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 on Sep. 16th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every 112 rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on Jun. 16th, 2025. Claims 1-12 are examined in this office action. Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on Oct. 10th 2022.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh et al. (US 20210028381 from IDS) in view of Xie et al. (CN 112002813).
Regarding claim 1, Noh teaches a method (Abstract) for preparing a perovskite electronic device (multilayer perovskite structure; Abstract), the method comprising:
forming an electron transport layer (fig. 7, first charge transport layer 230, is an electron transport layer; para. 0226) and a second light absorption layer (second perovskite layer 242; para. 0240) including a perovskite material (perovskite material for perovskite layer) each independently on a first substrate (base substrate 210; para. 0216) and a second substrate (donor substrate (not shown) and fig. 5, donor substrate 130; para. 0120, 0240);
forming a first light absorption layer (first perovskite layer 241; para. 0232) on the electron transport layer (230);
a solvent (solvent for perovskite layer; para. 0292);
bonding the second light absorption layer (242) on the first light absorption layer (241);
removing (the donor substrate may be easily separated from the second perovskite layer; para. 0125) the second substrate (donor substrate);
forming a hole transport layer (second charge transport layer 250, may be a hole transport layer; para. 0225) on the second light absorption laver (242); and
forming an electrode (second electrode 260; para. 0216) on the hole transport layer (250).
Noh fails to explicitly teach the first light absorption layer including the perovskite material;
coating a solvent on a surface of the first light absorption layer and/or the second light absorption layer.
However, Xie teaches the first light absorption layer (Xie: fig. 1, first perovskite layer 13; para. 0061, similar to 241 of Noh) including the perovskite material (Xie: the monovalent cation types used in the first perovskite precursor and the second perovskite precursor are the same; para. 0026);
coating (Xie: coating; para. 0056) a solvent (Xie: first auxiliary layer 14 from first perovskite precursor solution, second auxiliary layer 24 from second perovskite precursor solution; para. 0056, 0061) on a surface (Xie: top surface of 13 and bottom surface of perovskite layer 23; para. 0061) of the first light absorption layer (Xie: 13) and/or the second light absorption layer (Xie: second perovskite layer 23; para. 0061, similar to 242 of Noh).
Xie and Noh are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of semiconductor devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed method to modify the first light absorption layer including the perovskite material and coating a solvent on a surface of the first light absorption layer and/or the second light absorption layer as taught by Xie into Noh
Doing so would realize the auxiliary layers coated on the perovskite layers to reduce the energy required for bonding between the grains and promoting bonding between the surfaces of perovskite layers (Xie: para. 0056).
Regarding claim 3, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent (Xie: fig. 1, 14, 24) is coated to increase a bonding strength (Xie: promoting the bonding strength; para. 0056) of the first light absorption layer (Xie: 13) and the second light absorption layer (Xie: 23).
Regarding claim 4, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, including the solvent (Noh: solvent for perovskite layer).
Noh in view of Xie as applied to claim 1 above fails to explicitly teach the solvent has a polarity of 2 to 6.
However, Noh teaches the solvent (solvent for perovskite layer) has a polarity up to 2.7 (chlorobenzene has a Polarity Index of 2.7; para. 0292 and https://macro.lsu.edu/howto/solvents/polarity%20index.htm), which overlaps the range of polarity of 2 to 6.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed method to have modified the polarity range from up to 2.7 to 2 to 6.
Here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (MPEP Chapter 2100-Section 2144.05-Optimization of Ranges).
Regarding claim 5, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the coating (Xie: fig. 1, 14, 24 is coated) is performed by a method selected from the group consisting of spin coating, bar coating, inkjet printing, nozzle printing, spray coating, slot die coating, gravure printing, screen printing, electrohydrodynamic jet printing, electrospray, and combinations thereof (Xie: spin coating, screen printing; para. 0052).
Regarding claim 6, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the bonding (Noh: fig. 7, bonding 241, 242) is performed by a hot-pressing process (Noh: heating and pressurization; para. 0276) using a machining pressure (Noh: pressure of 60 MPa; para. 0276) of a manpower press (Noh: BRI: manpower to close the chamber) and a power press (Noh: power pressure up to 60 MPa).
Regarding claim 7, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent (Noh: solvent for perovskite layer) is at least one selected from the group consisting of isopropyl alcohol, tert- butyl alcohol, acetonitrile, toluene, ether, chlorobenzene, ethanol, acetone, and combinations thereof (Noh: chlorobenzene; para. 0292).
Regarding claim 8, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first substrate (Noh: fig. 7, 210 includes ITO or FTO coated transparent substrate; para. 0095) and the second substrate (Noh: fig. 5, 130 includes ITO or FTO-coated transparent substrate; para. 0126) each includes at least one selected from the group consisting of FTO, ITO, IZO, ZnO-Ga2O3, ZnO-A1203, SnO2-Sb2O3, and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 9, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the electron transport layer (Noh: fig. 7, 230) includes at least one selected from the group consisting of SnO2, TiO2, ZrO, A1203, ZnO, W03, Nb2O5, TiSrO3, and combinations thereof (Noh: TiO2-based or Al2O3-based materials; para. 0229).
Regarding claim 10, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first light absorption layer (Noh: fig. 7, 241) and the second light absorption layer (Noh: 242 can also have three-dimensional structures; para. 0184) each independently includes the perovskite material (Noh: perovskite precursor for perovskite layer) represented by the following Chemical Formula 1 or 2:
[Chemical Formula 1]
RMX3 (Noh: three-dimensional structures CMX3; para. 0098)
[Chemical Formula 2]
R4MX6
(In Chemical Formulas 1 and 2 above,
R is an alkali metal, and a Ci-24 is substituted or unsubstituted alkyl group (Noh: C is an organic cation may be alkyl group; para. 0102), and when R is substituted, the substituent is an amino group, a hydroxyl group, a cyano group, a halogen group, a nitro group, or a methoxy group (Noh: substituted with amine, hydroxyl, cyano, halogen, nitro or methoxy group; para. 0102),
M includes a metal cation (Noh: divalent metal cation M; para. 0104) selected from the group consisting of Pb, Sn, Ge, Cu, Ni, Co, Fe, Mn, Cr, Pd, Cd, Yb, and combinations thereof (Noh: Pb2+, Cu2+, Ni2+, Co2+, Fe2+, Mn2+, Cr2+, Pd2+, Cd2+, Yb2+, Sn2+, and Ge2+; para. 0104), and
X includes a halide anion (Noh: monovalent anion X may be a halide material; para. 0105) or a chalcogenide anion).
Regarding claim 11, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the hole transport layer (Noh: fig. 7, 250) includes at least one selected from the group consisting of Spiro- OMeTAD, PEDOT:PSS, G-PEDOT, PANI:PSS, PANI:CSA, PDBT, P3HT, PCPDTBT, PCDTBT, PTAA, MoO3, V205, NiO, W03, CuI, CuSCN, and combinations thereof (Noh: spiro-OMeTAD, PEDOT:PSS, P3HT; para. 0259).
Regarding claim 12, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the electrode includes (Noh: fig. 7, 260) at least one selected from the group consisting of Au, Ag, Pt, Ni, Cu, In, Ru, Pd, Rh, Mo, Ir, Os, C, a conductive polymer, and combinations thereof (Noh: Au, Ag, Pt, Pd, Cu, C; para. 0261).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Xie as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 111969113).
Regarding claim 2, Noh in view of Xie further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the solvent (Xie: fig. 1, 14 ,24 and Noh: solvent for perovskite layer) is coated between the first light absorption layer (Xie: 13) and the second light absorption layer (Xie: 23).
Noh in view of Xie fails to explicitly teach the solvent is coated to reduce a surface roughness of the first light absorption layer.
However, Zhang teaches the solvent (Zhang: residual high boiling point solvent; para. 0036) is to reduce a surface roughness (Zhang: a smooth surface and a small surface roughness; para. 0038) of the first light absorption layer (Zhang: perovskite active layer A; para. 0036, similar to 241 of Noh).
Zhang, Xie and Noh are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of semiconductor devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed method to add the solvent is coated to reduce a surface roughness as taught by Zhang.
Doing so would realize process with solvent to improve the surface roughness and the characteristics of perovskite films (Zhang: para. 0038).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on Sep. 16th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to pages 6-10 of applicant’s response of claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103.
Applicant submits "It appears that for the purposes of Noh, having a smooth bonding surface is not required. However, adding such additional steps will add additional complexities and costs to Noh, that do not appear to be necessary for the purposes of Noh. Accordingly, Applicant submits that the proposed modifications of Noh (according to Xie) appear to render Noh being modified unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Accordingly, there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification. "
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
As cited in para. 0056 of Xie, Xie teaches coating a solvent (14, 24) to reduce the energy required for bonding between the grains and promoting bonding between the surfaces of perovskite layers. The main motivation of the solvent is coated to promote the bonding strength between two perovskite layers because of reducing the energy required for bonding and the smooth bonding surface is just additional benefit. A stronger bond would improve reliability by preventing delamination, which is necessary for the purposes of Noh. In addition, coat the solvent is not adding a step and is a suitable alternative bonding method. As result, given a broadest reasonable interpretation, Noh in view of Xie teaches all limitations of claims 1 with motivation. Details of rejections are discussed above.
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 ZHIJUN XU whose telephone number is (571)270-3447. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am-5pm ET.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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.
/ZHIJUN XU/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/BRIAN TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 2818