Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/870,905

CONNECTOR FOR ATTACHING A SOLAR PANEL TO A SUPPORT

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 02, 2024
Priority
Jun 17, 2022 — provisional 63/353,126 +1 more
Examiner
DUCKWORTH, BRADLEY
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Watershed Geosynthetics LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
987 granted / 1364 resolved
+20.4% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1396
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
30.1%
-9.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1364 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 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 3,4,10-12,14,23-27 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. In claims 3 and 14, it is unclear if the “first direction” recited is meant to be the same first direction referenced in claim 1. For the purposes of examination it was assumed that the first direction of claim 3 was meant to be the same first direction referenced in claim 1, as this is what was meant to be claimed per the examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention. As such, it appears claims 3 and 14 should read “the first direction”. In claim 4 it is unclear how the connector is meant to be arranged such that the second direction(direction the foot extends in) is opposite the first direction(direction the stem extends in). As seen in figure 3 of the present application, the foot(66) extends perpendicularly to the stem(62), such that the first and second directions are perpendicular, not opposite to each other. In claim 10 it is unclear how the connector is meant to be structured and arranged. Claim 10 depends from claim 8 which recites the second mating portion of the second plate, is matingly connected to the first mating portion of the first plate. Claim 10 however recites that the first mating portion of the spacer plate is engaging the second mating portion of the second plate. It is unclear if the claim is meant to recite that both the first mating portions of the first plate and the spacer plate are connected to the second mating portion of the second plate, or if only one of the first mating portions are meant to be connected to the second mating portion of the second plate. In claim 11 it is unclear which of the first and second mating portions is being referenced as “said first mating portion” and “said second mating portion”, as multiple elements are claimed as having either a first or second mating portion. In claim 23 there is no antecedent basis for the terms “the second plate”, “said hinge” and “said first plate”. It appears that claim 23 should depend from claim 22 where these terms are introduced. Likewise in claims 26 and 27, there is no antecedent basis for the terms “the first plate”, ”said respective solar panel” and “the first plates and the second plates”. It appears the this would be corrected if claim 23 depended from claim 22. 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. Claim(s) 18,21,22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schmid(US20160111998). [claim 18] Schmid teaches a connector(fig 6) for securing a solar panel(1) to a support structure(3), comprising: a first plate(10) for coupling with a support structure(3) for positioning a solar panel for generation of an electrical current; a second plate(16) for supporting a portion the solar panel with a pair of spaced-apart fingers(vertical sides of 12) projecting from the second plate in a first direction, for abutting a side of the solar panel; and a hinge(14,15) for connecting the second plate to the first plate, wherein the second plate being rotatable about the hinge to a selected angle relative to the first plate. [claim 21] Schmid teaches an array of connected solar panels(fig 1,2) for generation of electrical energy, comprising: a first and a second solar panel(both labeled 1 in figs 1,2), each having a first side edge and an opposing second side edge; a pair of spaced-apart elongated rails(3) for supporting said first and second solar panels; a first pair of fixed connectors(leftmost 8 in figure 2, two shown in figure 1) each secured in spaced-apart relation to said first side edge of said first solar panel and to a respective rail; a pair of spacer connectors(9 in figure 2) each secured in spaced-apart relation to said second side edge of said first solar panel and to said first side edge of said second solar panel, whereby said first solar panel and said second solar panel are coupled in spaced-apart relation; and a second pair of fixed connectors(rightmost 8 in figure 2) each secured in space-apart relation to said second side edge of said second solar panel and to said respective rail. [claim 22] wherein each said fixed connector comprises: a first plate(10) for coupling with the respective rail for positioning said respect solar panel for generation of an electrical current; a second plate(16) coupled with the first plate and for supporting a portion of said respective solar panel; a hinge(14,15) configured for coupling the second plate with the first plate, wherein the second plate rotatable about the hinge to a selected angle relative to the first plate; and a clip(12) configured for securing to the second plate and having a stem(either vertical sidewall) for abutting a portion of a side of the respective solar panel(fig 2), a cap plate(upper laterally extending lip) extending laterally from the stem for overlying contact with a portion of a top surface of said respective solar panel(fig 2), whereby the clip being secured to the second plate, holds said solar panel thereon, a foot(horizontal base member with aperture receiving bolt 13) extending laterally from the stem and defining a passageway(receiving bolt 13) therethrough, and a fastener(13) for extending through the passageway for engaging the second plate to secure the clip thereto. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1,5-9,15 and 16 are allowed. Claims 19 and 23-27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, as well as being amended to overcome the above 112 rejections. Claims 3,4,10-12,14 would be allowable if amended to overcome the above 112 rejections. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with regards to claims 1 and 19, the prior art teaches the majority of the connector comprising a first plate, second plate, hinge and clip as claimed in claims 1 and 19, however the prior art does not teach a pair of spaced apart fingers projecting from the second plate in a first direction for abutting a side of the solar panel, and the clip having a stem for abutting a portion of a side of the solar panel. With regards to claims 23-27, and assuming claim 23 was meant to depend from claim 22, the prior art teaches an array of claims 21 and 22 as detailed above, however the prior art does not teach a spacer plate with first and second mating portions structured and arranged as in claim 23. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US11264941, US20180331652, US9347692, US20150179848, US20110214366, US20090320898, US20090114269. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 5712724979. 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. /BRADLEY DUCKWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 02, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12614901
CABLE ROUTING FOR A COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SYSTEM
2y 9m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612996
WALL MOUNT ASSEMBLY AND WALL MOUNT BRACKET
2y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612997
FOOD PROCESSING TREE SUPPORT
2y 1m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612994
MOVABLE BASES FOR SHADE STRUCTURES
1y 11m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12604992
TORSO DEVICE
1y 12m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+20.2%)
2y 1m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1364 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month