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 .
Summary
This is the initial Office Action based on the 19/175,650 application filed on 04/10/2025.
Claims 1-32 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “wherein the relative angle … measured near a midpoint of the second section” is not supported by the originally filed disclosure.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “wherein the relative angle … a second average angle measured from the second pier to the third pier” is not supported by the originally filed disclosure.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “wherein a central longitudinal axis of the first section of the continuous torque tube is angularly deflected from a central longitudinal axis of the second section of the continuous torque tube up to 0.75 degrees to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the rolling terrain.
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.
Claim 2 is 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. The phrases “near a midpoint of the first section” and “near a midpoint of the second section” render the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to how close the location is in order for it to be considered “near a midpoint”. The originally filed disclosure does not disclose any location that is considered as being “near a midpoint”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the rolling terrain" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 32 recites the limitation “the rolling terrain” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Taha et al. (US 2020/0052644).
Addressing claim 1, Taha discloses a terrain following solar tracker comprising:
a plurality of piers 110 mounted into a non-uniformly sloped terrain (variable terrain as recited in the abstract, which implies non-uniformly sloped terrain; fig. 2 shows the configuration of the solar tracker that corresponds to the claimed non-uniformly sloped terrain) and arranged in a row (fig. 2), one or more of the plurality of piers 110 being at different heights relative to other piers of the plurality of piers due to the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2);
a continuous torque tube (torque tube 105 along with the bearing assemblies spanning the disclosed piers in fig. 2 correspond to the claimed continuous torque tube) extending along the plurality of piers at the different heights (fig. 2) such that the continuous torque tube substantially follows a contour of the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2), the continuous torque tube formed of a plurality of torque tube sections (the sections of the torque tube 105 and structures of the intervening bearing assemblies correspond to the claimed plurality of torque tube sections), the continuous torque tube supported by a plurality of bearing assemblies (side plates 355 in figs. 3A-3B, side plates 460 in figs. 4A-4B, side plates 510 in fig. 5 and base 605 in fig. 6 correspond to the claimed bearing assemblies) that are respectively mounted on the plurality of piers at the different heights relative to one another (fig. 2), the continuous torque tube bending to conform to the plurality of piers at different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers (fig. 3C shows the articulated joint assembly section of the continuous torque tube enables the continuous torque tube to bend to conform to the plurality of piers at different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers, which is also shown in fig. 2);
a first section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from a first pier of the plurality of piers to a second pier of the plurality of piers (annotated fig. 2 below); and
a second section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from the second pier of the plurality of piers to a third pier of the plurality of piers, the piers being at different heights causing bending along the first section to form a relative angle between the first section and the second section of up to 0.75 degrees (annotated figs. 2-3 below; paragraph [0035] discloses the angle of the bent portion is greater 0 and to 5 degrees, which encompasses the claimed range of up to 0.75) to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
318
416
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Addressing claims 2-3, the way in which the relative angle is measured does not structurally differentiate the claimed solar tracker from that of the prior art.
Addressing claims 4-5, the claimed height difference between the piers does not structurally differentiate the claimed solar tracker from that of the prior art because the height difference is dictated by the terrain on which the piers are installed. The piers disclosed by Taha are shown to be installed on variable terrain with height difference; therefore, piers of Taha are structurally configured to have the height difference that fall within the claimed ranges when they are installed on the same terrain as those of current claims.
Addressing claim 6, the claimed maximum north-south slope is drawn to the terrain on which the solar tracker is positioned that does not structurally differentiate the claimed solar tracker from that of the prior art.
Addressing claim 7, fig. 2 of Taha implies that the one or more relative angles formed between the adjacent torque tube sections (via the articulated joint shown in fig. 3) of the plurality of torque tube sections varies along the continuous torque tube such that the continuous torque tube is substantially parallel to the contour variations in the rolling terrain.
Addressing claim 8, fig. 2 shows the continuous torque tube, which includes the torque tube sections, varies along the slope from the row end bearing assembly 205 to the articulating joint bearing assembly 220 that satisfies the limitation one or more relative angles formed between adjacent torque tube sections of the plurality of torque tube sections varies along the continuous torque tube such that the continuous torque tube follow elevational variations in the rolling terrain.
Addressing claims 9-10 and 15, fig. 2 shows the continuous torque tube conforms to the plurality of piers at the different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers, and wherein a difference in pier height from the first pier to the second pier along the first section to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the rolling terrain. The tension being put on the continuous torque tube due to the differences in height between the piers as the piers are mounted at different heights along the terrain corresponds to the claimed “pre-load” and “pre-loading”.
Addressing claim 11, Taha discloses in fig. 7 and paragraph [0048] torque tube cradle and clamp mechanism that correspond to the claimed unswaged end within which the corresponding end of the torque tube, that is the structural equivalence to the claimed swaged end, is inserted as shown in fig. 8B to form the claimed continuous torque tube.
Addressing claim 12, Taha disclose the coupling between the torque tube and the cradle/clamp mechanism that result in the first swaged ends of the torque tube sections being inserted into the second unswaged end (the cradle/clamp) of the plurality of toque tube sections forms overlapping sections having a double-wall thickness.
Addressing claim 13, figs. 8A-10B show the overlapping sections are disposed proximate one or more piers of the plurality of piers.
Addressing claim 14, fig. 10A shows the overlapping sections are placed proximate to the articulating bearing assembly, which is proximate to the piers of the plurality of piers, where the continuous torque tube is bent or the bending moments caused by bending of the continuous torque tube are highest.
Addressing claim 16, fig. 2 shows the pre-loaded continuous torque tube passes through the plurality of aforementioned side plates that correspond to th claimed bearing assemblies that are respectively mounted on the piers at different heights.
Addressing claim 17, the torque tube sections that are attached to the opposite ends of the torque tube cradles 800 in fig. 10A result in the central longitudinal axis of one section being angularly deflected, via the articulating action of the articulating assembly, from a central longitudinal axis of the second section of the continuous torque tube up to 0.75 degrees [0035] to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the rolling terrain.
Addressing claim 18, Taha discloses a terrain following solar tracker (fig. 2) comprising:
a plurality of tiers mounted into a non-uniformly sloped terrain and arranged in a row (fig. 2), one or more of the plurality of piers being at different heights relative to other piers of the plurality of piers due to the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2);
a continuous torque tube (torque tube 105 along with the bearing assemblies spanning the disclosed piers in fig. 2 correspond to the claimed continuous torque tube) extending along the plurality of piers at the different heights (fig. 2) such that the continuous torque tube substantially follows a contour of the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2), the continuous torque tube formed of a plurality of torque tube sections (the sections of the torque tube 105 and structures of the intervening bearing assemblies correspond to the claimed plurality of torque tube sections), the continuous torque tube supported by a plurality of bearing assemblies (side plates 355 in figs. 3A-3B, side plates 460 in figs. 4A-4B, side plates 510 in fig. 5 and base 605 in fig. 6 correspond to the claimed bearing assemblies) that are respectively mounted on the plurality of piers at the different heights relative to one another (fig. 2), the continuous torque tube bending to conform to the plurality of piers at different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers (fig. 3C shows the articulated joint assembly section of the continuous torque tube enables the continuous torque tube to bend to conform to the plurality of piers at different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers, which is also shown in fig. 2);
a first section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from a first pier of the plurality of piers to a second pier of the plurality of piers (annotated fig. 2 below); and
a second section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from the second pier of the plurality of piers to a third pier of the plurality of piers, the piers being at different heights causing bending along the first section of up to 0.75 degrees (annotated figs. 2-3 below; paragraph [0035] discloses the angle of the bent portion is greater 0 and to 5 degrees, which encompasses the claimed range of up to 0.75) to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the non-uniformly sloped terrain (fig. 2).
Addressing claims 19-20, the claimed height difference between the piers does not structurally differentiate the claimed solar tracker from that of the prior art because the height difference is dictated by the terrain on which the piers are installed. The piers disclosed by Taha are shown to be installed on variable terrain with height difference; therefore, piers of Taha are structurally configured to have the height difference that fall within the claimed ranges when they are installed on the same terrain as those of current claims.
Addressing claim 21, the claimed maximum north-south slope is drawn to the terrain on which the solar tracker is positioned that does not structurally differentiate the claimed solar tracker from that of the prior art.
Addressing claim 22, fig. 2 of Taha implies that the one or more relative angles formed between the adjacent torque tube sections (via the articulated joint shown in fig. 3) of the plurality of torque tube sections varies along the continuous torque tube such that the continuous torque tube is substantially parallel to the contour variations in the rolling terrain.
Addressing claim 23, fig. 2 shows the continuous torque tube, which includes the torque tube sections, varies along the slope from the row end bearing assembly 205 to the articulating joint bearing assembly 220 that satisfies the limitation one or more relative angles formed between adjacent torque tube sections of the plurality of torque tube sections varies along the continuous torque tube such that the continuous torque tube follow elevational variations in the rolling terrain.
Addressing claims 24-25 and 30, fig. 2 shows the continuous torque tube conforms to the plurality of piers at the different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers, and wherein a difference in pier height from the first pier to the second pier along the first section to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the rolling terrain. The tension being put on the continuous torque tube due to the differences in height between the piers as the piers are mounted at different heights along the terrain corresponds to the claimed “pre-load” and “pre-loading”.
Addressing claim 26, Taha discloses in fig. 7 and paragraph [0048] torque tube cradle and clamp mechanism that correspond to the claimed unswaged end within which the corresponding end of the torque tube, that is the structural equivalence to the claimed swaged end, is inserted as shown in fig. 8B to form the claimed continuous torque tube.
Addressing claim 27, Taha disclose the coupling between the torque tube and the cradle/clamp mechanism that result in the first swaged ends of the torque tube sections being inserted into the second unswaged end (the cradle/clamp) of the plurality of toque tube sections forms overlapping sections having a double-wall thickness.
Addressing claim 28, figs. 8A-10B show the overlapping sections are disposed proximate one or more piers of the plurality of piers.
Addressing claim 29, fig. 10A shows the overlapping sections are placed proximate to the articulating bearing assembly, which is proximate to the piers of the plurality of piers, where the continuous torque tube is bent or the bending moments caused by bending of the continuous torque tube are highest.
Addressing claim 31, fig. 2 shows the pre-loaded continuous torque tube passes through the plurality of aforementioned side plates that correspond to th claimed bearing assemblies that are respectively mounted on the piers at different heights.
Addressing claim 32, the torque tube sections that are attached to the opposite ends of the torque tube cradles 800 in fig. 10A result in the central longitudinal axis of one section being angularly deflected, via the articulating action of the articulating assembly, from a central longitudinal axis of the second section of the continuous torque tube up to 0.75 degrees [0035] to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the rolling terrain.
Double Patenting
Claims 1 and 4-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,301,164. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following reasons:
Regarding claims 1 and 18, US Pat. No. ‘164 recite in claim 1 a terrain following solar tracker (rolling terrain following solar tracker) comprising:
a plurality of piers mounted into (embedded into) a non-uniformly sloped terrain (rolling terrain) and arranged in a row, one or more of the plurality of piers being at different heights relative other piers (relative to each other) due to the non-uniformly sloped terrain (rolling terrain);
a continuous torque tube (torque tube) extending along the plurality of piers at different heights such that the continuous torque tube substantially follows a contour of the non-uniformly sloped terrain, the continuous torque tube formed of a plurality of torque tube sections (a second plurality of sections), the continuous torque tube supported by a plurality of bearing assemblies (a third plurality of bearings) that are respectively mounted on the plurality of piers at the different heights relative to one another (the plurality of bearings that are respectively mounted on the piers at different heights), the continuous torque tube bending to conform to the plurality of piers at the different heights as the continuous torque tube extends along the plurality of piers (the torque tube extending along the first plurality of piers at different heights relative to each other);
a first section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from a first pier of the plurality of piers to a second pier of the plurality of piers (a first section of the second plurality of sections extending from a first pier of the first plurality of piers to a second pier of the first plurality of piers); and
a second section of the plurality of torque tube sections extending from the second pier to a third pier of the plurality of piers (a second section of the second plurality of sections extending from the second pier to a third pier of the first plurality of piers), the piers being at different heights causing bending along the first section to form a relative angle between the first section and the second section of up to 0.75 degrees (0.25 to about 0.75 degrees) to enable the continuous torque tube to follow contour variations in the non-uniformly sloped terrain.
The limitations of claims 4-6 and 19-21 are similarly recited in claims 2-4 of US Pat. No. ‘164.
The limitations of claims 7-8 and 22-23 are similarly recited in claim 7 of US Pat. No. ‘164.
The limitations of claims 9-10 and 24-25 are similarly recited in claims 12-13 of US Pat. No. ‘164.
The limitation of claims 11-14 and 26-29 are similarly recited in claims 1 and 8-10 of US Pat. No. ‘164.
The limitations of claims 15-17 and 30-32 are similarly recited in claims 12-14 of US Pat. No. ‘164.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 EST.
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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. 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.
/BACH T DINH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 03/17/2023