DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This office action is a non-final rejection in response to the filing of the application on 03/28/2025. 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 “wherein the plurality of optimizers are mounted on an opposite surface of a surface on which the photovoltaic module is disposed” (claims 10 and 20) must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. 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
3. 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 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moslehi, US Patent Application Publication (US 2017/0244358 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Moslehi discloses a photovoltaic module (see PV module Fig 5) (see Figs 5,7,14-16), comprising:
a photovoltaic panel comprising a plurality of cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5 and par. [0045]-[0047]); and
a plurality of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) each configured to control output power of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7 and par. [0045]-[0049]),
wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) located at a position corresponding to an output terminal (Module + Lead, Module - Lead) of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7 and par. [0045]-[0049], see structure in Fig 5 below),
PNG
media_image1.png
547
793
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed
apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art
reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29
(CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959).
"Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard
Co. V. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to
the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not
differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus
teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding claim 2, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 1, wherein each of the optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) comprises:
two input terminals (L3,L4) connected to output terminals at both ends of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7; par. [0041]);
two output terminals (L1,L2) connected to other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) or outside (see connections in Fig 5); and
a power conversion unit (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7) configured to convert output power of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) inputted through the input terminals (L3,L4) and output it to the output terminals (L1,L2) (see Fig 5,7; par. [0048]).
Regarding claim 3, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 2, wherein the output terminal (L2) connected to the other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) is connected via a connection unit (cable) embedded in the photovoltaic panel (see connection unit between L2 and L1 in Fig 5) (see Fig 5, par. [0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 4, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 3, wherein the connection unit (cable) embedded in the photovoltaic panel comprises a bus bar or a cable (cable) (see Fig 5, par. [0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 5, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 2, wherein the output terminals at both ends of each of the cell strings are directly connected to the two input terminals (L3,L4) of each of the optimizers inside the optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) (see Fig 5 disclosing the output terminals of each string within the PV module connected to the two input terminals L3 and L4 of RAMS).
Regarding claim 6, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 2, wherein the output terminal connected to the other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) or the outside is connected via a connection unit at outside of the photovoltaic panel (see power line connections in Fig 5,7; par. [0042]-[0048]).
Regarding claim 7, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 2, wherein the power conversion unit (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7) comprises at least one of a buck converter (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7, par. [0048]), a boost converter, and a buck-boost converter.
Regarding claim 8, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 2, wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) comprises a bypass unit connected in parallel between the two output terminals (See Fig 5,7 and par. [0030]-[0034],[0038],[0048] disclosing a bypass unit).
Regarding claim 9, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 1, wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) controls output power of each of cell strings with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) (see Fig 5,7 14, and par. [0056]).
Regarding claim 10, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic module of claim 1, wherein the plurality of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) are mounted on an opposite surface of a surface on which the photovoltaic module is disposed (see PV module Fig 5) (see Figs 5,7-8,14-16; par. [0033],[0041],[0049],[0051]).
Regarding claim 11, Moslehi discloses a photovoltaic system (see PV system in Fig 5) (see Figs 5,7,14-16), comprising:
a photovoltaic module (see PV module Fig 5); and
a power converting module (DC/AC inverter, Figs 14-16) configured to convert output of the photovoltaic module (see Figs 14-16; par. [0032],[0039],[0055]-[0056]), wherein the photovoltaic module comprises:
a photovoltaic panel comprising a plurality of cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see PV panel in Fig 5 and par. [0045]-[0047]); and
a plurality of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) each configured to control output power of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7 and par. [0045]-[0049]), and
wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) located at a position corresponding to an output terminal (Module + Lead, Module - Lead) of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7 and par. [0045]-[0049], see structure in Fig 5 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
557
808
media_image2.png
Greyscale
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed
apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art
reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29
(CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959).
"Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard
Co. V. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to
the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not
differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus
teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding claim 12, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 11, wherein each of the optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) comprises:
two input terminals (L3,L4) connected to output terminals at both ends of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) (see Fig 5,7; par. [0041]);
two output terminals (L1,L2) connected to other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) or the power converting module; and
a power conversion unit (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7) configured to convert output power of each of the cell strings (20 series connected solar cells) inputted through the input terminals (L3,L4) and output it to the output terminals (L1,L2) (see Fig 5,7; par. [0048]).
Regarding claim 13, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 12, wherein the output terminal (L2) connected to the other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) is connected via a connection unit (cable) embedded in the photovoltaic panel (see connection unit between L2 and L1 in Fig 5) (see Fig 5, par. [0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 14, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 13, wherein the connection unit (cable)embedded in the photovoltaic panel comprises a bus bar or a cable (cable) (see Fig 5, par. [0045]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 15, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 12, wherein the output terminals at both ends of each of the cell strings are directly connected to the two input terminals (L3,L4) of each of the optimizers inside the optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) (see Fig 5 disclosing the output terminals of each string within the PV module connected to the two input terminals L3 and L4 of RAMS).
Regarding claim 16, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 12, wherein the output terminal connected to the other optimizer (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) or the power converting module is connected via a connection unit at outside of the photovoltaic panel (see power line connections in Fig 5,7; par. [0042]-[0048]).
Regarding claim 17, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 12, wherein the power conversion unit (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7) comprises at least one of a buck converter (see DC/DC Buck converter PS1 within RAMS in Fig 7, par. [0048]), a boost converter, and a buck-boost converter.
Regarding claim 18, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 12, wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) comprises a bypass unit connected in parallel between the two output terminals (See Fig 5,7 and par. [0030]-[0034],[0038],[0048] disclosing a bypass unit).
Regarding claim 19, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 11, wherein each of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) controls output power of each of cell strings with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) (see Fig 5,7 14, and par. [0056]).
Regarding claim 20, Moslehi discloses the photovoltaic system of claim 11, wherein the plurality of optimizers (see plural “RAMS”, Fig 5,7, par. [0042]-[0048]) are mounted on an opposite surface of a surface on which the photovoltaic module is disposed (see PV module Fig 5) (see Figs 5,7-8,14-16; par. [0033],[0041],[0049],[0051]).
Examiner Note
6. The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the cited prior art in the PTO-892 form attached.
Perreault et al (US 9,673,729 B2) discloses a system for controlling a plurality of photovoltaic cells, the system comprising: a first power converter coupled to a first photovoltaic cell, the first power converter being formed on a first semiconductor substrate; a first controller to control the first power converter, wherein the first controller is formed on the first semiconductor substrate; a second power converter coupled to a second photovoltaic cell, the second power converter being formed on a second semiconductor substrate; a second controller to control the second power converter, wherein the second controller is formed on the second semiconductor substrate; and a third controller that controls a current through the first and second power converters based on signals from the first and second controllers.
Osterloh et al (US 9,269,834 B2) discloses an apparatus includes a plurality of photovoltaic units having respective pairs of first and second power terminals connected in series. Each photovoltaic unit in the series includes a bypass switch connected in parallel with the photovoltaic current source of the photovoltaic unit. The bypass switch is configured to provide a bypass of the photovoltaic current source in response to a respective switch control signal.
Hadar et al (US 8,933,321 B2) discloses systems and methods are disclosed for automatically or remotely rendering a solar array safe during an emergency or maintenance. A watchdog unit is disclosed for monitoring a signal from a central controller. If the signal is lost, interrupted, or becomes irregular, or if a shutdown signal is received, then the watchdog unit can shutdown one or more solar modules. Shutting down a solar module can mean disconnecting it from a power bus of the solar array or lowering the solar module voltage to a safe level.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1714. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9am-4pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Taelor Kim can be reached on (571) 270-7166. 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. /ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights