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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/31/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 11-15, 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tseng (United States Patent Application Publication 20120073641 A1).
With respect to claims 1, 2, 20 and 21,Tseng discloses a photovoltaic array (see fig.4A and B and fig.5 A and B) and an absorption based optical device (see fig.4A and fig.5A and 5B) comprising; a plurality of subwavelength dimensions ([0002]: The invention relates to a solar cell apparatus, particularly to a solar cell apparatus having the transparent conducting layer with the structure as a plurality of nano-level well-arranged arrays.) inverted cone bodies (see the cone bodies that make of 402) that are arranged on a layer (see the layer 403), each cone body being a solid-filled cone body that projects from the layer toward incoming radiation (see the layer of 402 in fig4 A and the direction of incident light), has a wider base facing the incoming radiation (see the incident light in light and the wide base in fig.4A) and a narrower base joined to the layer (see the narrow base in fig.4A), and has a curved sidewall in cross-section (see the curved cross section of 402 in fig.4A and photo active layer 403 in fig.4A), wherein either:(a) said inverted cone bodies as well as the layer are fabricated from a semiconductor material (see 402 which is made from ITO and 401 : “The photoactive layer 403 is mainly a material which can form the electron and electric hole, including solar cell material.” ): or (b) said inverted cone bodies and the layer are fabricated from a dielectric material and are attached, at a rear side thereof, to an underlying layer fabricated from a semiconductor material, used in an absorption- based optical device (see the operation of fig.4 and 5B), the absorption-based optical device which is configured to absorb broadband light (see para.[0049]: “summarized from the above-mentioned description, the invention can be applied to and designed in various solar cell materials and photodetectors, in order to increase the absorption efficiency of solar light.” ).
With respect to claims 4, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, wherein the curved sidewall is convex (see the shape of fig. 5B).
With respect to claim 7, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, wherein the curved sidewall is concave (see the shape of fig.4).
With respect to claim 8, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 7, wherein the curved concave sidewall has a trumpet-like shape (see the shape of fig.4).
With respect to claim 11, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, which is fabricated from a semiconductor material (see the disclosure of silicon-see claim 6: “wherein the photoactive layer is selected from the group consisting of crystalline silicon and amorphous silicon.”).
With respect to claim 12, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 11, wherein the semiconductor material is selected from Silicon, GaAs, or Germanium (see the disclosure of silicon-see claim 6: “wherein the photoactive layer is selected from the group consisting of crystalline silicon and amorphous silicon.”).
With respect to claim 13, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, wherein each of the cone bodies, together with the layer, forms a photovoltaic cell (see the photovoltaic cell of fig.4).
With respect to claim 14, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, which is configured to absorb radiation in a specific spectrum or wavelength of light (disclosed by design of 4: “[0012] :The invention uses the structure as a plurality of nano-level well-arranged arrays, wherein the plurality of nano-level well-arranged arrays is a periodic or a quasi-periodic with a plurality of certain defect areas, to trap the light in the limited thickness of thin film solar cell”).
With respect to claim 15, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, which is configured to a limited range of spectral radiation (disclosed by design of fig.4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 3, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (United States Patent Application Publication 20120073641 A1) in view of Endoh (EP 2372403 A1).
With respect to claim 3, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the cone bodies is a truncated cone which is inverted such that its wider base faces the incoming radiation.
Endoh discloses wherein each of the cones is a truncated cone which is inverted such that its wider base faces the incoming radiation (see the orientation of fig.18).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the array of Tseng with the teaching of Endoh so that each of the cone bodies is a truncated cone which is inverted such that its wider base faces the incoming radiation to facilitate the absorption of light.
With respect to claim 9 and 10, Tseng discloses the photovoltaic array of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the period between the cone bodies is in the subwavelength light range, wherein the period between the cone bodies is substantially in the order of a wavelength of an impinging illumination.
Endoh wherein the period between the cones is in the subwavelength light range (see the distance between the centers of the inverted cones in fig.18 and see the abstract), wherein the period between the cones is substantially in the order of a wavelength of an impinging illumination (again see the abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the array of Tseng with the teaching of Endoh so that wherein the period between the cone bodies is in the subwavelength light range, wherein the period between the cone bodies is substantially in the order of a wavelength of an impinging illumination to facilitate the absorption of light.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (United States Patent Application Publication 20120073641 A1) in view of Zhao (CN 102790114 A).
With respect to claims 5 and 6, Tseng discloses the array of claim 4, but does not disclose wherein the convex sidewall has a compound parabolic body shape, or wherein convex sidewall has a parabolic shape.
Zhao shows this shape is well known in the art to light trapping: wherein the convex sidewall has a compound parabolic body shape, or wherein convex sidewall has a parabolic shape (see para.[0005]: common compound parabolic concentrator (CPC) (FIG. 4) ).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the array of Tseng with the teaching of Zhao so that the convex sidewall has a compound parabolic body shape, wherein convex sidewall has a parabolic shape to facilitate the absorption of light.
Claims 17 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (United States Patent Application Publication 20120073641 A1) in view of Todd (United States Patent Application Publication 201200865 A1).
With respect to claims 17 and 22, Tseng discloses the absorption-based optical device of claims 1 and 20, but does not disclose further comprising a filter to limit the absorption to a specific spectrum or wavelength of light.
Todd discloses further comprising an anti-reflection coating or a filter to limit the absorption to a specific spectrum or wavelength of light ( see para.[0030]:such as UV filters, anti-reflective layers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tseng with the teaching of Todd so that the array further comprises an anti-reflection coating or a filter to limit the absorption to a specific spectrum or wavelength of light to enhance light capture or to enhance the durability of the photovoltaic cell.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15, 17 and 20-22 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 JERRY L. BROOKS whose telephone number is (571)270-5711. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:00 PM.
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, Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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.
/JERRY L BROOKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights