solar module under the two side edges, the second attachment positioned up-roof from the first attachment at a distance less than the first length of the first-row solar module, the second half extending from the top edge to the half of the first length, fig. 6; and
installing a third roof attachment (404) to the roof surface using a third set of fasteners, wherein the third roof attachment supports a second half of a second-row solar module under two side edges of the second-row solar module each extending a second length between a bottom edge of the second-row solar module and a top edge of the second-row solar module, the second half of the second-row solar module extending from the top edge of the second-row solar module to the half of the second length, the third pair positioned up-roof from the second pair at a distance equal to the second length plus or minus 10 inches, fig. 9.
Stephan does not teach a pair of roof attachments spaced apart so as to support the modules under a respective one of two side edges. Jasmin, fig. 1, teaches a pair of roof attachments 15, attached with fasteners 31, spaced apart within modules 11. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Stephan to have a pair of roof attachments (by replacing the Stephan rails with the Jasmin attachments) “to adjust the position and height of the mounting hardware”, col. 1, lines 34-35, the Stephan in view of Jasmin roof attachments positioned under a respective one of the two side edges of the modules as claimed because when the Stephan rails are replaced with the Jasmin attachments, the attachments are situated at clamps 400 just as clamps 400 are attached to the rails in Stephan.
Finally, should Applicant disagree that Stephan teaches the claimed up-roof distance, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have such distance for system strength.
17. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 16, Stephan further teaching the first, second, and third pair of roof attachments are configured to receive one or more module clamps, 17 (Jasmin), for securing a solar module.
20. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 16, Stephan in view of Jasmin further teaching each of the first, second, and third pair of roof attachments are capable of spanning between two or more correspondingly dimensioned ribs on a roof surface because there is ample space, fig. 1, (Jasmin).
21. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 16, Jasmin further teaching the fasteners (screws) for attaching the roof attachment to the roof surface are configured to threadably pierce and mechanically engage a material of the roof surface to create a mechanical connection between the roof attachment and the roof surface.
22. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 16, Stephan in view of Jasmin further comprising:
attaching a first row of solar modules to a first row of roof attachments including the first pair and a second row of roof attachments including the second pair using a plurality of module clamps, 17 (Jasmin);
attaching a second row of solar modules to a third row of roof attachments including the third pair using a plurality of module clamps, 17 (Jasmin); and
attaching the first row of solar modules and the second row of solar modules together using a plurality of structural clamps, 501 (Stephan).
23. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 22, Stephan further teaching the structural clamps provide an electrical bond path from a first row of solar modules to a second row of solar modules, col. 2, lines 7-11.
25. Stephan in view of Jasmin teaches the method of claim 16, Jasmin further teaching a roof surface is metal, col. 1, line 7.
26. Stephan, fig. 6, teaches a system for mounting solar modules, the system comprising:
a first roof attachment (401) configured to secure a first half of a first-row solar module to a roof surface, wherein the first roof attachment is configured to support the first half of the first-row solar module under each of two side edges of the first-row solar module, the first half extending from a bottom edge of the first- row solar module;
a second roof attachment (402) configured to secure a second half of the first-row solar module to the roof surface, wherein the second roof attachments is configured to support the second half of the first-row solar module under each of the two side edges of the first-row solar module, the second half extending from a top edge of the first-row solar module;
a third roof attachment (404) configured to secure a second half of a second-row solar module to the roof surface, wherein the second roof attachment is configured to support the second half of the second-row solar module under each of two side edges of the second-row solar module, the second half of the second- row solar module extending from a top edge of the second-row solar module; and
a structural clamp configured 501 to connect the top edge of the first-row solar module to the bottom edge of the second-row solar module at a position between the second pair of roof attachments and the third pair of roof attachments.
Stephan does not teach a pair of roof attachments spaced apart within the modules such that each of the roof attachments is positioned under a respective one of the two side edges of the modules. Jasmin, fig. 1, teaches a pair of roof attachments (base 15) spaced apart within modules 11. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Stephan to have a pair of roof attachments (by replacing the Stephan rails with the Jasmin attachments) “to adjust the position and height of the mounting hardware”, col. 1, lines 34-35, the Stephan in view of Jasmin roof attachments positioned under a respective one of the two side edges of the modules as claimed because when the Stephan rails are replaced with the Jasmin attachments, the attachments are situated at clamps 400 just as clamps 400 are attached to the rails in Stephan.
Claim 9 – is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan in view of Jasmin and in further view of Elsinawai (11,881,807).
9. Stephan does not expressly teach the solar modules are solar photovoltaic modules that produce between 300 and 800 Watts of electricity. Elsinawi teaches solar modules are solar photovoltaic modules that produce between 300 and 800 Watts (350 watts) of electricity, col. 1, lines 44-46. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the solar modules to be solar photovoltaic modules that produce between 300 and 800 Watts of electricity for maximum power generation.
Claim 11 – is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan ‘636 in view of Jasmin and in further view of Stephan (9,473,066).
11. Stephan ‘636 does not expressly teach the module clamps provide an electrical bond path between adjacent solar modules within a row of solar modules. Stephan ‘066 teaches the module clamps provide an electrical bond path between adjacent solar modules within a row of solar modules, col. 9, lines 55-59. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the module clamps to provide an electrical bond path between adjacent solar modules within a row of solar modules to prevent shorts.
Claims 12 and 24 - are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan in view of Jasmin and in further view of Stearns (11,012,023).
12 and 24. Stephan does not teach the structural clamp has a foot that abuts a roof surface. Stearns, fig. 2B, teaches a clamp has a foot 210 that abuts a roof surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the structural clamp to have a foot that abuts a roof surface for support.
Claims 13-14 and 18-19 – are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stephan in view of Jasmin and in further view of Plaisted (7,900,407).
13-14. Stephan in view of Jasmin does not teach at least one of the roof attachments of the first pair, at least one of the roof attachments of the second pair, and at least one of the roof attachments of the third pair has a sealing layer disposed on at least a portion of an underside surface, the sealing layer configured to create a watertight seal to the roof surface when the roof attachments are installed to the roof surface. Plaisted teaches roof attachments in rows have a sealing layer disposed on at least a portion of an underside surface, col. 7, lines 9-13. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one or more of the roof attachments in one or more of the first row, the second row, and the third row to have a sealing layer disposed on at least a portion of an underside surface, the sealing layer configured to create a watertight seal to the roof surface when the roof attachments are installed to the roof surface to prevent leaks.
18-19. Stephan in view of Jasmin does not teach the roof attachments have a sealing layer disposed on all or a portion of an underside surface, the sealing layer configured to create a watertight seal to a roof surface when the roof attachment is installed to the roof surface. Plaisted teaches roof attachments have a sealing layer disposed on all or a portion of an underside surface, the sealing layer configured to create a watertight seal to a roof surface when the roof attachment is installed to the roof surface, col. 7, lines 9-13. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the roof attachments to have a sealing layer disposed on all or a portion of an underside surface, the sealing layer configured to create a watertight seal to a roof surface when the roof attachment is installed to the roof surface to prevent leaks.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL J KENNY whose telephone number is (571)272-9951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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.
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.
/DANIEL J KENNY/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRIAN E GLESSNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights