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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The six information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on April 16, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
In the April 16, 2025 submission, claims 1-23 were presented for consideration and are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substantial asserted utility or a well-established utility.
The cited claims are directed to the configuration of a solar cell assembly. The cited assembly comprise two solar cell units, wherein each unit comprise of two cell series connecting half-cut cells in series and further providing a cross-connector connecting a portion of each series of the cells, wherein two series share a bypass diode. The configuration further employs the use of a fifth cross-connector connecting the two solar cell units.
While the claim notes a solar array configuration, the cited language fails to provide a utility for relative to the solar configuration. The claims fail to assert actionable utility in (1) the setup of the configuration(s); (2) clearly discerning what is determined as a portion of a cell series, how the portions are determined and actionably engaged with the configuration; and (3) how the configuration provides active steps to facilitate a driven utility for the presented configuration.
Paragraphs 14 and 24 of the published specification notes the following:
[0014] Therefore, there is a desire to have an optimal cell configuration in solar cell modules such that the maximum reverse breakdown voltages are not exceeded and such that the use of connector ribbons of excessive lengths is avoided.
[0024] Fig. 2a shows an embodiment of a solar cell assembly layout 200 and Fig. 2b shows a corresponding electrical schematic diagram. In one embodiment, the solar cell assembly is a solar cell module. In another embodiment, the solar cell assembly is a portion of a solar cell module. The solar cell assembly may include solar cells 204 which may be arranged in one or more solar cell units. As illustrated in Fig. 2a, the solar cell assembly layout 200 includes three solar cell units, for example, a first solar cell unit 211, a second solar cell unit 212 and a third solar cell unit 213. Having solar cell assemblies including another number of solar cell units may also be useful.
Regarding paragraph 14, the specification presents a utility directed in support of a method for optimizing solar cell configurations wherein “cell configuration in solar cell modules such that the maximum reverse breakdown voltages are not exceeded and such that the use of connector ribbons of excessive lengths is avoided”. Support for this utility is not provided in the cited claim language. While paragraph 24 further notes that the solar cell assembly is a portion of a solar cell module, the claim language and specification does not further discern how the system defines a portion or support configuration setup relative to the portion. Paragraphs 26 and 32 of the specification further describe the shaded portion of the cells and further notes steps taken by the system to mitigate reverse breakdown in the system, but does not address or focus on a configuration setup respective of a cross-connector connecting a portion of a solar cell series. The configuration and obscurity afforded connecting the undefined portions, obscures the overall configuration setup and steps taken to employ the configuration in a utility. In light of the aforementioned, further defining connecting “portions”, and limitations of claim 12 along with the utility elements presented in paragraph 14 provide further support in addressing utility of the claim set.
Claims 1-23 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Specifically, because the claimed invention is not supported by either a specific and substantial asserted utility or a well-established utility for the reasons set forth above, one skilled in the art clearly would not know how to use the claimed invention.
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 1-23 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.
The term “portion” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “portion” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
As noted earlier, the term portion is obscure in defining the connective sections of the solar cell series and how the system is configured respective of the claimed portion. Paragraph 26 and 32 of the specification cites the following:
[0026] In one embodiment, the first and second solar cell series within the same solar cell unit share a same by-pass diode. The by-pass diode may include a semiconductor material, such as silicon, with two terminals attached. The by-pass diode may be used to circumvent destructive effects of hot-spot heating. In one embodiment, the bypass diode is connected in parallel, but with opposite polarity, to a solar cell or a group of solar cells connected in series. Under normal operation, each solar cell in the group may be forward biased and the bypass diode may be reverse biased. However, when a portion of the solar cell group is shaded, the bypass diode may become forward biased and allow the current produced by the unshaded portion to flow through the by-pass diode, thus avoiding the high resistance of the shaded portion and preventing hotspot heating.
[0032] When all solar cells, for example, in the first solar cell unit 211, operate normally and provide enough current to a load, the first by-pass diode 2011 coupled to the first solar cell unit 211 may be reverse biased, and all cells in the first solar cell unit operate close to a maximum power point (MPP). However, when a portion of the first solar cell unit becomes incapable of generating enough current for the load, for example, when the portion of the first solar cell series is shaded from the sun or even damaged, the shaded or damaged portion may become reverse biased and the first by-pass diode 2011 coupled in parallel may become forward biased to conduct currents. The shaded or damaged first solar cell series may not contribute to the power output of the assembly, while the second solar cell series which are not shaded or damaged may still contribute to the power output of the assembly to a small extent. This embodiment may have better performance than the conventional configurations of the solar cell modules in which all solar cells connected parallel to the by-pass diode contribute no power when the by-pass diode is forward biased.
The aforementioned notations are directed to effect of shaded sections to the solar cells, but does not define or describe cell setup and configuration respective of shaded areas (e.g., portions). While the term does present a scenario causing the system to react based on reverse biasing, setup of the cell assembly is obscured in light of configurations based on portions. As presented, the claims are not clear in presenting the actual configuration described, its use or application in addressing shaded portions and how the configuration and system resolves to mitigate damage due to reverse bias/breakdown voltage based on the connective portions of the system.
Examiner notes that during the examination process, claim language is considered in broad terms, whereby careful consideration is taken to view claim language in light of the specification, and not read details of the specification into the submitted claim language (see MPEP 2111).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oldenkamp [WO2021/098895] teach of a system which ensures reverse voltage for each active solar cell does not exceed a predetermined value. Agrawal et al., “Experimental Investigations of Fault Tolerance Due to Shading in Photovoltaic Modules with Different Interconnected Solar Cell Networks” and the combination of Qian [“Comparison of Half-Cell and Full-Cell Module Hotspot-Induced Temperature by Simulation”], Wen et al., “A New and Simple Split Series Strings Approach for Adding Bypass Diodes in Shingled Cell Modules to Reduce Shading Loss”, and Witteck et al., “Three Bypass Diodes Architecture at the Limit”, focus on configuration techniques combined with circuit solutions to actively mitigate fault tolerance and reverse biasing in solar networks based on shade conditions. The balance of the references cited in the attached PTO Form-892 focus on several solar array systems which employ active configuration methodology combined with limiting corrective/limiting circuitry for addressing reverse biasing due to shading in solar systems.
Conclusion
The applicant is strongly encouraged to contact the examiner if further clarifications are needed with respect to interpretation of currently presented claims and/or cited prior art.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. BiocraftLabs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1,215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN BOOKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7827. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571) 272-4105. 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.
/Kelvin Booker/
Examiner, Art Unit 2119
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights