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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/31/2026 has been entered.
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 21-32 are 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 recites the limitation "the free surface of the substrate" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-4 and 21-32 are rejected on the same ground as claim 1.
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) 1, 3-4 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraishi et al. (US 2002/0139411) in view of Younan et al. (US Patent 5,575,861), and further in view of Ford et al. (US 2011/0226332) or Miyazawa (US 2016/0299425).
Regarding claim 1, Hiraishi et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a semi-translucent photovoltaic device, the method comprising:
providing the substrate (11 in figs. 1-5, [0024]; or 31 in figs. 6-8, [0048]) at a first side (or top side) thereof with the photovoltaic stack (121 in fig. 2 or 321 in fig. 7, see [0035]);
removing material from the stack in spatially distributed regions (window 112 in figs. 1-5 or exposed spaces between the stacks in figs. 6-8), therewith forming openings within these regions (112, see [0035]; or exposed space as seen in fig. 7); and
blanketly-wise depositing a protective layer (13 in fig. 2, or 33 in fig. 7) over the substrate with the photovoltaic stack (121 in fig. 2, or 321 in fig. 7); and
blanketly-wise depositing a transparent polymer (or sealing 14 in fig. 2, or 34 in fig. 7, [0034]] and [0060]) over the protective layer (13 or 33) to form an outer encapsulant layer (see figs. 2 or 7).
Hiraishi et al. teaches the sealing resin fills the openings (or gaps, see [0034] or [0060]).
Hiraishi et al. does not show the outer encapsulant layer of transparent polymer fills the openings; nor do they teach the outer layer is patterned/embossed such that the steps of patterning include using a radiation- curable precursor which is visible light or ultra-violet light curable for the translucent polymer, moving a patterned stamp into a free surface of the layer of the radiation-curable precursor, irradiating the substrate by visible light or ultraviolet light from a second side opposite to the first side while maintaining the patterned stamp on the first side to selectively cure the radiation-curable precursor within and in front of the spatially distributed openings, the radiation-curable precursor being converted therewith into the translucent polymer, removing the stamp subsequent to the irradiating; and removing uncured remainder of the layer of the radiation-curable precursor.
Younan et al. discloses embossing the outer encapsulant layer of transparent polymer (or encapsulant layer 88 of sealing resin, figs.16-18) at the inactive regions (84, or the openings between the photovoltaic stacks/devices 82, figs. 16-18) with textured material for a more cosmetic appearance and for creating the appearance of the photovoltaic device to be mimicked the surrounding such as the conventional roofing shingles (see col. 9, lines 45-59), wherein the outer layer of transparent polymer (88) fills the openings (or gaps) between the photovoltaic stacks (82, see figs. 16-18). It is noted that the inactive regions (84) is within and in front the spatially distributed openings (or the spaces between the photovoltaic stacks/devices 82, see figs. 16-18), and outer layer of the translucent polymer fills the openings.
Ford et al. discloses an embossing method (fig. 3 and steps 111-114 in fig. 4C) to form a patterned layer including the steps of:
providing a substrate (44/42 in fig. 3; or waveguide in fig. 4C, [0046]) having a first side (or the bottom side, see the first three drawings of fig. 3; or step 111 in fig. 4C);
blanket-wise depositing a layer of ultraviolet radiation-curable precursor, which is ultraviolet curable (54 in step 50 of fig. 3, [0040]; or un-crosslinked photopolymer in step 111 of fig. 4C, [0046]);
moving a patterned stamp (60 in step 58 of fig. 3; or mold in step 112 in fig. 4C) from a distance from a free surface (or the exposed surface with no pattern) of the precursor layer (54) to a position past the free surface to penetrate the precursor (see fig. 3 and steps 112-113 of fig. 4C);
irradiating/baking the precursor by using ultraviolet light/radiation (or using light source 68, fig. 3, [0041]; or the light arrow in fig. 4C) at the free surface location (or the top outer/exposed surface) of the substrate (42/44) from the second side (or the top side) of the substrate opposite to the first side (bottom side) of the substrate (44, fig. 3) to selectively cure the ultraviolet radiation-curable precursor, while maintaining the pattern stamp (60 in fig. 3, or mold in fig. 4C) at the position past the free surface of the precursor, thereby converting the precursor into the transparent polymer (or cured resin, see step 64, fig. 3, [0041] or step 113 in fig. 4C);
removing the stamp (60, see fig. 3 or step 114 in fig. 4C); and
removing an uncured remainder of the layer of the radiation-curable precursor (see step 70, fig. 3, [0041]).
Ford also shows the irradiating step (or baking step) is separated from the moving the patterned stamp in fig. 3, and also shows the irradiating (or baking) the precursor while maintaining the patterned stamp at the position at the free surface of the precursor (see step 113 in fig. 4C). It is noted that the patterned stamp (or stamp 60 in fig. 3 or mold in fig. 4C) must be a distance from the free surface of the precursor layer before the stamp arrived at the free surface and eventually penetrate the precursor layer to make the pattern.
Alternatively, Miyazawa also teaches a method of imprinting to form a structure with pattern (or embossing method) comprising:
blanket-wise depositing a layer of a radiation-curable precursor (9, fig. 1), which is visible light or ultraviolet light curable, for a translucent polymer over a substrate/protective layer (7, fig. 1, step 1 described in [0026-0062]);
moving a patterned stamp (mold 2), positioned on a first side of the substrate (or the bottom side or pattern forming side) from a distance from a free surface (or the exposed surface with no pattern) of the precursor layer (9) to a position past the free surface to penetrate the precursor (see the bottom portion of fig. 2, step 2 described in [0063-0068]);
irradiating/curing using visible light or ultraviolet light, subsequent to the moving the patterned stamp step, the free surface (or the exposed surface) of the substrate (7) from the second side (or the top side or the side without the mold 2) of the substrate opposite to the first side (bottom side or the side with the mold ) of the substrate (7), while maintaining the patterned stamp at the position past the free surface of the layer of the radiation-curable precursor, to therewith selectively cure the ultraviolet radiation-curable precursor (9) within in in front of the radiation-curable precursor (see step 3, [0069-0070]) so that the radiation-curable precursor being converted into an embossed structure (see fig. 5);
removing the stamp (or mold 2, see fig. 5, [0076])
removing an uncured remainder of the layer of the radiation-curable precursor (see [0076]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hiraishi et al. by forming the transparent polymer (or the encapsulant 14 or 34) of translucent polymer to fill the openings, and embossing to form textured material/surface in front of the openings (or the inactive regions); because Hiraishi et al. teaches the sealing resin fills the opening, and Younan teaches forming the patterned/embossed/textured material (or surface) would provide a more cosmetic appearance and create the appearance of the photovoltaic device to be mimicked the surrounding such as the conventional roofing shingles.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to have used the embossing method/process taught by Ford or Miyazawa to form the textured material/surface within and in front of the spatially distributed openings of modified Hiraishi et al. (or taught in Younan); because Ford et al. teaches such process would form a desired and localized textured material/surface, and would minimize chromatic aberration (see [0041] of Ford et al.) and Miyazawa teaches such method of embossing would suppress the in-mask curing corrosion while minimize influence on shape stability of a fine pattern to be transferred to a resin layer (see [0009] of Miyazawa).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein the stamp is patterned to imprint a textured surface (or prism facets), or a scattering structure, into the free surface (see claim 1 above, or figs. 3 and 4C of Ford, fig. 2 of Miyazawa).
Regarding claims 4 and 21, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein Younan et al. shows the pattern is lens-like elements of a concave lenses (see fig. 17).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hiraishi et al. (US 2002/0139411) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 20130044901, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claim 1 above.
Modified Hiraishi et al. does not disclose the layer of a radiation-curable precursor comprises scattering particles.
Lee discloses including scattering particles (400) in the encapsulant (300, see figs. 1 and 3-8) to allow the transmitted light to evenly distributed and emitted to the light absorption layer, thereby improving photoelectric conversion efficiency by increasing the amount of incident light and dispersing the light evenly (see [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Hiraishi et al. by including scattering particles in the layer of radiation-curable precursor to form the encapsulant (or sealing material of translucent polymer) including the scattering particles as taught by Lee, because Lee teaches including the scattering particles into the encapsulant (or sealing material) would allow the transmitted light to evenly distributed and emitted to the light absorber thereby improving photoelectric conversion efficiency by increasing the amount of incident light and dispersing the light evenly.
Claim(s) 4 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hiraishi et al. (US 2002/0139411) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Peng et al. (US 2010/0252106).
Regarding claims 4 and 21-22, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claim 1 above, wherein the translucent polymer (or the outer encapsulant layer) is textured. Younan et al. teaches the imprint lens-like element having a concave lens-shaped (see fig. 17 of Younan et al.). Ford et al. teaches the textured surface (or prism facets 66, fig. 3) having protrusions and recessions (see fig. 3).
Modified Hiraishi et al. does not explicitly disclose the stamp is patterned to imprint lens-like elements of concave lenses or convex lenses in the free surface to align with the photovoltaic cells to direct light thereto.
Peng et al. discloses a textured surface (10b of optical sheet 10, fig. 1B) having protrusions of convex lens-like element and the recessions of concave lens-like aligned with the photovoltaic cells (’08) to direct light thereto (see figs. 2-8).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Hiraishi et al. by using the stamp that is patterned to imprint lens-like elements of concave lenses or convex lenses in the free surface to align with the photovoltaic cells to direct light thereto as taught by Peng et al.; because Younan et al. teaches using textured material, Ford et al. teaches the textured material/surface having protrusions and recessions, and Peng et al. teaches the textured surface having patterns of protrusions of convex lenses and recessions of concave lenses for an optical sheet would offer high transmittance and highly light-trapping effects so that the output or photovoltaic efficiency of the solar module package structures can be enhanced (see [0008] of Peng et al.).
Claim(s) 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hiraishi et al. (US 2002/0139411) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Hornung (US 2012/0067418)
Regarding claims 23-24, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claim 4 above, wherein the translucent polymer (or the outer encapsulant layer) is textured. Younan et al. teaches the imprint lens-like element having a concave lens-shaped (see fig. 17 of Younan et al.). Ford et al. teaches the textured surface (or prism facets 66, fig. 3) having protrusions and recessions (see fig. 3).
Modified Hiraishi et al. does not explicitly disclose the stamp is patterned to imprint lens-like elements in the free surface of concave lenses or convex lenses to align with the photovoltaic cells to direct light thereto.
Modified Hiraishi et al. does not explicitly disclose the stamp is patterned to imprint lens-like elements of diverging Fresnel lenses or converging Fresnel lenses in the free surface to align with the photovoltaic cells to direct light thereto.
Hornung discloses Fresnel lens of convergent lens or divergent lens ([0045]) having textured surface of protrusions and recessions (see figs. 1-5) that can be produced to have its best optimal function simply and economically to concentrate as much light as possible onto solar cells (see [0037], [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Hiraishi et al. by using the stamp that is patterned to imprint lens-like elements of Fresnel convergent lenses or Fresnel divergent lenses in the free surface to align with the photovoltaic cells to direct (or concentrate) light thereto as taught by Hornung; because Younan et al. teaches using textured material, Ford et al. teaches the textured material/surface having protrusions and recessions, and Hornung teaches Fresnel lenses of divergent lens or convergent lens have a textured surface having patterns of protrusions and recessions would be produced to have its best optimal function simply and economically to concentrate as much light as possible onto solar cells.
Claim(s) 25-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hiraishi et al. (US 2002/0139411) as applied to claims 1-4 and 21-24 above, and further in view of Kano (US 2017/0260125).
Regarding claims 25-32, modified Hiraishi et al. discloses a method as in claims 1-4 and 21-24 above.
Modified Hiraishi et al. does not disclose the photovoltaic stack comprises a perovskite photovoltaic layer.
Kano et al. teaches perovskite type solar cell would yield a conversion rate exceeds 17% conversion rate, and have the advantages of having a simple production process and inexpensive material in comparison to silicon-based solar cells (see [0002]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Hiraishi et al. by using photovoltaic stacks (or photovoltaic cells) comprising a perovskite layer, e.g. perovskite solar cells, as taught by Kano et al., because Kano teaches perovskite type solar cell would yield a conversion rate exceeds 17% conversion rate, and have the advantages of having a simple production process and inexpensive material in comparison to silicon-based solar cells.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Younan does not disclose using a patterned stamp, e.g. or forming the embossing process/texturing process/ of forming a pattern, and Ford’s manufacturing a completely different device such as waveguide with lens array and Ford does not disclose forming cured precursors that are self-aligned with openings in a semitranslucent photovoltaic device.
The examiner replies that Younan teaches embossing (or forming textured surface or patterned surface on) the translucent polymer filled in the distributed openings interrupting a photovoltaic stack, and Ford teaches a method of embossing (or forming textured surface or forming a pattern surface). It is noted that Ford also teaches a photovoltaic device (or solar energy capture device) and Applicant also claims imprinting lens-like elements (or waveguide element) in claim 4. As such, Applicant’s claimed invention and Ford are in the same field of endeavor, photovoltaic device or solar energy capture device.
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