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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/8/2026 has been entered.
Priority
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 14/793,427, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
Prior filed Application No. 14/793,427 does not disclose a solar cell module having “a thickness of each of the plurality of second finger electrodes is greater than a thickness of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes, and a width of each of the plurality of second finger electrodes is greater than a width of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes” as claimed in lines 29-32 of claim 45 of the instant application.
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.
Claims 45-49, 52-54, and 56 are 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.
As amended, claim 45 recites “a plurality of extension pads and a plurality of auxiliary pads alternately arranged at intervals along the second direction” in lines 27-29 and “wherein a size of each of the plurality of extension pads is smaller than a spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction and a size of each of the plurality of auxiliary pads is equal to the spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction” in lines 34-38. Applicant has no support for the limitation in the originally filed disclosure. Such description is nowhere to be found in the originally filed disclosure.
Claims 46-49, 52-54 and 56 are rejected on the same ground as claim 45.
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) 45-53 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US 2012/0103385) in view of Gray et al. (US 2010/0000602) and Hamaguchi et al. (US 2014/0251409), and further in view of Narita (WO 2014/132516, which has an English equivalence of US 2015/0364627).
Regarding claim 45, Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module comprising:
a first solar cell and a second solar cell (see solar cells 10, figs. 1-2) spaced apart in a first direction (see fig. 2); and
a wiring member (see interconnector 20, figs. 1-2) interconnecting the first solar cell and the second solar cell (10, see figs. 1-2) and bending downwardly at the end of the first solar cell (or the solar cell 10 on the left in fig. 2) to form a first bending portion (see fig. 2); and
a first reflector (see uneven portions 26 of the interconnect 20) being a component of the wiring member (or interconnector 20, see figs. 3 and 8), wherein the wiring member (20) has a portion positioned between the first solar cell and the second solar cell (see figs. 1-2);
wherein each solar cell comprises:
a semiconductor substrate (11, figs. 3 and 8),
a first electrode (13/14 in fig. 3 or 13 in fig. 8) disposed on a front semiconductor substrate (11, see figs. 3 and 8), and
a second electrode (16/17, fig. 3) disposed on a back semiconductor substrate (11, see fig. 3);
wherein the wiring member (or 20) is electrically connected to the first electrode (or front electrode 13/14 or 13) of the first solar cell (or solar cell 10 on the left) and the second electrode (or back electrode 16/17) of the second solar cell (or the solar cell 10 on the right, see figs. 1-3), and
wherein the first reflector (26) is connected to a front surface of the wiring member (see fig.3);
Hong et al. shows the (first) reflector (or uneven portion 26) on the front/upper surface of the wiring member (or interconnector 20) in figs. 3 and 8, or the (first) reflector (26) is a component of the wiring member (or interconnector 20); wherein the front/upper surface of the wiring member (20) has a portion positioned on a front surface of the first solar cell (or the left solar cell) by a predetermined distance from an end of the first solar cell (or the left solar cell), the wiring member bends downwardly at the end of the first solar cell to form a first bending portion (see fig. 2), and the front/upper surface of the wiring member (20) covers the first bending portion (see fig. 2). As such, the first reflector (or uneven portion 26) on the front/upper surface of the wiring member (20) must have the same configuration/arrangement as the front/upper surface of the wiring member, e.g. a portion of the first reflector positioned on the front surface of the first solar cell by a predetermined distance from an end of the first solar cell and the first reflector covers the first bending portion.
Hong et al. shows the first electrode (13/14) comprises a plurality of first finger electrodes (see front electrodes 13) extending in a first direction and arranged in a second direction crossing the first direction (see figs. 3, 7-8), and a second electrode (or back electrode 16 and back current collector 17), wherein the wiring member (20) connects the first electrode (13/14) including the plurality of first finger electrodes (13) of the first solar cell and the second electrode (16/17 of the second solar cell (see figs. 1-8).
a) Hong et al. does not teach the first electrode comprising a connection electrode and a plurality of first pads, wherein the connection electrode extends along the second direction and is electrically connected the plurality of first finger electrodes and each of the end pads is selectively formed at intersections of the connection electrode and the plurality of first finger electrodes.
Gray et al. discloses a first electrode comprising a connection electrode (18P, figs. 4A-4B, 6-8, 10, 12-13) and a plurality of first pads (32, figs. 2B, 3, 4A-B, 5-9, 10, 12-13); wherein the connection electrode (18P) extends along the second direction (or along a wiring member/tab 22) and is electrically connected to the plurality of first finger electrodes (18, see figs. 2B, 3-10 and 12-13), and each of the plurality pads (32) is selectively formed at intersections of the connection electrode (18P) and the plurality of first finger electrodes (18, see figs. 2B, 3-10 and 12-13).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell module of Hong et al. by forming the first electrode comprising a connection electrode and a plurality of pads and each pad being formed at intersections of the connection electrode and the first finger electrodes as taught by Gray et al., because Gray et al. teaches pads forming discontinuous busbars would reduce/mitigate carrier losses that could be caused by bond break (see [0038]) and the connection electrode (or fingers 18P) would gather charge carriers and is beneficially aid efficiency if a wiring member (tab)/pad bond breaks (see [0050-0051]) and improve efficiency (see [0059]).
b) Modified Hong et al. does not teach the first pads comprises a plurality of extension pads and a plurality of auxiliary pads; wherein two of the plurality of extension pads are respectively closer to two ends of the first solar cell in the second direction than remaining pads of the plurality of first pads, and each of the plurality of auxiliary pads connects two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes.
Himaguchi et al. discloses an electrode comprising a plurality of pads of a plurality of extension pads (or larger end pads/or larger portions of electrode/busbar 42) respectively closer to two ends of the solar cell, and a plurality of auxiliary pads (or smaller middle pads or smaller portions of electrode/busbar 42) each connecting two adjacent first finger electrodes (3, see fig. 9-2) to suppress separation of the wiring member (2, see [0120]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell module of modified Hong et al. by forming the plurality of first pads to include a plurality of extension pads and a plurality of auxiliary pads as taught by Himaguchi et al., because Himaguchi et al. teaches such configuration would suppress separation of the wiring members (see [0120]).
c) Gray et al. shows using pads with different sizes and shapes (see figs. 1-10 and 12-13) and the pattern of the pads is a matter of desired choice (see [0047] and [0074]]). Himaguchi et al. teaches the pattern of the pads is a matter of desired choice (see figs. 9-1 and 9.2 and [0117]), and shows the extension pads (or larger portions of electrode/busbar 42) and the teaches the extension pads (or larger portion of electrode/busbar 42) and the auxiliary pads (or the smaller portion of the electrode/busbar 42) are alternatively arranged at an (single) interval along the second direction (or the vertical direction along the wiring member 2). Himaguchi et al. also teaches a size (or the shorter side) of each extension pad (end pads) is smaller than a spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes.
Modified Hong et al. also does not teach the extension pads and the auxiliary pads alternatively arranged at intervals along the second direction such that a size of each of the plurality of extension pads is smaller than a spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction and a size of each of the plurality of auxiliary pads is equal to the spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have formed the pattern of the (first) pads such that the extension pads (or larger portion of electrode/busbar 42) and the auxiliary pads (or the smaller portion of the electrode/busbar 42) are alternatively arranged at (a plurality of) intervals along the second direction to provide extension pads (or larger pads/portions of electrode/busbars) at the middle portion of the solar cell to suppress the separation of the wiring members from the middle portion of the solar cell, because Himaguchi et al. teaches providing extension pads (or larger pads) would suppress the separation of the wiring members. Such modification would involve nothing more than a matter of desired choice as suggested by Gray et al. and Himaguchi et al.. Such modification is also a mere duplication of parts. Mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378, 380 (CCPA 1960). Further, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. In addition, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make a size of each of the plurality of extension pads is smaller than a spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction and a size of each of the plurality of auxiliary pads is equal to the spacing between two adjacent first finger electrodes among the plurality of first finger electrodes along the second direction. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was the recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior device. The skilled artisan would have been able to select an appropriate size based on the desired properties of the solar cell.
d) Hong et al. shows the second electrode (16/17) comprising a conductive part (16) wider than the first finger electrode (13, see figs. 3 and 8). Modified Hong et al. does not teach the second electrode comprising a plurality of second finger electrodes extending in the first direction and arranged in the second direction such that the wiring member connects the plurality of first finger electrodes of first solar cell and the plurality of second finger electrodes of the second solar cell; nor do they teach a thickness of each of the plurality of the second finger electrodes is greater than a thickness of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes, and a width of each of the plurality of second finger electrodes is greater than a width of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes.
Narita teaches the second electrode (25) having a plurality of second finger electrodes (25a, fig. 2, [0026]) extending in the first direction and arranged in the second direction (or the same directions as the first finger electrodes 24a, fig. 2, [0021]) such that the wiring member (15, fig. 1) connects the plurality of the plurality of first finger electrodes (24a) on the top of the solar cell and the plurality of the second fingers (25a) at the bottom of the solar cell (see figs. 1-2). Narita also teaches each second finger electrode (25a) is thicker than the first finger electrode (24a) and the percentage of an area of the second electrode (25) is larger than the percentage of area occupied by the first electrode (24) to improve the electric conductivity of the second electrode (see [0026] and [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell module of modified Hong et al. by forming the second electrode comprising a plurality of second finger electrodes extending in the first direction and arranged in the second direction such that the wiring member connects the plurality of first finger electrodes of first solar cell and the plurality of second finger electrodes of the second solar cell, and forming a thickness of each of the plurality of the second finger electrodes is greater than a thickness of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes and a percentage of area occupied by the second electrode is larger than the percentage of area occupied by the first electrode as taught by Narita, because Narita teaches greater thickness of the second electrode and greater area occupied by the second electrode would improve the electric conductivity of the second electrode. In addition, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to form a width of each of the plurality of second finger electrodes is greater than a width of each of the plurality of first finger electrodes, because greater width of each second finger electrodes provides greater area occupied by the second electrode and Narita teaches greater area occupied by the second electrode would improve the electric conductivity of the second electrode.
Regarding claim 46, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. shows the first reflector (or uneven portions 26 on the upper surface of the wiring member) having a bar shape of a rectangular cuboid (see figs. 3 and 8) and formed of solder (24, [0068]), which is a metal material ([0076]).
Regarding claim 47, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. discloses the first reflector (or uneven portions 26) is formed of a same material as the wiring member (e.g. since the uneven portions 26 are portions of the interconnector 20).
Regarding claim 48, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45, wherein Hong et al. discloses the first reflector (26) is soldered (24, [0061]) to the front surface of the wiring member (20, see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 49, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. discloses the wiring member (20) is inclined at a predetermined angle in an interspace between the first solar cell and the second solar cell (10, see fig. 2), and the first reflector (26) is also inclined at the predetermined angle since the first reflector (26) is on the wiring member (20, see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 52, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. discloses the front surface of the first reflector has uneven portions (see uneven portions 26 in figs. 3 and 8).
Regarding claim 53, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. discloses a front surface of the first reflector is an inclined surface having uneven portions (see the curve of the solder layer 24), and a height of the inclined surface varies depending on a position (see figs. 3 and 8).
Regarding claim 56, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above, wherein Hong et al. discloses forming the uneven portion (26) on both the upper surface and the lower surface of the wiring member (or the interconnector 20, see [0075]). As such, there is a second reflector (or the uneven portion 26) connected to the back surface of a portion of the wiring member (or the lower surface of the interconnector 20) in an interspace between the first solar cell and the second solar cell.
Claim(s) 46 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hong et al. (US 2012/0103385) as applied to claim 45 above, and further in view of Asberg (US 2010/0108123).
Regarding claim 54 and alternatively in regards to claim 46, modified Hong et al. discloses a solar cell module as in claim 45 above.
Hong et al. discloses the wiring member (or the interconnector 20) including the first reflector (or uneven portions 26) on the front surface of the wiring members (20, see fig. 3). Hong et al. does not disclose the first reflector having a rectangular cuboid that extends in a second direction crossing the first direction.
Asperg et al. discloses an interconnector of reflector (3, figs. 1-2 and 4, also see fig. 6) having a rectangular cuboid that extends in the second direction crossing the first direction (or perpendicular to the series connected solar cells 2, see figs. 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wiring member (or the interconnector 20) of Hong et al. by using the wiring member of reflector having a rectangular cuboid that extends in the second direction crossing the first direction as taught by Asperg et al., because Asberg et al. teaches such reflector would redirect incident light from areas not covered by the solar cells towards the solar cells ([0006]) to cut cost by reducing the density of the active elements within the module without interference with the cell interconnection ([0004-0005]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues there is a misunderstanding in regards to “extension pads” and “auxiliary pads”. The examiner replies that claim limitations are interpreted in light of Applicant’s disclosure. Applicant identifies/defines the “extension pads” (140e) to be the end pads (see figs. 40-41 and Applicant’s disclosure) and the “auxiliary pads” (140a) to be the middle pads (see figs. 40-41 and Applicant’s disclosure). The alternating pattern for the extension pads (140e) and the auxiliary pads (140a) is shown in figs. 40-41 which depict the auxiliary pads (140a) are between the extension pads (140e). The alternating pattern of pads shown in figs. 35-36, 38-39 are for first pads of different sizes, not for extension pads and auxiliary pads.
Applicant argues Hamaguchi does not teach the pads located at the intersection of finger electrodes and the connection electrodes. The examiner replies that Hamaguchi is not relied upon for teaching connection electrodes such that the pads are located at the intersection of finger electrodes.
Applicant argues Hamaguchi does not teach the alternating pattern of the extension pads and the auxiliary pads as claimed. The examiner replies that Hamaguchi discloses the alternating pattern of the extension pads and the auxiliary pads as disclosed by Applicant. Hamaguchi also teaches larger pads would suppress separation of the wiring members such that a larger pads at end portion would suppress separation of the wiring members at the end portion. Therefore, one skilled in the art would find it obvious to duplicate the pattern of Hamaguchi such that the larger pads are located in the middle portion of the solar cell to suppress the separation of the wiring members at the middle portion, and duplication of the pattern to achieve the advantage would be obvious to one skilled in the art.
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 on 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