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 Objections
Claims 2-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 2-6, each respectively, line 1 should read in part “The system of claim 1, wherein”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 7, line 3 should read “a Stirling engine;”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 8, line 1 should read in part “The thermal collection system of claim 7, wherein”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 9, line 1 should read in part “The thermal collection system of claim 8, wherein”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schilder (US 2010/0212660).
In Reference to Claim 1
(See Schilder, Figures 1-5)
Schilder discloses:
A system comprising:
a first solar collection stage (2,3) that raises the temperature of a medium to a first temperature (See Schilder, Paragraphs [0037]-[0040]),
a second solar collection stage (2,3) raising the temperature of the medium from the first temperature to a second temperature(See Schilder, Paragraphs [0037]-[0040]),
an Nth solar collection stage (2,3) further raising the temperature of the medium (See Schilder, Paragraphs [0037]-[0040]); and
a thermal load (15) thermally coupled to the medium having the further raised temperature, the thermal load (15) using heat provided by the medium. (See Schilder, Paragraph [0039]).
The Examiner notes that medium of Schilder follows a linear path receiving heat from sequential solar thermal lenses thus providing staged heating of the medium. Additionally, Schilder discloses modular construction which would also create stages dependent on flow path. (See Schilder, Paragraphs [0014]-[0015]).
In Reference to Claim 3
(See Schilder, Figures 1-5)
Schilder discloses:
Wherein the thermal load comprises a thermal storage (14). (See Schilder, Paragraph [0039]).
In Reference to Claim 4
(See Schilder, Figures 1-5)
Schilder discloses:
Wherein the first and second stage are modular. (See Schilder, Paragraphs [0014]-[0015]).
In Reference to Claim 5
(See Schilder, Figures 1-5)
Schindler discloses:
Wherein the first and second stages operate using different portions of a continuous heat absorber. (See Schilder, Paragraph [0039]).
The Examiner notes that Schindler uses is a continuous heat absorber of an array of lens focusing on sections of pipe with a heated medium flowing throughout. Thus both the first and second stages use different portions of absorption piping and different portions of liquid flowing therein.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Johnson et al. (US 2016/0146507).
In Reference to Claim 7
(See Johnson, Figures 1-40)
Johnson et al. (John) discloses:
A thermal collection system comprising:
a thermal storage (7) (See John, Paragraph [0412]);
a Stirling engine (See John, Paragraphs [0020] and [0056]);
a lens array (13) rotatable about a longitudinal axis of the thermal storage (3) (See John, Paragraph [0467]); and
a linear heat absorber (3) disposed along the longitudinal axis of the thermal storage (7), the linear heat absorber (3) receiving concentrated thermal energy from the lens array (13) on different portions along its length from different lenses in the lens array (13), the linear heat absorber (3) receiving concentrated thermal energy from the lens array (13) on different portions of its periphery as the lens array (13) rotates about the longitudinal axis. (See John, Paragraphs [0388]-[0391] & [0467]).
The Examiner notes that the lens array is rotatable about but a longitudinal axis and vertical axis and the linear heat absorber receives concentrated thermal energy from the array along its periphery and longitudinal axes.
In Reference to Claim 8
(See Johnson, Figures 1-40)
John discloses:
Wherein the thermal storage (7) is modular. (See John, Paragraph [0410]).
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) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schilder (US 2010/0212660) in view of Johnson et al. (US 2016/0146507).
In Reference to Claim 2
Schilder discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the thermal load comprises a Stirling engine.
Johnson et al. (John) discloses a thermal solar energy capture and storage device. (See John, Abstract). John discloses utilizing the thermal energy to power a Stirling engine to generate electricity. (See John, Paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the stored thermal energy of Schilder to drive a Stirling engine, as both references are directed to solar thermal storage to provide thermal energy to drive a thermal load. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a Stirling engine to drive a generator would be a simple substitution of on known thermal load for another that would yield the predictable result of efficiently driving a generator to generate electricity.
In Reference to Claim 6
Schilder discloses:
Forming the solar panel system as modular. (See Schilder, Paragraphs [0014]-[0015]).
Schilder discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the system is disposed in an intermodal shipping container form factor.
John discloses a thermal solar energy capture and storage device. (See John, Abstract). John discloses uses a shipping container to mount and house both the modular solar array and the thermal storage. (See John, Paragraph [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the modular array of Schilder and thermal storage of Schilder disposed in a shipping container, as both references are directed towards modular solar thermal storage arrays. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that making the thermal storage array of such configuration would allow for modularity, portability and not require foundations and significant site preparations reducing the cost of the system. (See John, Paragraphs [0075]-[0076]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson et al. (US 2016/0146507) in view of Kapteyn (US 8,851,066).
In Reference to Claim 9
Johnson discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the modules comprise clay blocks.
Kapteyn (Kap) discloses a solar thermal storage system. (See Kap, Abstract). Kap discloses uses clay as a thermal storage material. (See Kap, Column 5, Line 57 – Column 6, Line 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used clay as the thermal storage block of Johnson as both references are directed towards thermal storage solar systems. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that clay would be a simple substitution of one known thermal storage material for another that would yield the predictable result of effectively storing the solar thermal energy.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Orosz, Combelic, Margankunte, Brenmiller, Majima, Hung, Wirz, Garrison, and O’Donnell show thermal storage devices within the general state of the art of invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW THOMAS LARGI whose telephone number is (571)270-3512. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 4:00 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469) 295-9278. 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.
/MATTHEW T LARGI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights