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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 23rd, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-10, 14-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman (U.S. Publication No. 20170115119 A1, as cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 1,
Chapman teaches a method comprising: obtaining, by a first computing device, an electrical parameter related to a photovoltaic (PV) power source
("The module data may be accessed locally at the site of the PV system or via a network, such as the Internet. Data from more than one module, or even numerous modules, may also be generated in systems of MLPE devices. Site data and module-to-module comparison data may also be available, gathered, analyzed, and acted upon in embodiments. Gateway devices, systems, and methods may provide this functionality and additional functionality, such as, for example, logging and time-stamping data as it is received or is otherwise available to it." [Paragraph 33])
determining a first timestamp corresponding to the electrical parameter
("The module data may be accessed locally at the site of the PV system or via a network, such as the Internet. Data from more than one module, or even numerous modules, may also be generated in systems of MLPE devices. Site data and module-to-module comparison data may also be available, gathered, analyzed, and acted upon in embodiments. Gateway devices, systems, and methods may provide this functionality and additional functionality, such as, for example, logging and time-stamping data as it is received or is otherwise available to it." [Paragraph 33])
obtaining a Global Positioning System (GPS) parameter of a second computing device; determining a second timestamp corresponding to the GPS parameter
(“Alternatively or additionally, this calculated location may be compared to a geolocation (e.g., a GPS location) determined by the installer at the time of installation.” [Paragraph 36], and
“Based on timestamp and geographic location (e.g., GPS coordinates), embodiments can calculate the location of the sun in the sky (azimuth angle and altitude angle), based on telemetry equations. Likewise, if the sun location and the module telemetry are known, embodiments can calculate the geographic location of a module as well as its orientation and tilt." [Paragraph 64],
i.e. A second timestamp would be associated with the GPS parameter may be obtained in the form geolocation data transmitted by another device to the device comparing gathered data.)
determining, based on a determination that the first timestamp matches the second timestamp, a second location of the PV power source
(“Alternatively or additionally, this calculated location may be compared to a geolocation (e.g., a GPS location) determined by the installer at the time of installation.” [Paragraph 36], and
“For example, an identifier for a specific PV module may be sent along with output and time data to be used for locating the position and operational status of the PV module” [Paragraph 38], and
"Based on timestamp and geographic location (e.g., GPS coordinates), embodiments can calculate the location of the sun in the sky (azimuth angle and altitude angle), based on telemetry equations. Likewise, if the sun location and the module telemetry are known, embodiments can calculate the geographic location of a module as well as its orientation and tilt." [Paragraph 64],
i.e. A determination that the first and second timestamps match to determine the location of a PV power source is, in essence, a simpler calculation. Here, the timestamp data of the PV module and the time stamp data associated the associated with GPS data may be used to determine the PV module location, in part through various comparisons and calculations.)
and storing, in a memory, the location of the PV power source
("Gateway 114 may aggregate data and report it to a service, such as a utility vendor, where it may be stored in server 518 or 520 for use in embodiments.” [Paragraph 62])
Regarding claim 3, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Chapman also teaches obtaining a second electrical parameter related to a second PV power source
("The module data may be accessed locally at the site of the PV system or via a network, such as the Internet. Data from more than one module, or even numerous modules, may also be generated in systems of MLPE devices. Site data and module-to-module comparison data may also be available, gathered, analyzed, and acted upon in embodiments. Gateway devices, systems, and methods may provide this functionality and additional functionality, such as, for example, logging and time-stamping data as it is received or is otherwise available to it." [Paragraph 33])
determining a third timestamp corresponding to the second electrical parameter
("The module data may be accessed locally at the site of the PV system or via a network, such as the Internet. Data from more than one module, or even numerous modules, may also be generated in systems of MLPE devices. Site data and module-to-module comparison data may also be available, gathered, analyzed, and acted upon in embodiments. Gateway devices, systems, and methods may provide this functionality and additional functionality, such as, for example, logging and time-stamping data as it is received or is otherwise available to it." [Paragraph 33])
obtaining a fourth GPS parameter of the second computing device; determining a fourth timestamp corresponding to the second GPS parameter
(“Alternatively or additionally, this calculated location may be compared to a geolocation (e.g., a GPS location) determined by the installer at the time of installation.” [Paragraph 36], and
“Based on timestamp and geographic location (e.g., GPS coordinates), embodiments can calculate the location of the sun in the sky (azimuth angle and altitude angle), based on telemetry equations. Likewise, if the sun location and the module telemetry are known, embodiments can calculate the geographic location of a module as well as its orientation and tilt." [Paragraph 64],
i.e. A fourth timestamp would be associated with the GPS parameter may be obtained in the form geolocation data transmitted by another device to the device comparing gathered data.)
determining, based on a determination that the third timestamp matches the fourth timestamp, a second location of the second PV power source
(“Alternatively or additionally, this calculated location may be compared to a geolocation (e.g., a GPS location) determined by the installer at the time of installation.” [Paragraph 36], and
“For example, an identifier for a specific PV module may be sent along with output and time data to be used for locating the position and operational status of the PV module” [Paragraph 38], and
"Based on timestamp and geographic location (e.g., GPS coordinates), embodiments can calculate the location of the sun in the sky (azimuth angle and altitude angle), based on telemetry equations. Likewise, if the sun location and the module telemetry are known, embodiments can calculate the geographic location of a module as well as its orientation and tilt." [Paragraph 64],
i.e. A determination that the third and fourth timestamps match to determine the location of a PV power source is, in essence, a simpler calculation. Here, the timestamp data of the PV module and the time stamp data associated the associated with GPS data may be used to determine the PV module location, in part through various comparisons and calculations.)
and storing, the second location of the second PV power source
("Gateway 114 may aggregate data and report it to a service, such as a utility vendor, where it may be stored in server 518 or 520 for use in embodiments.” [Paragraph 62])
Regarding claim 5, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 3.
Chapman also teaches the second PV power source is connected to the PV power source
("PV system 100 may implement daisy chained interconnections between the sets of PV modules to collect the power. As shown in FIG. 5, interconnection 506a may be coupled to PV modules 102 and interconnection 506b may be coupled to PV modules 104. Other interconnections may be used for other sets of PV modules." [Paragraph 52])
Regarding claim 6, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Chapman also teaches the obtaining the electrical parameter comprises determining a decrease in power produced by the PV power source
("The location and orientation of PV modules of a PV system can affect the amount of solar irradiation each solar cell of a PV module is exposed to and, therefore, the amount of subsequent voltage generated by the individual cells, the PV modules, and the PV system as a whole." [Paragraph 3], and
"When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37],
i.e. Changes in power in situations such as lower light obtained by PV power source can result in a decrease in power that is produced by the PV power source. PV voltage output can be measured (an "electrical parameter") to be used as some information to carry out the method.)
Regarding claim 7, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 6.
Chapman also teaches the decrease in the power produced by the PV power source is based on at least partial shading of the PV power source
("The location and orientation of PV modules of a PV system can affect the amount of solar irradiation each solar cell of a PV module is exposed to and, therefore, the amount of subsequent voltage generated by the individual cells, the PV modules, and the PV system as a whole." [Paragraph 3], and
"When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37],
i.e. Shading limits the amount of light the PV power source received and, therefore, will affect the amount of power the PV power source produces.)
Regarding claim 8, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 6.
Chapman also teaches associating, based on the decrease in the power produced by the PV power source, the first timestamp with the electrical parameter
("When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37])
Regarding claim 9, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 6.
Chapman also teaches the determining the first timestamp is further based on the decrease in the power produced by the PV power source
("When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37])
Regarding claim 10, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 6.
Chapman also teaches selecting, based on the decrease in the power produced by the PV power source, the electrical parameter from a plurality of electrical parameters.
("The location and orientation of PV modules of a PV system can affect the amount of solar irradiation each solar cell of a PV module is exposed to and, therefore, the amount of subsequent voltage generated by the individual cells, the PV modules, and the PV system as a whole." [Paragraph 3], and
"When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37],
i.e. Changes in power in situations such as lower light obtained by PV power source can result in a decrease in power that is produced by the PV power source. PV voltage output can be measured (an "electrical parameter") to be used as some information to carry out the method. This can be applied to a PV system with multiple electrical parameters.)
Regarding claim 14, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Chapman also teaches selecting, based on the first timestamp and the second timestamp, the electrical parameter from a plurality of electrical parameters
("As with the first cycle, one or more of the microprocessors, may identify and associate the time of day to this other time cycle and its gathered data. The recording and analysis may then be used to determine the latitude and the longitude or other geospatial identifiers of one or more PV modules. Other determinations may also be made, include the efficiency or anticipated efficiency of a PV module, and operational settings for these same PV modules." [Paragraph 27],
i.e. determinations, analysis, and identification in the method may include selection. The plurality of parameters are associated with the multiple PV modules.)
Regarding claim 15, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Chapman also teaches selecting, based on the electrical parameter or the first timestamp, the PV power source from a plurality of PV power sources
("As with the first cycle, one or more of the microprocessors, may identify and associate the time of day to this other time cycle and its gathered data. The recording and analysis may then be used to determine the latitude and the longitude or other geospatial identifiers of one or more PV modules. Other determinations may also be made, include the efficiency or anticipated efficiency of a PV module, and operational settings for these same PV modules." [Paragraph 27])
Regarding claim 16, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 16 in claim 1, in method mode rather than device mode. Chapman also teaches circuitry ("Gateway device 114, or gateway arrangement, also is coupled to single split-phase circuit 508 to monitor data and information coming from PV modules 102 and 104.”[Paragraph 54]) Therefore, claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 16. Chapman also teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 18 in claim 3, in method mode rather than device mode. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 3 and 16.
Regarding claim 20, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 16. Chapman also teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 20 in claim 6, in method mode rather than device mode. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 6 and 16.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 2, 4, 12, 13, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman (U.S. Publication No. 20170115119 A1, as cited by applicant) in view of Goldstein (U.S. Publication No. 20220057519 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Chapman does not directly teach the PV power source is at least partially shaded at a time indicated by the first timestamp.
Goldstein also teaches the PV power source is at least partially shaded at a time indicated by the first timestamp
("Still referring to FIG. 11, when determining minimum necessary countermeasures, apparatus may use MDE, and other factors such as ambient light, shadows, sun position, other illumination systems, atmospheric conditions such as fog, rain, snow, or the like to calculate in situ, countermeasure effects based on environment." [Paragraph 212])
Therefore, as Chapman teaches receiving electrical parameters from PV modules and determining a first timestamp, and as Goldstein teaches receiving information when there is partial shading, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to combine Chapman’s and Goldstein’s respective methods to have a method that is analogous to that of the method presented in the claimed invention. The motivation to combine is to have a method that would yield a predictable result in determining the location of a PV power source through comparison of data from multiple sources in a scenario where there is partial shading, thereby allowing ease of PV maintenance and monitoring since “the stored outputs of the PV modules, and the calculated locations, may be helpful for weather prediction purposes, ground change indications, e.g., earthquake, device deterioration, e.g., broken installation brackets, and for remote population as well” (Chapman, Paragraph 39).
Regarding claim 4, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 3.
Chapman does not directly teach determining, based on the location of the PV power source and the second location of the second PV power source, a PV map; and displaying, via a user interface, the PV map.
Goldstein also teaches determining, based on the location of the PV power source and the second location of the second PV power source, a PV map; and displaying, via a user interface, the PV map
("Still referring to FIG. 3, apparatus 100 may use one or more imaging devices 104 to determine a baseline condition of subject area. Imaging device 104 may map points within subject area to a coordinate system." [Paragraph 89])
Regarding claim 12, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Goldstein also teaches the second computing device comprises a GPS device comprising GPS circuitry
("At least a GPS receiver 244 may include without limitation, a receiving antenna, accompanying circuits, and processing." [Paragraph 86])
Regarding claim 13, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 1.
Goldstein also teaches selecting the GPS parameter from a plurality of GPS parameters based on the second timestamp and the first timestamp.
("One or more GPS receivers may be configured to receive and determine the local time based on the time information received from the satellite signals determining, based on a determination that the first timestamp matches the second timestamp, a location of the PV power source" [Paragraph 86],
i.e. "selecting" may be a step in the determination process.)
Regarding claim 17, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 16. Chapman-Goldstein also teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 17 in claim 2, in method mode rather than device mode. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 2 and 16.
Regarding claim 19, Chapman teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 18. Chapman-Goldstein also teaches all the limitations and motivations of claim 19 in claim 4, in method mode rather than device mode. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claims 4 and 18.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman in view of Mammone (U.S. Publication No. US 20120265586 A1).
Regarding claim 11,
Chapman teaches causing the second computing device to at least partially shade the PV power source
("The location and orientation of PV modules of a PV system can affect the amount of solar irradiation each solar cell of a PV module is exposed to and, therefore, the amount of subsequent voltage generated by the individual cells, the PV modules, and the PV system as a whole." [Paragraph 3], and
"When cloud cover or another anomaly renders determination of the time of sunset or sunrise difficult or impossible, when using operational data such as PV module voltage output or PV module temperature, embodiments may be used to confirm location and assign specific sunrise or sunset times from similarly situated PV modules." [Paragraph 37],
i.e. Changes in power in situations such as lower light obtained (i.e. "shade") by PV power source can result in a decrease in power that is produced by the PV power source. PV voltage output can be measured (an "electrical parameter") to be used as some information to carry out the method.)
Chapman does not directly teach cause a decrease in power produced by the PV power source.
In an analogous art, Mammone teaches cause a decrease in power produced by the PV power source
("At step 996, the data value representative of power being drawn by the power loads connected to the electrical circuits using the measured electrical parameter is compared to a predetermined ideal value via a processor and/or comparator to yield comparison data…At step 998, the processor adjusts power available to be drawn by the electrical circuits if the comparison data indicates that the data value exceeds the ideal value.” [Paragraphs 124-125],
i.e. The electrical parameter may be used to adjust power produced by the PV power source, and “adjusts power available” by the power source here can also mean to “cause a decrease in power produced” by the power source.)
Therefore, as Chapman-Goldstein teaches a method of determining the location of a PV power source using various gathered information, and as Mammone teaches controlling the power produced by the PV power source, to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to combine Chapman-Goldstein’s and Mammone’s respective methods to have a method analogous to the method in the claimed invention. The motivation to combine is to have a method that would yield predictable results in determining the location of PV power sources and controlling the power produced by the power sources, therefore allowing ease of maintenance and monitoring as “techniques for measuring power in a residence are available and useful to allow a consumer to monitor power usage, each has a shortcoming whether it be cost or consumer installation requirements” (Mammone, Paragraph 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATIHA KAMAL whose telephone number is (571)270-0726. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30am - 3:30pm, Alternating Fridays 6:30am-2:30pm.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
/FATIHA KAMAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2647
/Alison Slater/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights