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 .
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 "the light dispersion device is ... attached to the underside of the solar panels" of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dyson et al. [US 2004/0246596 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Dyson et al. discloses a light dispersion device [structure 206, see figure 4A] for use with a solar panel assembly [a photovoltaic cell 202, see figure 4], the light dispersion device comprising: a transparent or translucent material [structure 206 are preferably made of either a translucent material, paragraph 0044] having a surface configured with a light-diffusing pattern [a diffusing material or a Fresnel diverging material surface, see figure 4A], wherein the light-diffusing pattern is adapted to scatter and redistribute incoming sunlight to enhance illumination beneath the solar panel assembly [abstract, figures 4A-4F], and wherein the light dispersion device [structure 206] is positioned between individual solar panels [see figures 4A-4C] or attached to the underside of the solar panels (paragraphs 0041-0044).
Regarding claim 2, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern comprises a Fresnel lens [a Fresnel diverging material surface] formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material [structure 206] (figure 4A).
Regarding claim 3, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern [a diffusing material or a Fresnel diverging material surface, see figure 4A] comprises flutes or ribs formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material, the flutes or ribs being configured to scatter light laterally.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 4-9, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyson et al. in view of Etienne et al. [US 2018/0095330 A1].
Regarding claim 4, Dyson et al. discloses the transparent or translucent material [structure 26] (figure 4A), but does not clearly show the ion-exchange toughened glass.
Etienne et al. discloses the ion-exchange toughened glass (paragraph 0028).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the transparent or translucent material of Dyson et al. with the ion-exchange toughened glass as taught by Etienne et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way of better scratch resistance and durability than polymer.
Regarding claim 5, Etienne et al. discloses the transparent or translucent material is selected from a group consisting of glass (paragraph 0028).
Regarding claim 6, Dyson et al. discloses a light dispersion device [structure 206, see figure 4A] for use with a solar panel assembly [a photovoltaic cell 202, see figure 4A], the light dispersion device comprising: a transparent or translucent material [structure 206 are preferably made of either a translucent material, paragraph 0044] having a surface configured to disperse incoming sunlight, wherein the surface includes one or more light-diffusing patterns [a diffusing material or a Fresnel diverging material surface, see figure 4A] that scatter sunlight to enhance illumination in areas below the solar panel assembly (see figure 3). However, Dyson et al. does not clearly show the ion-exchange toughened glass.
Etienne et al. discloses the ion-exchange toughened glass (paragraph 0028).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the transparent or translucent material of Dyson et al. with the ion-exchange toughened glass as taught by Etienne et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way of better scratch resistance and durability than polymer.
Regarding claim 7, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern comprises a Fresnel lens [206] formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material (a Fresnel diverging material surface, paragraph 0044).
Regarding claim 8, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern [structure 206] comprises flutes or ribs formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material, the flutes or ribs being configured to scatter light laterally (figure 4A).
Regarding claim 9, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern [structure 206] comprises random surface textures that scatter incoming light in multiple directions (figure 4A).
Regarding claim 17, Dyson et al. discloses the light dispersion device [206] is integrated as a standalone component or incorporated into an existing structure of the solar panel assembly (figures 4A-4F).
Regarding claim 19, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern is configured to enhance light dispersion beneath the solar panel assembly for reducing shaded areas and promoting uniform illumination (the sidewall(s) of the back support structure are made of a diffusing material which is shaped to block the focused solar radiation from being visible from a back side of the back support structure 206; paragraph 0044).
Claim(s) 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyson et al. in view of Ranish [US 2014/0341551 A1].
Regarding claim 10, Dyson et al. discloses a light dispersion device [structure 206, see figure 4A], but does not clearly show the light-diffusing pattern comprises dimples formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material, the dimples being configured to scatter light by diffraction and reflection.
Ranish teaches the light-diffusing pattern [114, see figure 1] comprises dimples [abstract] formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material [see figure 2A], the dimples being configured to scatter light by diffraction and reflection (abstract, figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the transparent or translucent material of Dyson et al. with the dimples as taught by Ranish for purpose of providing an advantageous way of that the light-diffusing structures facilitate more uniform heating of substrates by reducing thermal hot spots caused by uneven irradiation by light.
Regarding claims 11-12, Radish teaches the light-diffusing pattern comprises a frosted pattern formed on the surface of the transparent or translucent material (abstract, figures 1-2).
Regarding claims 13-15, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern [structure 206] (figure 4A). Method claim(s) was/were considered as inherently disclosed by the patented structure of Dyson et al.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyson et al. and Etienne et al. in view of Francis et al. [US 5,281,560].
Regarding claim 16, Dyson et al. and Etienne et al. disclose the light dispersion device having a glass. Method claim(s) was/were considered as suggested by the combined teachings of Dyson et al. and Etienne et al.
However, Dyson et al. and Etienne et al. does not clearly show the glass is further strengthened by incorporating one or more reinforcing additives selected from a group consisting of aluminum oxide, zirconium oxide, and magnesium oxide.
Francis et al. teaches the glass is further strengthened by incorporating one or more reinforcing additives selected from a group consisting of aluminum oxide, zirconium oxide, and magnesium oxide (abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the glass of Dyson et al. and Etienne et al. with the reinforcing additives as taught by Francis et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way of that the sealing glass material may contain mill additions to reduce the effective coefficient of thermal expansion in a seal, as well as a strength reinforcing additive having a coefficient of thermal expansion.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyson et al. in view of Steneby [US 7,295,372 B2].
Regarding claim 18, Dyson et al. discloses the light dispersion device [206, see figure 4A], but does not further include a concave or convex lens for focusing and spreading light over a wider area.
Steneby teaches a concave or convex lens [101 and 102, or 201 and 202] for focusing and spreading light over a wider area (abstract, figures 1-2, column 4 lines 43-47).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the light dispersion device of Dyson et al. with the concave or convex lens as taught by Steneby for purpose of providing an advantageous way of producing a system with a greater operating range in either direction off from the normal axle.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dyson et al. in view of Masaki et al. [US 2003/0030372 A1].
Regarding claim 20, Dyson et al. discloses the light-diffusing pattern (206, see figure 4A), but does not clearly show the diffusive film or coating to the surface of the transparent or translucent material.
Masaki et al. teaches the diffusive film or coating to the surface of the transparent or translucent material (abstract, figure 1, paragraph 0011).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine the light dispersion device of Dyson et al. with the diffusive film as taught by Masaki et al. for purpose of providing an advantageous way of a high-quality protective, diffusive film which can suppress the formation of burrs at the time of processing for the formation of sheet-like films, possesses excellent punchability, and is excellent in handleability in a sheet-like film form.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Akkashian et al. US 2014/0053477 A1 discloses concentrated photovoltaic skylights or other windows having a cylindrical lens array.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO Q TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2383. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 3 pm.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at 571 272 5046. 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.
BAO Q. TRUONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/BAO Q TRUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
