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 § 112
Claims 9 and 11 is 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.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase of “the first and second gears” (emphasis added) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 11, the phrases of “the first and second gear” (emphasis added), “the internal gearing”, “the gearing” and “the bearing” lack a proper antecedent basis.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Domingo et al (ES 2268936) in view of Almotlaq et al (US 10,190,802).
Regarding claim 1, Domingo et al discloses (Figs.1-2) an energy generation device driving system adapted to bear an energy generation device (page 2, lines 7-8) on a holding structure (page 2, lines 38-41) comprising at least one actuator (page 9, lines 32-34) adapted to generate two rotational motions and at least one transmission module (11, 21) adapted to transmit said two rotational motions, a movement transformation module (12, 22) for transforming said transmitted two rotational motions into the two rotational movements and transmitting said two rotation movements to the energy generation device, comprising a first rotation mechanism (12) adapted to receive first one of said two linear motions and transform it in a first rotation movement and transmit it to said energy generation device, and a second rotation mechanism (22) adapted to receive a second one of said two linear motions and transform it in a second rotation movement and transmit it to said energy generation device, wherein at least one of the first and second rotation movement is an energy generation device azimuthal rotation movement and each of the first and second rotation mechanisms (12, 22) comprises a specific linear to rotation movement transformation modules (12, 22), wherein the linear to rotation movement transformation modules (12, 22) are disposed on each side of the holding structure so as to be off-centered with respect to the azimuthal rotation axis (1) of the said energy generation device (Figs.1-2). The claimed invention differs from the device of Domingo in that the motion generated by the at least one actuator is a linear motion, instead of a rotational motion. However, this feature is merely well known in the art as disclosed by Almotlaq (Fig.4; the use of an actuator generating a linear motion which is then transmitted and transformed into a rotation motion) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings of Almotlaq et al in the device of Domingo et al in view of the desire to effectively provide linear motions resulting in achieving the particular desired performance.
Regarding claim 2, Domingo et al discloses the use of a motor (page 9, lines 32-34) and rods (Figs.1-2).
Regarding claims 3-4, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.6 of Almotlaq et al.
Regarding claim 5, the limitations therein are shown in Figs.1-2 of Domingo et al (page 9, lines 32-34).
Regarding claims 6 and 12, the limitations therein are disclosed in page 10, lines 64-65 of Domingo et al (Figs.1-2).
Regarding claim 7, the first local gearing system of Domingo et al comprises a first gear (12; Fig.1) adapted to be rotated by a first linear rack or roll (11) mounted on the holding structure and adapted to be linearly moved by the first transmission module and which in turn rotates and transmit this rotational movement to the energy generation device.
Regarding claims 8-9, 11 and 13-16, the specific configuration and scheme utilized for a gearing system would have an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art merely depending on the needs of particular application and involving only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 10, the first gear (12) of Domingo et al transmits the rotational movement to the energy generation device thanks to a second gear (14) rotating with the first gear (12) and engaged with a gearing (14) provided on the rotational axis of the energy generation device.
Regarding claim 17, the feature of utilizing a compensation system to correct an elevation would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements.
Regarding claim 18, the limitations therein are disclosed in page 2, lines 63-64 of Domingo et al.
Regarding claim 19, Domingo et al discloses an orientation-optimization system for orienting an energy generation device accordingly and comprising the energy generation device driving system of clam 1 and a driving system control module (Fig.3) adapted to control the driving system to orient the energy generation device in order to optimize the electrical yield.
Regarding claim 20, while Domingo et al discloses the use of a driving system control module (Fig.3), it doesn’t disclose the use of a light source positioning module. However, the use of a light source positioning device in a light source tracking system would be well known in the art and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements and involving only routine skill in the art.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Muchow et al (US 7,230,819) is cited for disclosing a power system. Dos Santos Teixeira Ramos (US 2012/0125404) is cited for disclosing a modular solar radiation concentration system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN K PYO whose telephone number is (571)272-2445. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/KEVIN K PYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878