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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-9 drawn to an installation structure, in the reply filed on 2/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, method for constructing a photovoltaic power generation sheet and a photovoltaic power generation sheet, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/27/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 9 recite “the convex portions adjacent” in line 8 of claim 1, line 7 of claim 9. It is suggested to be changed to “the adjacent convex portions”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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 “a photovoltaic power generation sheet” in line 1, and “a photovoltaic power generation sheet” in line 5. It is unclear if “a photovoltaic power generation sheet” recited in line 5 is the same as or different from “a photovoltaic power generation sheet” recited in line 1.
Claim 1 recites “the convex portion adjacent” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-9 are rejected on the same ground as claim 1.
Claim 7 depends on claim 1 and recites “the power generator” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 is rejected on the same ground as claim 7.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the water down side” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toshiaki (JP 2019085697, see machine translation, Cite a in Foreign Patent Document of IDS 9/19/2024).
Regarding claim 1, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure for a photovoltaic power generation sheet comprising:
an exterior member (see corrugated frame 4, figs. 5 and 14 of the original document) in which a plurality of convex portions (see upper curved portion 16) extending in one direction (or upward/vertical direction) are formed at intervals in a direction (or horizontal direction) orthogonal to the one direction (e.g. vertical direction, see figs. 3-5 and 14);
a photovoltaic power generation sheet (see film type solar cell 28, figs. 3-5 and 14 of the original document, [0082] of the translation) that is disposed across the plurality of convex portions (16) and is flexible to be curved along the plurality of convex portions (16) in a cross section (see figs. 4-5 and 14); and
a fixing member (see fastener 30 and mounting projection 10, figs. 3-5 and 14 of the original document, [0082] of the translation) that fixes the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28) to a portion (or lower curved section 18) between the adjacent convex portions (16) in a state where the photovoltaic power generation sheet is curved along the plurality of convex portions (16) in a cross section (see figs. 3-5 and 14 of the original document).
Regarding claim 4, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above, and teaches a portion of the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28) fixed to the fixing member (30/10) is positioned closer to a base side (or the bottom) of the convex portion than a top surface (or the peak) of the convex portion (or upper curved section 16, see figs. 5 and 14).
Regarding claim 7, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above, and teaches the fixing member (30/10) is attached to a portion (e.g. 6, 34 in fig. 5 or sheet 78 in fig. 11) other than the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28, see figs. 3-5, 11 and 14), and therefore other than a power generator in the photovoltaic power generation sheet.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiaki (JP 2019085697) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Higashiyama et al. (US 2009/0178708).
Regarding claims 2-3, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above.
Toshiaki does not teach the photovoltaic power generation sheet has a flexural strength of 10 MPa or more and 200 or less as claimed in claim 2, nor do they teach a flexural modulus of 100 MPa or more and 10,000 MPa or less as claimed in claim 3.
Higashiyama et al. discloses a photovoltaic power generation sheet (see solar cell module 1, fig. 1) having a flexural strength and a flexural modulus, respectively, of 100 MPa and 2280MPa; 138 MPa and 3580MPa; 83MPa and 1570MPa; 127MPa and 3705MPa; 130MPa and 3360MPa; and 96MPa and 2340MPa (see table 2). 100, 138, 83, 127, 130 and 96MPa are right within the claimed range of 10MPa or more and 200MPa or less for the flexural strength as claimed in claim 2. 2280, 3580, 1570, 3705,3360, 2340MPa are right within the claimed range of 100MPa or more and 10,000MPa or less for the flexural modulus as claimed in claim 3.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed to the photovoltaic power generation sheet (or the solar cell module) of Toshiaki having a flexural strength and a flexural modulus, respectively, of 100 MPa and 2280MPa; 138 MPa and 3580MPa; 83MPa and 1570MPa; 127MPa and 3705MPa; 130MPa and 3360MPa; and 96MPa and 2340MPa as taught by Higashiyama et al.; because Higashiyama et al. teaches such photovoltaic power generation sheet (or the solar cell module) would be thin, light, and easily molded in a curve shape, and therefore being favorably used in application such as automobiles; and have excellent transparency, mechanical strength and heat resistance (see [0032] and [0145] of Higashiyama et al.).
Regarding claim 9, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above, and teaches the exterior member (4) is a roof member (as the exterior member 4 is on the roof 34 as shown in fig. 5 of the original document, [0082] of the translation), wherein the photovoltaic power generation sheet includes the portion (or the lower curved section 18) between the adjacent convex portion constitutes a drain portion that is recessed and inclined downward (see figs. 3-5 and 14).
Toshiaki does not explicitly disclose the photovoltaic power generation sheet includes one barrier sheet covering a plurality of power generators such that an intermediate portion of the barrier sheet that is fixed by the fixing member with respect to the portion between the adjacent convex portions constitutes a drain portion that is recessed and inclined downward.
Higashiyama et al. discloses a photovoltaic power generation sheet (or solar cell module 1) including one barrier sheet (see front surface cover member 2, fig. 1) covering a plurality of power generators (see solar cells 4, fig. 1, [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the installation structure of Toshiaki by using the photovoltaic power generation sheet (or the solar cell module) including one barrier sheet covering a plurality of power generators as taught by Higashiyama et al.; because Higashiyama et al. teaches such photovoltaic power generation sheet is thin, light, easy to molded into a curve shape and have excellent transparency, mechanical strength, and heat resistance (see [0032] and [0145] of Higashiyama et al.). In such modification, the intermediate portion of the barrier sheet that is fixed by the fixing member with respect to the portion between the adjacent convex portions (or the lower curved section 18) constitutes a drain portion that is recessed and inclined downward, because Toshiaki teaches the portion between the adjacent convex portion constitutes a drain portion that is recessed and inclined downward.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiaki (JP 2019085697) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Takashi et al. (JP 2011089341, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 5, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above, and teaches the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28) is fixed at both the convex portions (or the upper curved portions 16) and the portions between the convex portions (or the lower curved section 18, see figs. 3-5 and 14).
Toshiaki does not disclose the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28) is not fixed to the plurality of convex portions (or upper curved section 16).
Takashi discloses fixing the photovoltaic power generation sheet (1, fig. 2c and 2d) to the exterior member (fixing member 10) by a fixing member (or taping screw with washer 71) in the portion between two adjacent convex portions (or upper curved sections), and not fixed at the plurality of convex portions (see figs. 2c and 2d).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the installation of Toshiaki by fixing the photovoltaic power generation sheet (28) to the exterior member (or corrugated frame 4) by the fixing member (30/10 or taping screw) at the portion between two adjacent convex portions but not the convex portions, or the photovoltaic power generation sheet is not fixed to the plurality of convex portions by the fixing member, as taught by Takashi; because Takashi fixing the photovoltaic power generation sheet to the exterior member (or the corrugated fixing member 10) at the portion between two adjacent convex portions (or the lower curved section) would allow for more secure the exterior member (or the corrugated fixing member) to a support member, thereby improving workability (see [0025-0026] of the translation) and that photovoltaic (solar) power generation sheet is attached to a roof relatively easily (see [0006] of the translation). Furthermore, such modification would reduce material cost since less fixing members being used.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshiaki (JP 2019085697) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Wang et al. (US 2019/0221691).
Regarding claim 6, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above.
Toshiaki does not disclose the photovoltaic power generation sheet includes a power generator containing a perovskite compound.
Wang et al. discloses a photovoltaic power generation sheet (see figs. 1-2 and 4) including a power generator (or solar cell) containing a perovskite compound would provide the advantages of high efficiencies, low temperature processing and flexibility (see [0030-0031]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the installation of Toshiaki by using the power generator (or solar cell) containing a perovskite compound as taught by Wang et al. in the photovoltaic power generation sheet, because Wang et al. teaches power generators (or solar cells) containing perovskite compound would provide the advantages of high efficiencies, low temperature processing and flexibility.
Claim 8rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to claim 1 above,
Regarding claim 8, Toshiaki discloses an installation structure as in claim 1 above.
Toshiaki does not disclose a minimum distance between the fixing member and the power generator positioned closest to the fixing member is 1.5 cm or more.
As the efficiency, performance and damages of the power generators are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the minimum distance between the fixing member and the power generator - with damages such as breakages, short circuit to the power generator increasing as the distance decreasing - the minimum distance between the fixing member and the power generator positioned closest to the fixing member would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed minimum distance cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, minimum distance between the fixing and the power generator in the installation to be 1.5cm or more obtain the desired balance between maintaining the efficiency and performance of the power generator (or the solar cells) and preventing damages (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH-TRUC TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-6594. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 6:00pm.
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 5712721307. 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.
THANH-TRUC TRINH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/THANH TRUC TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726