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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 2/23/2026 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The previous rejection under 112(b) is withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The previous art rejections are withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Interpretation
The claim includes structural limitations and functional limitations, which are largely drawn to the behavior of light upon interacting with the recited structure. The limitations are clear and definite. The examiner interprets the functional limitations to be describing a particular configuration of light. For instance, the claim recites visible light (322) present in the incident solar radiation, and visible light component (320a) present after ultraviolet light (320) interacts with a down-conversion assembly (206). Lines 8-10 recites that the visible light (322) merges with the visible light (322) to form a visible light component (320b). The examiner understands this to be a description of the functions shown in instant Fig. 3 of the drawings. In instant Fig. 3, in an initial condition, a visible light (322) is laterally displaced from, but propagating in the same direction as, ultraviolet light (320). The interaction of the ultraviolet light (320) with assembly (206) results in the visible light component (320a) being propagating at a particular angle. The visible light (322) also changes its angle slightly when interacting with assembly (206). Visible light (322) and visible light (320a) interact with lens element 104a, afterward overlapping and propagating at the same angle, now labeled as visible light component (320b). Thus the two elements can be interpreted to have merged. A person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that ultraviolet light and visible light that are present in a different initial condition (such as being more or less laterally displaced, or propagating at different angles) would not necessarily merge, even if they interact with the claimed structural elements.
Similarly, ultraviolet light and visible light present in a different initial condition would not necessarily be directed to a higher location on an inner wall of the corresponding solar tube, or thereafter reflect multiple times as claimed.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: the fourth line recites “ultraviolet light (206)”, and the following line recites “a down-conversion assembly (206)”. It seems like the claim should be amended to recite “ultraviolet light (320)”, which would resolve the conflicting numerical designators. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 and 7-11 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, in the last few lines, recites “a stepper motor (120) configured to cause vertical movement and adjust a height of the Fresnel lens holder (102) by rotating continuously over a duration of 8 to 12 hours at a displacement rate between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm”. The unit “mm” does not describe a rate. Is this intended to mean that the height is adjusted by 0.05 to 0.2 mm over 8 to 12 hours, or 0.05 to 0.2 mm per hour, etc.? However, the claim recites that the motor rotates at a displacement rate. What does 0.05 to 0.2 mm rotation mean? This function is described in paragraph [0035] of the instant disclosure: “The stepper motor (120) is programmed to rotate continuously at a very low speed of 0.05 to 0.2 mm in a span of 8-12 hours.” This reinforces the interpretation that a motor is rotating at a rate measured in mm/hour. However, this unit makes sense only when the radius of the of the spindle or main gear is known; the disclosure does not elaborate in a way that assists a skilled artisan in understanding the claim limitation. Claims 2-4 and 7-11 are rejected based on their dependence from claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “the one or more predefined points”, which has been deleted from claim 1. The limitation therefore lacks antecedent basis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 7-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ryan S Cannon whose telephone number is (571)270-7186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5:30pm PST.
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.
Ryan S. Cannon
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/RYAN S CANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726