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 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1:
Line 2 recites, “the blades” and should likely read, “the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 13 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 19 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 2:
Line 3 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 10 recites, “the blade” and should likely read, “the blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 3:
Line 3 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 4:
Line 3 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 4 recites, “the blade” and should likely read, “the blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 5 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 6 recites, “the blade” and should likely read, “the blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 7 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 5:
Line 2 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 6:
Line 3 recites, “different blades” and should likely read, “different blades of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 4 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 7:
Line 3 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 8:
Line 6 recites, “each blade” and should likely read, “each blade of the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 9:
Line 4 recites, “the blades” and should likely read, “the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 10:
Line 4 recites, “the blades” and should likely read, “the plurality of C-shaped blades” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a first control mechanism” in claim 10, which is being interpreted as, “an eccentric plate 41 in rotation with the lower connecting plate 9 and control arms 42” as in pages 8-9, or equivalents thereof (see page 10, “A third control mechanism 60, shown in Fig. 8 and 9, is associated with each of the upper radial airfoils 222 of the blades and, similar to the first control mechanism 40, is operable to adjust the aerodynamic angle of attack of these airfoils for stabilizing the bending moment at the bearings and connecting joints.” E.g., the first control mechanism could be a servomotor as well).
“a second control mechanism” in claim 8, which is being interpreted as, “a stepper motor” as in page 9 of the immediate specification, or equivalents thereof.
“a third control mechanism” in claim 9, which is being interpreted as, “a servomotor” as in page 10 of the immediate specification, or equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the other end" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner respectfully notes that it was not indicated that the blades strictly have “two ends” or similar.
Claims 2-10 are rejected by their dependencies.
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 1-6 and 8-10 (as well as they are understood by the Examiner) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lux (US PGPUB 2008/0267777 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
420
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Lux discloses a shaftless vertical-axis wind turbine (10), comprising a hub (14, 28, 26, 60), and a plurality of C-shaped blades (16), the blades being at one end connected to the hub (near 14), and being at the other end connected to each other by a connecting element (12),
wherein each blade comprises:
a lower radial portion (20, “bottom segment”) having a radially inner end connected to the hub (Fig. 5A),
an upper radial portion (18, “top segment”) having a radially inner end connected to the connecting element (Fig. 5A), and
a vertical portion (22) having opposite ends (Fig. 5A) connected to a radially outer end of the lower radial portion (Fig. 5A) and a radially outer end of the upper radial portion (Fig. 5A), respectively,
wherein each blade further comprises:
a lower radial airfoil ([0101] discloses each blade 16 having a top segment, a bottom segment, and middle segment 22 having an airfoil shaped cross section) arranged at the lower radial portion of the blade (Fig. 5A),
a vertical airfoil ([0101] discloses each blade 16 having a top segment, a bottom segment, and middle segment 22 having an airfoil shaped cross section) arranged at the upper radial portion of the blade (Fig. 5A), and
an upper radial airfoil ([0101] discloses each blade 16 having a top segment, a bottom segment, and middle segment 22 having an airfoil shaped cross section) arranged at the upper radial portion of the blade (Fig. 5A), and
wherein at least one portion of the vertical airfoil of each blade is rotatable about a relevant axis of rotation, in a manner that is independent from the homologous portions of the vertical airfoil of the other blades of the plurality of C-shaped blades ([0124], “The attached angle, or the angle between the chord line and the radius, can be changed easily with vertical blades. This angle when adjusted only a few degrees, can improve the turbine efficiency. Also, a pivot can be provided at the ends of each vertical middle blade segment to effectively change the attached angle.”), to adjust an angle of attack ([0124]).
Regarding claim 2, Lux discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the lower radial portion (20) is a first lower radial portion (Fig. 5A, the segment extending from the junction between the bottom segment and the additional support ‘60’, along 60), wherein each blade further comprises a second lower radial portion (Fig. 5, the segment extending from the junction between the bottom segment and the addition support ‘60’ towards 14) provided with a relevant airfoil (20 is airfoil shaped to 14), the second lower radial portion being arranged at a different elevation from the first lower radial portion (Fig. 5A) so as to form a triangular (Fig. 5A) structure that rigidly connects the hub to the relevant vertical portion (Fig. 5A), and wherein a vertical distance between the radially outer ends of the first and second lower radial portions is less than a vertical distance between the radially inner ends of the first and second lower radial portions (Fig. 5A, the connection is triangular).
Regarding claim 3, Lux discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein at least one portion of at least one of the lower radial airfoil and the upper radial of each blade is rotatable about a relevant axis of rotation ([0125] indicates the “sections or segmented blades on a turbine could be at various angles. These angled could change from horizontal to vertical” as the airfoil segments are modular [0107] and therefore must rotate to adjust the attached angle [0125]), optionally in a manner that is independent from homologous portions of the lower radial airfoil or of the upper radial airfoil of the other blades of the plurality of C-shaped blades, to adjust an angle of attack or a curvature of the relevant lower radial airfoil or of the relevant upper radial airfoil ([0125] indicates the “sections or segmented blades on a turbine could be at various angles. These angled could change from horizontal to vertical” as the airfoil segments are modular [0107] and therefore must rotate to adjust the attached angle [0125]).
Regarding claim 4, Lux discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the lower radial portion, the vertical portion and the upper radial portion of each blade are linear (Fig. 5A), wherein a lower corner portion of the blade ([0106]) is interposed between the lower radial portion and the vertical portion of each blade, and wherein an upper corner portion of the blade is interposed between the upper radial portion and the vertical portion of each blade ([0106]), the lower corner portion and the upper corner portion being curved ([0106]).
Regarding claim 5, Lux discloses all of claim 4 as above, wherein each blade further comprises a lower corner airfoil ([0106]) and an upper corner airfoil ([0106]) arranged at the corner portion and at the upper corner portion of the blade, respectively (Fig. 5A).
Regarding claim 6, Lux discloses all of claim 4 as above, further comprises a plurality of traction members (64, 24) stretched between relevant corner portions of different blades (Fig. 5A) or between at least one of the corner portions of each blade and at least one of the hub and the connecting element or between the hub and the connecting element (Fig. 5A), to stiffen the shaftless vertical-axis wind turbine ([0120]).
Regarding claim 8, Lux discloses all of claim 1 as above, further comprising a second control mechanism ([0034], “By providing an additional blade segment within each blade which is pivotal about a longitudinal axis thereof, the performance characteristics of the turbine can be adjusted according to wind conditions. For example certain blade segments may be pivoted into a braking position in which interaction between the blade and the wind forces applies a braking torque to the turbine about the vertical axis. As wind conditions vary, it may be subsequently desired to pivot all blade segments into a position which applies a torque in a common direction of rotation responsive to wind forces”) associated with each of the vertical airfoils of the blades, and operable to adjust the angles of attack or the curvatures of the vertical airfoils in a manner than is independent from each other, by rotations of the at least one portion of the vertical airfoil of each blade ([0034] indicates all the blade sections are independently pivotable during operation).
Regarding claim 9, Lux discloses all of claim 3 as above, further comprising a third control mechanism ([0034]) associated with each of the upper radial airfoils or lower radial airfoils of the blades and arranged in the connecting element or in the hub ([0124], “a pivot can be provided at the ends of each vertical middle blade segment to effectively change the attached angle.” in combination with [0034] all of the blades are indicated by [0034] to be able to pivot, the pivots are at the ends of each blade segment and would be provided in the hub for the lower radial airfoils or in the connector for the upper radial airfoils), the third control mechanism being operable to adjust the angles of attack or the curvatures of the upper radial airfoils or of the lower radial airfoils in a manner that is independent from each other ([0034]), by rotation of the at least one portion of at least one of the lower radial airfoil and the upper radial airfoil of each blade ([0034]).
Regarding claim 10, Lux discloses all of claim 3 as above, further comprising a control mechanism ([0034]) associated with the lower radial airfoils or the upper radial airfoils of the blades and arranged in the hub or in the connecting element (0124], “a pivot can be provided at the ends of each vertical middle blade segment to effectively change the attached angle.” in combination with [0034] all of the blades are indicated by [0034] to be able to pivot, the pivots are at the ends of each blade segment and would be provided in the hub for the lower radial airfoils or in the connector for the upper radial airfoils), the first control mechanism being operable to adjust in a simultaneous manner the angles of attack or the curvatures of the lower radial airfoils or the upper radial airfoils, by the rotation of the at least one portion of at least one of the lower radial airfoil and the upper radial airfoil of each blade ([0034]).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lux (US PGPUB 2008/0267777 A1) in view of Ennis et al. (US PGPUB 2020/0392940 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Lux discloses all of claim 4 as above.
However, Lux does not disclose, “wherein radially outer ends of the lower radial portion and of the upper radial portion of each blade are connected to the relevant vertical portion by respective hinges arranged at the relevant lower corner portion and at the relevant upper corner portion, and wherein the radially inner ends of the lower radial portion and of the upper radial portion of each blade are hinged to the hub and the connecting element, respectively”
Lux does teach, “In further arrangements, turbine blades may be formed of segments similar to the segments of FIG. 3, but the segments are instead integrally joined with one another by curved intersection portions of the blades. [0117]” showing that the segments, even in the curved arrangement are joined together.
Ennis et al. teaches, in the field of connecting vertical-axis wind turbines, using hinged or pinned connections between the blades, the hub (bottom connector), and top connector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the connections between each blade segment of Lux to have a hinged or pinned connection therebetween, as both references are in the same field of endeavor, and one of ordinary skill would appreciable both the teaching that “[0030] The blades 12 are connected to or linked at a blade bottom end with a bottom connector 13. The bottom end being defined as the end proximate the base. The blade connection to the bottom connector 13 may be fixed or adjustable. In an embodiment, the connection may be hinged or pinned. The bottom connector 13 is connected to a driving shaft (not shown) contained within a base 14. The driving shaft transmits torque from the rotating blades via a geared or direct drive system to a shaft of an electrical generator, and as stated above, the configurations thereof being known in the art. In other embodiments, other power generation unit configurations are possible.
[0031] The blades 12 are connected or link to one another at a blade top end by a top connector 15. The top end being defined as the end proximate the top connector 15. In this exemplary embodiment, the top connector 15 is a pinned connector that attaches the blades 12 to the top connector with connector pins (not shown). In other embodiments, the top connector may be a hinged connector, a pin connector or other connector. In an embodiment, the top connector allows the angle of attachment of the blades to the connector to flex or vary at the angle of connection. In other embodiments, the top and or bottom connector may be omitted, and the flexible connectors may be connected directly to the blades.” of Ennis et al. and that said teaching of hinges or pins is recognized in the art as a suitable solution for an intended purpose (joining vertical axis wind turbine blades together) (see MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PNG
media_image2.png
384
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2011/0255972 A1 discloses a multi-element wind turbine airfoils and wind turbines incorporating the same.
PNG
media_image3.png
454
378
media_image3.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2008/0253889 A1 discloses a vertical axis wind turbines.
PNG
media_image4.png
534
462
media_image4.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2015/0192105 A1 discloses rotors for extracting energy from wind and hydrokinetic sources.
PNG
media_image5.png
460
490
media_image5.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2009/0074581 A1 discloses a vertical-axis wind turbine.
PNG
media_image6.png
460
460
media_image6.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2012/0224968 A1 discloses a lift-type vertical axis turbine.
PNG
media_image7.png
512
478
media_image7.png
Greyscale
US Patent 10,054,107 B2 discloses an omni-directional shaftless wind turbine.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C CLARK whose telephone number is (571)272-2871. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0730-1730, Alternate Fridays 0730-1630.
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, Courtney D Heinle can be reached at (571)-270-3508. 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.
/RYAN C CLARK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745
