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
Election of Embodiments A1, B1 and C1 directed to claims 21-25 and 30-39 is acknowledge. Claims 26-29 and 40 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/7/2025.
Rule 105 - Request for Information
Applicant and the assignee of this application are required under 37 CFR 1.105 to provide the following information that the examiner has determined is reasonably necessary to the examination of this application.
In view of Applicant’s Figures which comprise mere block diagrams for the component(s) listed below, it appears Applicant intends for said components to comprise what is conventional and known in the art (see MPEP 608.02(d)) however applicant has failed to provide an adequate disclosure and description of said components, nor has applicant used conventional terminology for said components making the components unknown.
Therefore, Applicant is required to provide further background information on their invention, particularly for the following components of:
Charge controller comprising an internal control (noting the charge controller is depicted as a mere generic block and said claimed internal control not depicted at all).
including:
Component name as used in the art and as used by the manufacturer;
Component manufacturer; and
Component specification data sheet(s).
as well as a detailed summary of the improvements associated with the invention and any technical information known to applicant concerning the related art particularly for said components listed above.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The charge controller comprises an internal control configured to prevent the charge controller from providing the amount of current to the energy storage system when the amount of current exceeds a predetermined threshold.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The charge controller comprises an internal control configured to prevent the charge controller from providing the amount of current to the energy storage system when the amount of current exceeds a predetermined threshold.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 25 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 25, 36
The disclosure fails to teach “wherein the charge controller comprises an internal control configured to prevent the charge controller from providing the amount of current (emphasis added) to the energy storage system when the amount of current exceeds a predetermined threshold.
Nowhere in the disclosure is there support for the claimed “threshold”. The closest teaching in the disclosure @ [0031] teaches:
According to various aspects, the photovoltaic charge controller 30 also includes internal controls which prevents the photovoltaic charge controller 30 from “pushing” too much current from the solar power system 14 to the energy storage system 18.
At most, the teaching is directed to the charger controller having “internal controls” (which structure of said internal controls is neither depicted nor taught) that generally prevent too much (ie limits) the current from the solar power system. The disclosure is void of any teaching of a threshold or more specific details of the control.
The claim will be examined as best understood.
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.
Claim 38 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 38
The claim limitation is improperly narrative attempting to define the apparatus by the narrative description and operation rather than structure of the apparatus. Particularly, the following claim language is improperly narrative and fails to set furth any identifiable structure to be added to the apparatus claim:
“wherein the converter is configured to be deactivated when the energy storage system is fully charged.”
Because of the great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of the claim(s) 38, it is not proper to reject the present claim(s) on the basis of prior art. (See MPEP 2173.06 and In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962).
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) 21-24, 30-33-35, 37 and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manto US 2014/0337002 in view of Smith et al. US 2013/0187464.
Manto teaches:
21/39. A direct current power system, comprising:
a solar power system configured to supply a first direct current power (PV array, FIG1);
and
a wind power system electrically couplable to a bus system (read on by DC bus connected to the outputs of the charge controllers, FIG1), wherein the wind power system is configured to supply a third direct current power (see FIG1).
Manto teaches a battery system (Primary battery storage) however fails to teach:
an energy storage system comprising: an input electrically couplable to the solar power system; and an output electrically couplable to a bus system, wherein the energy storage system is configured to supply a second direct current power to the bus system.
Smith teaches an energy storage system (battery bank 25, FIG2) comprising: an input electrically couplable to a solar power system (PV cell arrays, FIG2); and an output electrically couplable to a bus system (output of the bank to said inverter), wherein the energy storage system is configured to supply a second direct current power to the bus system (output voltage of the battery bank, FIG2).
It would have been obvious to incorporate the above energy storage system taught by Smith into the system of Manto at the output of the PV system of Manto to further include said energy storage system comprising said charge controller and additional battery bank (Smith, FIG2) into the system of Manto with the added benefit of increased power storage and desirable reliability.
Manto further teaches:
22/33. The direct current power system of Claim 21/32, wherein the solar power system comprises a solar panel (see solar panel PV array of FIG1).
Manto in view of Smith further teaches:
23/32,34, 37. The direct current power system [of Claim 22/33], wherein the solar power system further comprises a charge controller/converter configured to attenuate a voltage generated by the solar panel (see Manto charge controller FIG1 and/or Smith charge controller FIG2 noting the addition of said charge controller not needed by Smith since it is already present and taught by Manto).
24/35. The direct current power system of Claim 23/34, wherein attenuating the voltage alters an amount of current provided to the energy storage system (Noting that is the function of a PV charge controller).
30. The direct current power system of Claim 21, further comprising an inverter electrically couplable to the direct current bus system (see inverter, FIG1).
31. The direct current power system of Claim 30, wherein the inverter is configured to convert direct current power from the direct current bus system into alternating current power (see inverter DC/AC converter, FIG1).
Claim(s) 25, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manto US 2014/0337002 in view of Smith et al. US 2013/0187464 and Wright et al. US 2011/0193518.
Manto in view of Smith fails to explicitly teach (although arguably the inherent function of a PF charge controller a reference has been applied to help advance prosecution):
25/36. The direct current power system of Claim 24/35, wherein the charge controller comprises an internal control configured to limit the current output from the charge controller
Wright teaches a charge controller comprising an internal control configured to limit the current output from the charge controller (See Spec @ [0027]).
It would have been obvious to include said current limiting circuitry taught by Wright into the system of Manto/Smith with the motivation of providing desirable current control to provide control such as overcharging and/or fault control.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CAVALLARI whose telephone number is (571)272-8541. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 10:00-18:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571)272-7492. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights