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 .
Status of Claims
Claim(s) 1-14 are currently pending.
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 1-14 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.
Regarding claim 1
The limitation “particularly solar module (100)” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The term “particularly” in the instant claim implies that there is more than one solar module. However, the claim recites a singular solar module in line 1 corresponding to the solar module zone.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claim 2
The sequence of polarities recited in the instant claim (positive, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative or vice versa) is not consistent with that recited in claim 1 (positive, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative or vice versa), from which claim 2 depends. For purposes of examination on the merits, it is interpreted that the recitation “vice versa” applies to each pair.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claim 6
The limitation “such as solder joints” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The recitation “such as” implies that the limitations that follow are merely exemplary. Accordingly, it is not clear if the solder joints are required by the claim. For purposes of examination on the merits, the limitation is interpreted as exemplary.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claim 7
The limitation “for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole from the electrical connections for connecting the negative end terminals to the minus pole” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite.
The limitation is confusing and one of ordinary skill cannot be reasonably apprised of the invention. For purposes of examination on the merits, the limitation is interpreted as follows: “for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole and the negative end terminals to the minus pole”.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claim 10
The limitation “particularly configured for generating a nominal power of at least 300 W” is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if the limitations following the term “particularly” are required by the claim. The term “particularly” in the instant claim implies that the module may generate a different nominal power. One of ordinary skill cannot be reasonably apprised of the invention.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claim 13
The limitation “to convert the voltage between the plus and minus pole into an alternating voltage, particularly wherein the inverter is a micro-inverter, particularly wherein the inverter comprises the voltage converter, particularly wherein the voltage provided to the inverter is provided from the voltage converter”, is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if the limitations following the term “particularly” are required by the claim. One of ordinary skill cannot be reasonably apprised what the inverter is.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claims 3-5, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14
Claims 3-5, 8, 9 and 11, 12 and 14 are rejected at least for their dependency on claim 1.
**Careful consideration of the any claim reciting the term “particularly” is required.**
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) 1-6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 208674149 U, Li et al. (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 1
Li teaches a solar module zone (internal layout) of a solar module [Fig. 2 and paras. 0035-0036], the solar module zone (internal layout) comprising an array of solar cells (303) arranged in pairs of substrings (302) along columns of the array [Fig. 2 and paras. 0035-0037], wherein
each substring (302) comprises a plurality of solar cells (303) electrically connected in series along the column the substring (302) extends in [Fig. 2 and paras. 0035-0037],
each pair of substrings (302) comprises two substrings (302) that extend along the columns, particularly adjacent columns, and that are electrically connected in series [Fig. 2, paras. 0033 and 0035], and wherein all pairs of substrings (302) are electrically connected in parallel [Fig. 2, para. 0032],
each pair of substrings (302) comprises a positive and a negative end terminal for connecting the pair of substrings (302) to a plus and a minus pole of the solar module [Fig. 2 and para. 0032], wherein the negative and the positive end terminals of each pair of substrings (302) are located adjacent to each other in an end terminal-connecting portion (see portion denoted as TC in Fig. 2 belol2) of the solar module zone [see Fig. 2 below], such that the end terminals of the pairs of substrings (302) form a sequence of end terminals along the columns having a sequence of polarities [Fig. 2],
wherein the sequence of polarities of the end terminals comprises at least two changes of polarity of adjacent end terminals (see positive and negative terminal connections) [Fig. 2], characterized in that the sequence of polarity of the end terminals comprises the following sequence of polarity: positive, negative, negative, positive, positive, negative or vice versa (the sequence of polarities follows the following sequence: positive, negative, negative, positive, positive, negative) [Fig. 2].
PNG
media_image1.png
920
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2
Regarding claim 2
Li teaches the solar module zone as set forth above, wherein the sequence of polarity of the end terminals comprises the following sequence of polarity: positive, negative, positive, negative, positive, negative or vice versa (the sequence of polarities follows the following sequence: positive, negative, negative, positive, positive, negative) [Fig. 2, paras. 0034 and 0047].
Regarding claim 3
Li teaches the solar module zone as set forth above, wherein the substrings (302) of each pair of substrings (302) are electrically interconnected in an interconnection portion (see portion denoted as IP in Fig. 2 above) of the array opposite of the end terminal-connecting portion (TC) [Fig. 2].
Regarding claim 4
Li teaches the solar module zone as set forth above, wherein some or all pairs of substrings (302) are mutually interconnected at the interconnection portion (IP) of the array, forming an electrical circuit with some or all substrings (302) with positive end terminals interconnected in parallel and being serially connected to some or all substrings (302) with negative end terminals (302) that are interconnected in parallel [Fig. 2 and paras. 0032-0033].
Regarding claim 5
Li teaches the solar module zone as set forth above, wherein the array of solar cells (303) of the solar module zone consists of exactly three pairs of substrings (each group of single-column battery strings 302 to form three parallel large-column battery strings 301) [Fig. 2 and para. 0048].
Regarding claim 6
Li teaches the solar module zone as set forth above, comprising electrical connections (see elements denoted as EC in Fig. 2 below) such as solder joints (conductive medium) arranged and configured to connect the positive end terminals to the plus pole and the negative end terminals to the minus pole [Fig. 2, paras. 0035 and 0039].
Regarding claim 10
Li teaches a solar module comprising a solar module zone (110) according to claim 1 [Fig. 2 and paras. 0035-0036].
The limitation “configured for generating a nominal power of at least 300 W” is considered a functional limitation and is given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the claimed function. Since the structure of the prior art is identical to the one claimed, the same is considered capable of generating at least 300W.
It has been held that when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent (see MPEP § 2112.01). “When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
It is noted that Li disclosed the solar module having a structural configuration that leads to increased power generation [para. 0021].
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) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claims 1-6 and 10 above, and further in view of US 2015/0194552 A1, Ogasahara et al. (hereinafter “Ogasahara”).
Regarding claim 7
Li does not teach an electrical insulator arranged and configured such that the insulator electrically insulates the electrical connections for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole and for connecting the negative end terminals to the minus pole.
Ogasahara teaches a solar module comprising an electrical insulator (corresponding to insulating coating material 270) that is arranged and configured such that the insulator (270) electrically insulates the electrical connections (corresponding to electrodes of the photovoltaic device) for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole and for connecting the negative end terminals to the minus pole (see terminals 254) [Figs. 13-14 and paras. 0131-0133].
Li and Ogasahara are analogous inventions in the field of solar modules. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the solar module of Li to comprise an electrical insulator, as in Ogasahara, for the purpose of providing electrical insulation between the electrical connections of the module [para. 0130 of Ogasahara].
The limitation “for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole and for connecting the negative end terminals to the minus pole” is considered intended use and is given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the claimed function. Since the structure of the prior art is the same as the one claimed, the same is considered capable of performing the intended use.
Regarding claim 8
Modified Li teaches the module as set forth above, wherein the insulator (270) is at least partially arranged between the electrical connections (see electrical connection between back electrodes of the photovoltaic element and the terminals) for connecting the positive end terminals to the plus pole from the electrical connections for connecting the negative end terminals to the minus pole so as to separate and insulate the respective electrical connections from each other [Ogasahara, Figs. 13-14 and paras. 0130-0132].
Regarding claim 9
Modified Li teaches the module as set forth above, wherein the insulator (270) is coated with a conductive layer (corresponding to back electrodes of the device and to current collecting wiring 280) on two opposite surfaces of the insulator (270) [Ogasahara, Figs. 13-14 and paras. 0130-0132].
The limitation “such that the respective conductive layer becomes part of the respective electrical connection” is considered intended use and is given weight to the extent that the prior art is capable of performing the claimed function. Since the structure of the prior art is the same as the one claimed, the same is considered capable of performing the intended use.
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claims 1-6 and 10 above, and further in view of US 2017/0279002 A1, Julian et al. (hereinafter “Julian”).
Regarding claim 11
Li teaches junction box (600) [para. 0031]. Li is silent to the solar module connected to and/or comprises a voltage controller configured to control, particularly to limit a voltage between the plus and the minus pole.
Julian teaches a solar module connected and/or comprising a voltage controller configured to control (receives real-time feedback readings and orchestrates operations), particularly to limit a voltage between the plus and the minus pole [paras. 0038-0048]. Julian further teaches voltage and current measurements may be thresholded and auto shutdown or current path rerouting executed by the controller [paras. 0038-0041].
With regards to the limitation “configured to control, particularly to limit a voltage between the plus and the minus pole”, Julian teaches that distributed circuitry (120) is coupled to solar cell strings (110) to selectively route current generated by solar cells (115) under the influence and control of a controller within junction box (125) [Fig. 2A, paras. 0031 and 0035].
Li and Julian are analogous inventions in the field of solar modules. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the solar module of Li such that it is connected and/or comprises a voltage controller, as in Julian, for the purpose of executing control of the current generated by the cells.
Regarding claim 12
Modified Li teaches the module as set forth above, wherein the solar module is connected to and/or comprises a voltage converter, particularly a DC-DC voltage converter (a solar module comprising and/or connected to a DC-DC converter to step up or step down the voltage on output ports versus the voltage received on input power lines) [Julian, para. 0037].
With regards to the limitation “configured to increase the voltage between the plus and minus pole, such that an electrical current produced by the solar module is reduced”, modified Li teaches that the DC-DC converter steps up or steps down the voltage on output ports versus the voltage received on input power lines [Julian, para. 0037].
Regarding claim 13
Modified Li teaches the module as set forth above, wherein the solar module is connected to and/or comprises an inverter configured (a solar module comprising and/or connected to an inverter to convert an output voltage into an AC power signal) [Julian, para. 0048].
With regards to the limitation “to convert the voltage between the plus and minus pole into an alternating voltage, particularly wherein the inverter is a micro-inverter, particularly wherein the inverter comprises the voltage converter, particularly wherein the voltage provided to the inverter is provided from the voltage converter”, modified Li teaches the inverter converting the output voltage into an AC power signal [Julian, para. 0048].
Regarding claim 14
Modified Li teaches a photovoltaic system comprising one or more solar modules as set forth above [Li, Fig. 2 and paras. 0031-0032].
Li is silent to a voltage controller system with one or more voltage controllers arranged and configured such that the respective voltages between the plus poles and the minus poles of the respective solar modules can be controlled, particularly limited, by the voltage controller system.
Julian teaches a solar module connected and/or comprising a voltage controller system with one or more voltage controllers arranged and configured such that the respective voltages between the plus poles and the minus poles of the respective solar modules can be controlled, particularly limited, by the voltage controller system (distributed circuitry is coupled to solar cell strings to selectively route current generated by solar cells under the influence and control of a controller within junction box, voltage and current measurements may be thresholded and auto shutdown or current path rerouting executed by the controller) [Fig. 2A, paras. 0031, 0035, 0038-0041].
Li and Julian are analogous inventions in the field of solar modules. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the solar module of Li such that it is connected and/or comprises a voltage controller system, as disclosed in Julian, for the purpose of executing control of the current generated by the cells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5054. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9:00-5:00 - 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/MAYLA GONZALEZ RAMOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721