Arun K. Gupta

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Dec 17, 2019

14109495 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Dec. 17, 2019)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
14/109,495 12/17/2013 Arun K. Gupta SKYV-P0001US-NP 5136
134449 7590 12/17/2019
Grable Martin Fulton PLLC
2709 Dublin Road
Plano, TX 75094
EXAMINER
SUN, MICHAEL Y
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1726
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
12/17/2019 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
docketing@gchub.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte ARUN K. GUPTA
Appeal 2018-008309
Application 14/109,495
Technology Center 1700
Before LINDA M. GAUDETTE, MONTÉ T. SQUIRE, and
SHELDON M. MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
MCGEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the
Examiner’s decision to reject claims 41–59. Br. 12.
We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.

1 We use the word Appellant to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Skyven
Technologies, LLC. Br. 1.
Appeal 2018-008309
Application 14/109,495

2
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
The claims are directed to solar concentrators and solar concentration
systems. Independent claim 41, reproduced below, is illustrative of the
claimed subject matter:
41. A solar concentrator comprising:
a plurality of reflector arrays, each reflector array
including a plurality of reflector elements arranged along a
longitudinal axis and pivotally mounted to a pair of elongated
members parallel to the longitudinal axis, where the plurality of
reflector elements in each reflector array being configured to
pivot simultaneously in unison;
each of the plurality of reflector arrays being mounted to
rotate about the longitudinal axis independently of the other
reflector arrays, where each of the plurality of reflector elements
in a reflector array being configured to rotate about the
longitudinal axis simultaneously in unison; and
the plurality of reflector elements of the plurality of
reflector arrays being configured to be oriented to reflect and
direct an incident radiation energy onto a solar receiver.
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner is:
Name Reference Date
Hubbard US 4,243,018 Jan. 6, 1981
Findell US 4,317,031 Feb. 23, 1982
Gross US 7,192,146 B2 Mar. 20, 2007
Lu US 2007/0070531 A1 Mar. 29, 2007

REJECTIONS UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103
I. Claims 41–45 and 47–56 are rejected as being unpatentable
over Findell in view of Gross and Hubbard.
II. Claims 46 and 57–59 are rejected as being unpatentable over
Findell in view of Gross, Hubbard, and Lu.
Appeal 2018-008309
Application 14/109,495

3
OPINION
Upon consideration of the evidence in this appeal and each of
Appellant’s arguments, we are unpersuaded of reversible error in the
Examiner’s rejections of claims 41–59. We, therefore, sustain these
rejections based on the findings of fact and reasoning provided at pages
3–13 of the Final Office Action dated November 3, 2017, and pages 3–17 of
the Examiner’s Answer dated June 14, 2018. We add the following only for
emphasis.
In addressing the Examiner’s obviousness rejections of the
independent claims, Appellant asserts that Findell does not disclose
independent reflector array rotation. Br. 13–15. The Examiner, however,
expressly acknowledges that Findell does not disclose this limitation (see,
e.g., Final Act. 3; Ans. 3), and instead relies on Gross for its teaching of a
plurality of motors 130 in Figure 1 that “can be used to rotate the reflector
elements.” Final Act. 4, 8. Thus, Appellant merely points out what the
Examiner acknowledges is already lacking in Findell. Such arguments that
focus on portions of prior art references that are not relied on by the
Examiner fail to identify reversible error in the rejection.
Appellant then discusses embodiments of Gross that also are not
relied on by the Examiner in reaching the obviousness determination.
Compare Br. 15–16 (discussing features of Gross’s Figures 4, 5, and 10A),
with Final Act. 4 (explaining how “motors 130 in each row of reflectors in
figure 1 . . . can be used to rotate the reflector elements” (emphasis added)).
Specifically, Appellant focuses on the “row manipulation linkage 120”
depicted in Figures 4 and 5 (Br. 16), and then characterizes the linkage as an
“essential feature” of Gross. Appellant, however, fails to persuasively
Appeal 2018-008309
Application 14/109,495

4
establish that linkage 120 is a component part of the Figure 1 embodiment
relied on by the Examiner (Final Act. 4). Additionally, Appellant’s
argument fails to meaningfully address the Examiner’s discussion of Gross’s
motors 130 and the Examiner’s determination that the skilled artisan would
have been motivated to rotate a row of reflector elements, i.e., a “reflector
array,” “in order to uniquely control rotations of a plurality of mirrors to
maintain reflections of the direct rays of the sun from all mirrors on a
receiver at the common focus.” Final Act. 4; Ans. 3–4.
For these reasons, and those provided by the Examiner, we sustain
Rejections I and II.
CONCLUSION
The Examiner’s obviousness rejections are affirmed.
DECISION SUMMARY
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
41–45, 47–56 103(a) Findell, Gross,
Hubbard
41–45, 47–56
46, 57–59 103(a) Findell, Gross,
Hubbard, Lu
46, 57–59
Overall
Outcome
41–59
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED