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
Claims 23-44 are pending. Claims 37-44 are withdrawn. Claims 23-36 are examined below.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 23-36, in the reply filed on 3/20/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 23-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nogier (US 2017/0126172).
Regarding claim 23, Nogier discloses a method in an agrivoltaic system including photovoltaic panels (see abstract), the method comprising:
(a) obtaining a comparison signal indicative of a comparison (see para [0030]-[0035]) between a temperature of ambient air (see para [0036], i.e., local temperature level with the crops) and a temperature of the plants (see para [0051], i.e., foliar temperature of the crop); and
(b) controlling one or more of said photovoltaic panels to adjust the shadow cast by said one or more photovoltaic panels on the plants using said comparison signal (see para [0037], [0047]-[0052]).
Nogier includes additional information along with the comparison signal claimed to determine the position of the solar modules. The term comprising is open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. See, e.g., Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See MPEP § 2111.03.
Alternatively, Nogier discloses a number of signals to optimize position of the solar modules, including comparison signal indicative of a comparison between a temperature of ambient air and a temperature of the plants. As Nogier discloses choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions i.e., a comparison signal between temperature of ambient air and a temperature of the plants, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to pursue the known options with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP § 2143.
The limitation in the preamble that the photovoltaic modules are “disposed to cast a shadow on plants when irradiated by sunlight, said photovoltaic panels being controllable for adjusting said shadow” is intended use listed within the preamble, wherein the structure is fully laid out within the body of the claim, the preamble not adding to said structure. Therefore, the intended use within the preamble is not examined. See MPEP § 2111.02.
Regarding claim 24, Nogier discloses a method of claim 23, wherein the controlling of said photovoltaic panels is performed to maintain a predetermined relationship between the temperature of the plants and ambient air temperature (see para [0030], [0051]-[0053], i.e., controlled via computer algorithm (i.e., predetermined) to control the microclimate; orient the collectors based on the stress level of the crop; evaluating criterion on “temperature history of the crop, and on a measurement of the foliar temperature of the crop”).
Regarding claim 25, Nogier discloses a method of claim 23, wherein the comparison signal is indicative of a difference and/or a ratio between ambient air temperature and the plant temperature (see para [0030], [0051]-[0053], i.e., controlled via computer algorithm to control the microclimate; orient the collectors based on the stress level of the crop; evaluating criterion on “temperature history of the crop, and on a measurement of the foliar temperature of the crop”).
Regarding claim 26, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein controlling one or more of said photovoltaic panels using the comparison signal comprises determining whether said difference or ratio between ambient air temperature and the plant temperature exceeds a threshold (see para [0030]).
Regarding claim 27, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein the comparison signal is obtained repeatedly over time and wherein controlling one or more of said photovoltaic panels using said comparison signal comprises using the comparison signal obtained at several points in time (see para [0030], [0051]-[0053], i.e., controlled via computer algorithm to control the microclimate; orient the collectors based on the stress level of the crop; evaluating criterion on “temperature history of the crop, and on a measurement of the foliar temperature of the crop”).
Regarding claim 28, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein controlling one or more of said photovoltaic panels comprises: (a) determining a current shadow cast by the photovoltaic panels on the plants; (b) computing a desired shadow adjustment of the shadow cast by said one or more photovoltaic panels on the plants using said comparison signal; and (c) controlling one or more of said photovoltaic panels to achieve said desired shadow adjustment (see para [0035]-[0038]). As the computer is in control of the orientation of the collectors, recited limitation “(a) determining a current shadow cast by the photovoltaic panels on the plants” is inherent as the computer controlled the positioning based on cited parameters.
Regarding claim 29, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein controlling one or more photovoltaic panels is performed such that the shadow cast by said one or more photovoltaic panels on the plants is increased when the signal is indicative that the temperature of the plants increases and approaches or exceeds ambient air temperature (see para [0030], [0036], [0051]-[0053], i.e., “orientation of the collectors is preferably controlled so as to keep the crops in a preset maximum and/or minimum temperature range”; “the system may include a temperature sensor informing the computer of the local temperature level with the crops”; controlled via computer algorithm (i.e., predetermined) to control the microclimate; orient the collectors based on the stress level of the crop; evaluating criterion on “temperature history of the crop, and on a measurement of the foliar temperature of the crop”).
Regarding claim 30, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein controlling one or more photovoltaic panels is performed such that the shadow cast by said one or more photovoltaic panels on the plants is decreased when the signal is indicative that the temperature of the plants decreases and approaches or goes below ambient air temperature (see para [0030], [0036], [0051]-[0053], i.e., “orientation of the collectors is preferably controlled so as to keep the crops in a preset maximum and/or minimum temperature range”; “the system may include a temperature sensor informing the computer of the local temperature level with the crops”; controlled via computer algorithm (i.e., predetermined) to control the microclimate; orient the collectors based on the stress level of the crop; evaluating criterion on “temperature history of the crop, and on a measurement of the foliar temperature of the crop”).
Regarding claim 31, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein said method is performed repeatedly at any of an hourly, daily and/or seasonal periodicity (see para [0049]).
Regarding claim 32, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein the temperature of the plants is a temperature of a canopy of the plants (see para [0051], i.e., measurement of the foliar temperature; [0077], i.e., infrared sensor to measure the temperature of the crops).
Regarding claim 33, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein the photovoltaic panels are movable and wherein controlling said one or more photovoltaic panels comprises adjusting a position and/or an orientation of said one or more photovoltaic panels (see para [0037] and [0047]-[0052]).
Regarding claim 34, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein the one or more photovoltaic panels are rotatable around an axis and wherein controlling one or more photovoltaic panels comprises rotating the one or more photovoltaic panels around said axis (see para [0014], [0027]-[0028].
Regarding claim 35, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, wherein controlling one or more photovoltaic panels is performed to also reduce a decrease in the generation of electricity by the one or more photovoltaic panels (see para [0014]).
Regarding claim 36, Nogier discloses a method according to claim 23, further comprising an overruling pattern in case of meteorological event (see para [0046]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bartelmuss et al. (WO 2013-056285); Sgarrella (US 2020/0083838); Sgarrella (US 2021/0211091); Knoche et al. (US 2023/0318523); Agrawal et al. (US 2022/0151163).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAYNE L MERSHON whose telephone number is (571)270-7869. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 to 6:00 M-F.
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.
JAYNE L. MERSHON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1721
/JAYNE L MERSHON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights