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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10/8/2025 is entered and fully considered.
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 1-3, 7, 8, 20, and 23-29 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.
Regarding claim 1, the amendment requires a plurality of chambers or zones. The one or more atmospheric isolation chambers from claim 10 supports a plurality of chambers. The examiner also notes that the claim 26 requires the heat treatment oven to comprise a plurality of at least partially isolated atmosphere chambers. Accordingly, there is support for providing a reducing atmosphere to a first chamber (partially or totally isolated), but there is no support for providing a reducing atmosphere to a first zone (insofar as a zone is different from a chamber).
The amendment also states that “only the first chamber or zone” is configured to create reducing atmosphere conditions, but also notes that the second chamber or zone can be provided with “one or more other or different gases”. The specification does not support all other or different gases. The specification does support other gases that include inert or reducing gases. However, applicant has defined vacuums and both inert and reducing gases are considered to create reducing atmosphere related conditions. Accordingly, the flow of inert gas is within the scope of “flowing a reducing gas” in the context of this application. Therefore support for flowing other/different gases into the at least second chamber (remaining chambers) is limited to inert and reducing gases which are expressly precluded from being flowed into anything but the first chamber.
In another interpretation, a gas can generally be considered to be either reducing, inert, or oxidizing. A requirement that the gas is not reducing or inert (generating reducing conditions) may be deduced to be an oxidizing gas. There is no support for introducing an oxidizing gas to any zone or chamber.
Depending claims are rejected because they incorporate the new matter from the parent claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues the WANG reference does not teach a heat treatment oven with a plurality of chambers or zones. However, the examiner maintains that the heat treatment oven includes an unwinding chamber, a heating and cooling chamber and a heating chamber. The heating and cooling chamber has multiple zones (S1, M1, M2, and S2). The reference further teaches the atmospheres of each chambers are individually controlled by the valves 109A-B and 107A-B. WANG specifically notes that 107A and 107B are only opened to introduce inert or reaction gas if the annealing/reaction is not to be conducted under a vacuum [0018] (implicitly teaching the chambers S1, M1, M2, and S2 are vacuum). The reference also teaches that one of 109A (valves for the unwinding chamber) and 109B (valves for the winding chamber) are used as vacuum outlets while the other are used for providing inert gas inlets (reducing conditions) [0018]. As a whole the reference teaches only providing inert gas to the unwinding chamber and keeping the remaining chambers under vacuum.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7, 8, 20, 25, 26, 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WANG (US 2012/0264075).
Regarding claims 1-3, 26, 28 and 29,
WANG teaches a roll-to-roll reactor for solar cells abstract. The apparatus includes an unwinding chamber that receives a substrate roll that is then fed through a heating section S1 and a cooling section S2 [0017] (cooling is after heating). The heat treatment oven can heat to temperature of up to 1000°C abstract (above 400°C). The entire roll-to-roll process is enclosed in a system that is flushed with inert gas and drawn to a [0018]. The apparatus is further divided into a winding chamber, heating and cooling chamber (S1, M1, M2 and S2), and winding chamber with shutters 111A and 111B (a plurality of at least partially isolated atmosphere chambers). The heating and cooling portions are within a first partially isolated atmosphere chamber. The cooling portion is equipped with cooling elements and thermocouples [0017] (configured for controlling cooling operations). The first partially isolated atmosphere chamber is at least in a partial atmosphere isolation from the winding and unwinding chamber (second partial atmosphere isolation chamber and remaining part of the heat treatment oven).
WANG teaches an atmosphere isolation chamber with valves to control gases and vacuums (configured to flow one more reducing gases). According to applicant, reducing atmospheres include vacuums and inert gases, see claim 3 and specification [0091]. In addition, the examiner notes that the apparatus claim is limited to the structures and not the intended use. The same valves that supply inert gas would be capable of supplying a reducing gas and therefore are a structure that meets the claim limitation. Likewise, the valves can be opened and closed to only flow inert/reducing gas in the first chamber while drawing a vacuum on the remaining chambers. WANG specifically notes that 107A and 107B are only opened to introduce inert or reaction gas if the annealing/reaction is not to be conducted under a vacuum [0018] (implicitly teaching the chambers S1, M1, M2, and S2 are vacuum). The reference also teaches that one of 109A (valves for the unwinding chamber) and 109B (valves for the winding chamber) are used as vacuum outlets while the other are used for providing inert gas inlets (reducing conditions) [0018]. As a whole the reference teaches only providing inert gas to the unwinding chamber and keeping the remaining chambers under vacuum.
Regarding claim 7 and 8,
WANG teaches a heat treatment zone S1 in addition to modular buffer sections M1 and M2 that help with thermal control [0017] (plurality of temperature zones at different temperatures).
Regarding claim 20,
The cooling zone S2 in WANG includes cooling elements with cold water or cold gas (forced cooling) [0017].
Regarding claim 25,
WANG teaches moving the substrate at 1 meter per minute [0022] which would correspond to a residence time of longer than the claimed 1.2 minutes to 2 minutes. However, the speed at which the substrate moves is not a structural limitation for the apparatus claim. The apparatus in WANG is also infers there are different substrate delivery speeds [0007]. Higher speeds would advantageously yield more product.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (US 2012/0264075).
Regarding claim 23,
WANG teaches the substrate transports over 10 meters [0023]. The reference does not teach the heat treatment oven as 12-18 meters. Although only a portion of the length of WANG is attributable to the heating the open-ended length of “over 10 meters” allows for an arbitrary length which makes the heating portion also an arbitrary length. Accordingly, the prior art range overlaps the claimed range and is considered prima facie obvious, MPEP 2144.05.I.
Alternatively, the difference in the length of the reactor/heating section of WANG does not change the operation of the prior art device and is prima facie obvious as a change in size/proportion MPEP 2144.04.IV.A.
Regarding claim 24,
WANG teaches a heat treatment oven that transports over 10 meters [0023] and further teaches speed of the film through the oven can be changed [0007] but does not expressly teach a residence time of the substrate in the oven. The residence time is a result effective variable and set according to reaction time and substrate delivery speed according to WANG [0007]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to configure the system to provide a desired residence time within the claimed range by ordinary experimentation to find workable parameters.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (US 2012/0264075) further in view of SAIJO et al. (US 2013/0146580).
Regarding claim 27,
WANG teaches using shutters between the ovens heating and cooling parts and the payoff/uptake rollers. The reference does not teach providing a cooling operation to a chamber that is partially isolated. However, SAIJO teaches that a cooling operation can be extended into a tail portion of a heating chamber [0179] and fig. 4. to further control the temperature of the substrate while in a purge chamber. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to further include cooling elements in the winding (inert/purge) chamber of WANG to extend the temperature control of the substrate as it is recovered from the oven.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MURATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5596. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571272-1418. 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.
/AUSTIN MURATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712