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 .
Election/Restrictions
The amendment to claims filed on 6/29/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 4-10 are amended. Claims 11-15 are canceled. Claims 16-25 are newly added.
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, drawn to a solar tracker, in the reply filed on 6/29/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-10 and 16-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schimelpfenig et al. (US 2018/0175783) in view of Maxey et al. (US 2015/0377518) or Urbanek et al. (US 2023/0353082).
Regarding claim 1, Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker (110, figs. 1-7) comprising:
a first set of photovoltaic solar panels (see photovoltaic modules 104 at the first driven support assembly 112, fig. 2);
a second set of photovoltaic solar panels (see photovoltaic modules 104 at the second driven support assembly 114, fig. 2);
a support structure comprising a main crossbar (see torque tube 120, fig. 2), comprising a central longitudinal axis (or mid section 126 of torque tube 120, fig. 2), a first part (see first end section 122 of torque tube 120, fig. 2) and a second part (see second end section 124 of torque tube 120, [0031]);
a first motor (see first motor drive 132, fig. 2) that is operatively coupled to the first part (122) of the main crossbar (120) and is configured to apply a rotation to the first part (122) of the main crossbar to move the first set of photovoltaic panels (or photovoltaic modules 104 at the first driven support assembly 112) to a final angular position (or improved position, see figs. 1-7, [0031-0066]);
a second motor (see second motor drive 134, fig. 2) that is operatively coupled to the second part (124) of the main crossbar (120) and is configured to apply a rotation to a second part (124) of the main crossbar (120) to move the second set of the photovoltaic panels (or photovoltaic modules 104 at the second driven support assembly 114) to the final angular position (or improved position, see figs. 1-7, [0031-0066]);
a first controller (see controller 150 and gearmotor 135, fig. 2) configured to control the first motor (132) to rotate the first set of photovoltaic solar panels (104) to the final angular position from the initial angular position; and
a second controller (see controller 150 and gearmotor 137) configured to control the second motor (134) to move the second set of photovoltaic solar panels (104) to the final angular position from the initial angular position determined by sensor data (see fig. 2, [0045-0046]).
Schimelpfenig et al. teaches using frame to support the photovoltaic modules (104) along an outer perimeter or a back surface (see [0037]) and one or more sensors for measuring an ambient environmental condition and system properties or positions (see [0045-0046]).
Schimelpfenig et al. does not explicitly show a plurality of crossbars coupled to and oriented non-parallel to the main crossbar, nor do they describe a first position sensor and a second position sensor as claimed.
Maxey et al. shows a support structure comprising a plurality of crossbars (see crossbars shown in fig. 3) coupled to and oriented non-parallel to a main crossbar (or torque tube 16, see fig. 3), and a controller (50) including a position sensor (120, 122, 240) as a sensor data to determine the position of the photovoltaic panel (see fig. 17).
Similarly, Urbaneck et al. shows a support structure comprising a plurality of crossbars coupled to and oriented non-parallel to a mean crossbar (109, see fig. 2), and a controller including a position sensor as one of the input devices to determine the initial position of the photovoltaic module ([0035]).
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar tracker shown in fig. 2 of Schimelpfenig et al. by incorporating a plurality of crossbars coupled to the main crossbar and a position sensor to each local controller to determine an initial angular position of each set of photovoltaic panels as taught by Maxey et al. or Urbaneck et al., because Schimelpfenig et al. explicitly suggests doing so, e.g. frame and one or more sensors measuring an ambient environmental condition and system properties or positions.
Regarding claim 2, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Maxey et al. and Urbaneck et al. show the plurality of crossbars are oriented orthogonal to the main crossbar (see fig. 3 of Maxey et al. or fig. 2 of Urbaneck et al.).
Regarding claim 3, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. teaches a plurality of spaced apart posts (see piles 116 and 119 in fig. 2) on which the support structure (120) is supported (see fig. 2). Maxey et al. and Urbaneck et al. also teach the same (see fig. 3 of Maxey et al. or fig. 2 of Urbaneck et al.).
Regarding claim 5, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the first controller (135/150) comprises a master controller (150) and the second controller (137/150) comprises a slave controller (137), wherein the first controller (135/150) and the second controller (137/150) are connected to one another through a data and power supply line (152/150/154, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Urbanek teaches each sensor is an accelerometer (see [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 8 above, wherein the first sensor is included in the local first controller and the second sensor included in the second controller (see claim 1 above, or fig. 17 of Maxey et al., or fig. 7 and [0035] of Urbanek et al.). Schimelpfenig et al. shows a part of the first controller (e.g. 135) is arranged in the first part of the support structure (122) that supports the first set of the photovoltaic solar panels, and a part of the second controller (e.g. 137) is arranged in the second part of the support structure (124) that supports the second set of the photovoltaic panels (see fig. 2).
Modified Schimelpfenig et al. does not explicitly show the first position sensor is arranged in the first part of the support structure that supports the first set of photovoltaic solar panels, and the second position sensor is arranged in the second part of the support structure that supports the second set of photovoltaic solar panels.
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the first position sensor in the first part of the support structure that supports the first set of photovoltaic solar panels and the second position sensor in the second part of the support structure that support the second set of photovoltaic solar panels; because Schimelpfenig et al. teaches arranging a part of the first controller in the first part of the support structure (122) that supports the first set of the photovoltaic solar panels, and a part of the second controller in the second part of the support structure that supports the second set of the photovoltaic panels (see fig. 2), and such modification would involve nothing more than a mere rearrangement of the system parts that would not modify the operation of the system, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 10, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 9 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. shows the first motor (or motor drive 132) being arranged in the first part (122) of the support structure (120), the second motor (or motor drive 134) being arranged in the second part (124) of the support structure (120), and the controllers (133 or 137) being arranged right next to the corresponding drives (132 or 134, respectively). Maxey et al. shows the sensors (e.g. 120, 122, 204, 202, 206) are arranged in the controller (50, see fig. 17) and the controller is enclosure, and the controller (50) is disposed right next to the motor drive (30, see fig. 1). In other words, modified Schimelpfenig et al. disclose the first position sensor is arranged in an enclosing casing of the first controller which is disposed in the first part of the support structure, and the second position sensor is arranged in an enclosing casing of the second controller which is disposed in the second part of the support structure.
Regarding claim 16, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the motor (or motor drive such as 132) has a gearbox (e.g. 133) which comprises a worm gear (see [0036]). Urbanek et al. teaches using slew drive (see [0024]).
Schimelpfenig et al. does not explicitly describe the worm gear to be a slew drive.
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used slew drive as taught by Urbanek et al. for the worm gear of Schimelpfenig et al. such that the slew drives comprises the first motor or the second motor, because such modification would involve nothing more than use of known worm gear for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish entirely expected result. International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 17, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the first controller or the second controller comprises a communication unit (see [0038])
Regarding claims 18-24, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses all the structural limitations of the solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. teaches the controllers (150) including a microprocessor or computer ([0041]) to control the motors to operate independently (see fig. 3). Recitations of the instant claims are directed toward how to operate the tracker, or different intended uses of the tracker by configurating the controllers. Said recitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim; so long as the disclosed apparatus is capable of performing the process limitations, the limitations are deemed to have been met. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” The solar tracker of modified Schimelpfenig et al. is fully capable of being used, or the controllers being configured to operate, as claimed, because Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the controllers include microprocess or computer that is fully capable of being configured/programed to operate as claimed.
Regarding claim 25, Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Maxey et al. or Urbanek et al. show the photovoltaic solar panels are support by the main crossbar and the plurality of crossbars (see figs. 1 and 3 of Maxey et al. or fig. 2 of Urbanek et al.).
Claim(s) 4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Schimelpfenig et al. (US 2018/0175783) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2021/0273604).
Regarding claim 4, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Maxey et al. teaches each of the first and second sets of photovoltaic solar panels (11) is electrically coupled to a main power line (44) to extract electric power generated by the first and second sets of photovoltaic solar panels (11, see fig. 3).
Schimelpfenig et al. teaches each of the motors is required electrical signals to operate (see fig. 3).
Modified Schimelpfenig et al. does not explicitly teach the motors are electrically coupled to the main power line to receive a portion of the electrical power from the power line.
Liu et al. teaches photovoltaic solar panels (see PV strings, fig. 4) electrically coupled to a main power line (see electrical flows in fig. 4) and the motor (14) coupled to the main power line to receive a portion of the electric power from the power line (see fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have coupled the photovoltaic solar panels of the solar tracker to the main power line and the motors are electrically coupled to the main power line to receive a portion of the electric power from the power line as taught by Liu et al., because such coupling would involve nothing more than an intended use of the solar tracker to provide self-powered solar tracker.
Regarding claim 6, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 4 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the first controller (135/150) comprises a master controller (150) and the second controller (137/150) comprises a slave controller (137), and the first controller (135/150) and the second controller (137/150) are connected to one another through a data and power supply line (152/150/154, see fig. 2 of Schimelpfenig et al.) that is configured to transmit electric power and communication data between the first and second controllers, and Liu et al. teaches wherein the main power line comprises the data and power supply line (see fig. 4 of Liu et al.).
Regarding claim 7, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 4 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. discloses the first controller (135/150) comprises a master controller (150) and the second controller (137/150) comprises a slave controller (137), wherein the first controller and the second controller are connected to one another through a data and power supply line (152/150/154, see fig. 2), and Liu et al. teaches the controllers coupled to the main power line to receive electric power from the main power line and communication data from the first controller through the data and power supply line (see fig. 4 of Liu et al.).
Alternatively, claim(s) 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Schimelpfenig et al. (US 2018/0175783) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tilley et al. (US 2014/0201109).
Regarding claim 8, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 1 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. teaches one or more sensors for measuring an ambient environmental condition and system properties or positions (see [0045-0046]).
Schimelpfenig et al. does not teach each of one or more of the first position sensor or the second position sensor to be an accelerometer.
Tilley et al. teaches using an accelerometer sensor among other sensors for information related to the overall status of the tracker ([0039-0041], [0048], [0054-0055]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar tracker of modified Schimelpfenig et al. by using the accelerometer sensor as taught by Tilley et al., because Schimelpfenig et al. teaches using one or more sensor for measuring an ambient environmental condition and system properties or positions and Tilley et al. teaches using such sensor would provide information related to the overall status of the tracker. Such modification would involve nothing more than use of known type of sensor for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish entirely expected result. International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 9, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 8 above, wherein the first sensor is included in the local first controller and the second sensor included in the second controller (see claim 1 above, or fig. 17 of Maxey et al., or fig. 7 and [0035] of Urbanek et al.). Schimelpfenig et al. shows a part of the first controller (e.g. 135) is arranged in the first part of the support structure (122) that supports the first set of the photovoltaic solar panels, and a part of the second controller (e.g. 137) is arranged in the second part of the support structure (124) that supports the second set of the photovoltaic panels (see fig. 2).
Modified Schimelpfenig et al. does not explicitly show the first position sensor is arranged in the first part of the support structure that supports the first set of photovoltaic solar panels, and the second position sensor is arranged in the second part of the support structure that supports the second set of photovoltaic solar panels.
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the first position sensor in the first part of the support structure that supports the first set of photovoltaic solar panels and the second position sensor in the second part of the support structure that support the second set of photovoltaic solar panels; because Schimelpfenig et al. teaches arranging a part of the first controller in the first part of the support structure (122) that supports the first set of the photovoltaic solar panels, and a part of the second controller in the second part of the support structure that supports the second set of the photovoltaic panels (see fig. 2), and such modification would involve nothing more than a mere rearrangement of the system parts that would not modify the operation of the system, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 10, modified Schimelpfenig et al. discloses a solar tracker as in claim 9 above, wherein Schimelpfenig et al. shows the first motor (or motor drive 132) being arranged in the first part (122) of the support structure (120), the second motor (or motor drive 134) being arranged in the second part (124) of the support structure (120), and the controllers (133 or 137) being arranged right next to the corresponding drives (132 or 134, respectively). Maxey et al. shows the sensors (e.g. 120, 122, 204, 202, 206) are arranged in the controller (50, see fig. 17) and the controller is enclosure, and the controller (50) is disposed right next to the motor drive (30, see fig. 1). In other words, modified Schimelpfenig et al. disclose the first position sensor is arranged in an enclosing casing of the first controller which is disposed in the first part of the support structure, and the second position sensor is arranged in an enclosing casing of the second controller which is disposed in the second part of the support structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH-TRUC TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-6594. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 6:00pm.
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 T. Barton can be reached at 5712721307. 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.
THANH-TRUC TRINH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/THANH TRUC TRINH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights