DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Notes
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.1 7(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/10/2026 has been entered.
Remarks
Claims 1-2 and 4-7 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Claim 3 is amended.
Claims 10-12 are cancelled.
Claims 13-15 are new.
Claims 1-9 and 13-15 are pending.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 3, 8-9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (TiO2/RbPbI3 halide perovskite solar cells) in view of ZHANG II (Enhanced Power Conversion Efficiency of Perovskite Solar Cells with an Up-Conversion Material of Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ Tri-doped TiO2), with evidence provided by RICHARDS (The Mechanism of Iodine Reduction by TiO2 Electrons and the Kinetics of Recombination in Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells).
Regarding claim 3, JUNG teaches a composite that is an aggregate or a thin film comprising a perovskite structure as a main component (see the composite that is an aggregate or a thin film comprising a RbPbI3 structure as a main component; see Fig. 5a attached below), and additionally including a core-shell particle (see the core-shell particle with TiO2 core and RbPbI3 shell; see Fig. 5a attached below), wherein the core shell particle comprises a core-shell structure (see the TiO2 core - RbPbI3 shell structure), wherein the core shell particle comprises an inorganic nanoparticle (see the TiO2 nanoparticle in Fig. 5a attached below); and a coating layer (see the RbPbI3 coating layer) formed on a surface of the inorganic nanoparticle (see Fig. 5a attached below and Fig. 5c showing SEM image and EDAX elemental mapping), and formed of an inorganic perovskite (see the RbPbI3, which is an inorganic perovskite).
PNG
media_image1.png
366
612
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding the claimed “an inorganic nanoparticle having a light wavelength conversion ability that converts an absorbed long-wavelength light into a short-wavelength light; wherein main materials of the inorganic nanoparticle comprise a rare earth element”, JUNG teaches an inorganic nanoparticle (see the TiO2 nanoparticle) having a light wavelength conversion ability (TiO2 has a light wavelength conversion ability) and main materials of the inorganic nanoparticle (see TiO2 materials), but does not explicitly disclose the claimed “that converts an absorbed long-wavelength light into a short-wavelength light; a rare earth element”. However, ZHANG II discloses a TiO2/perovskite solar cell, wherein the Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ tri-doping into the TiO2 material presents an enhanced up-conversion emission, expands the spectral absorption of perovskite solar cells from visible light to near-infrared, and improves the performance of solar cells (see Abstract and Conclusions), wherein up-conversion materials in perovskite solar cells (PSCs) can convert NIR to visible light (see Background). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ tri-doping into the TiO2 nanoparticle in the device of JUNG as taught by ZHANG II, because the Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ tri-doping into the TiO2 presents an enhanced up-conversion emission, expands the spectral absorption of perovskite solar cells from visible light to near-infrared, and improves the performance of solar cells. Therefore, modified JUNG teaches an inorganic nanoparticle having a light wavelength conversion ability that converts an absorbed long-wavelength light into a short-wavelength light (The Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ tri-doped TiO2 nanoparticle has a light wavelength conversion ability that converts NIR (corresponding to the claimed “an absorbed long-wavelength light”) to visible light (corresponding to the claimed “a short-wavelength light”)), wherein main materials of the inorganic nanoparticle comprise a rare earth element (see Er, Yb).
Regarding claim 8, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 3.
JUNG teaches the inorganic nanoparticle is a particle having a diameter of 10 nm to 100 nm (see Experimental: A mesoporous TiO2 layer, which was prepared diluted
TiO2 paste (DYESOL-18NRT) with ethanol; An evidence provided by RICHARDS, 18NRT Dyesol contains TiO2 crystal with ~20 nm diameter), a thickness of the coating layer is 5% or more of the diameter of the inorganic nanoparticle (see the SEM image in Fig. 5a; The average diameter of TiO2 nanoparticles coated with RbPbI3 layer is measured as to about 25 nm; Based on the measurement, the thickness of the coating layer is calculated as to about 12.5% of the diameter of the TiO2 nanoparticle), wherein a coverage of the coating layer on the surface of the inorganic nanoparticle is 50% or more and 100% or less (see P52, It is important to note that most of the TiO2 layer was covered by the RbPbI3 perovskite layer and see Fig. 5c, SEM image and corresponding EDAX elemental mapping; The coating layer on the surface of the TiO2 nanoparticle is considered to be 100%), and the core-shell particle forms a layer while in contact with the perovskite structure (see Fig. 5a, 5c; The core-shell particle with TiO2 core and RbPbI3 shell forms a layer while in contact with the RbPbI3 structure).
Regarding claim 9, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 8.
JUNG teaches the coverage of the coating layer on the surface of the inorganic nanoparticle is 100% (see the rejection of claim 8; see 100%).
Regarding claim 13, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 3.
Modified JUNG teaches the absorbed long-wavelength light is near infrared light and the short-wavelength light is visible light or ultraviolet light (see the rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 14, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 8.
Modified JUNG teaches the absorbed long-wavelength light is near infrared light and the short-wavelength light is visible light or ultraviolet light (see the rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 15, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 9.
Modified JUNG teaches the absorbed long-wavelength light is near infrared light and the short-wavelength light is visible light or ultraviolet light (see the rejection of claim 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 3/10/2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant’s argument regarding that the prior art does not teach or suggest the core-shell structure in the amended claim 1 in P7, is not persuasive.
Fig. 5 of JUNG shows that TiO2 nanoparticle coated with RbPbI3 layer, which is a core-shell structure.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant’s argument regarding that the prior art does not teach or suggest the new limitation “that converts an absorbed long-wavelength light into a short-wavelength light” in the amended claim 1 in P7-P10, is not persuasive.
ZHANG II teaches Er3+-Yb3+-Li+ tri-doping into the TiO2 material, which provides upconversion emission. Modified JUNG in view of ZHANG II teaches all limitations required by the amended claim 1.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAE-SIK KANG whose telephone number is 571-272-3190. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am – 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew T. Martin can be reached on 571-270-7871. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAE-SIK KANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728