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 .
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 and 4-8 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the emitter region having outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate…wherein the substrate is continuous between the outermost sidewalls of the substrate when the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region are formed”. However, nowhere does the instant specification discloses this feature.
The instant specification has only disclosed in paragraph [0075] that “[r]eferring to part (A) of Figure 3, a method of fabricating a solar cell includes forming an emitter region in a substrate 300, at a light-receiving surface of the substrate 300. Referring to parts (B) or (C) a trench is formed in the emitter region. A passivation layer 218 or 268 is formed on the light-receiving surface of the substrate and in the trench. The substrate is cleaved to form a solar cell having sidewalls and an emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell.” It can be seen that the emitter region does not have outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate until the substrate is cleaved. Additionally, Morad outlines the exact same procedure, where trenches are formed in the emitter region in Figure 81D that are filled with the passivation layer and then the substrate is cleaved to form individual solar cells in Figure 81J.
Claims 1 and 6 go on to recite “forming a passivation layer on a top and along the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region to passivate the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region prior to cleaving the substrate.” As stated above, the passivation layer is not formed on the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region because the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region has not been established or formed yet. It will only be established after cleaving the substrate, as demonstrated by Figures 81D and 81J of Morad, in which the instant specification lacks figures to show each step of the method recited. Prior to cleaving the substrate, the only thing present would be trenches in the emitter region, which is stated in paragraph [0075] of the instant specification, as reproduced above. There would be no way for one of ordinary skill in the art to ascertain what is the “laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region” without further guidance. Further, the first clause states “the emitter region having outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate,” where given the substrate has not been cleaved, it would refer to the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region prior to cleaving. However, paragraph [0075] has only disclosed forming trenches in the emitter region, such that it is unclear how a trench is formed at the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region prior to cleaving when a trench would require walls on both sides by nature of the definition of a trench. Nowhere does the instant specification disclose forming a trench in the emitter region at the ends of the substrate as alleged. As shown in Figure 3, the trenches in question are not at the ends of the substrate or the “outermost sidewalls of the substrate” as recited. Similar deficiency is found in claim 6 with respect to “a semiconductor region” instead of an emitter region.
As mentioned previously, it appears Applicant intends to recite the final product of the solar cell as having a substrate with outermost sidewalls, as shown in Figures 2AA, 2BA, and 2CA, such that it is apparent above that the substrate is further cleaved to form the solar cell, and therefore the limitation directed to “the outermost sidewalls of the substrate” is referring to the final product that has not been formed and without any explicit recitations or figures for the method steps, it is not immediately clear if any relationship can be established between the supposed “outermost sidewalls of the substrate” and the outermost sidewalls of the emitter/semiconductor region and the passivation layer.
Therefore, the claims fail to comply with the written description requirement.
It is noted that the claims as originally filed on 10/24/2022 accurately describes the method steps as supported by the instant specification, such that the claims as originally filed is completely different from what the current claim set is trying to describe. Applicant is encouraged to review the instant specification and original claims to fully understand what the instant application has for support in terms of the method of making the solar cell.
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 and 4-8 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.
Claims 1 and 6 recite the limitation "a solar cell" in the last clause. However, the preamble already recites “a method of fabricating a solar cell,” such that it is unclear if the solar cell formed by the method is not the same solar cell as referenced in the preamble and is a completely different version of the solar cell in some way. Clarification is requested.
Additionally, claims 1 and 6 both recite “the semiconductor/emitter region having outermost sidewalls” in the first clause, but then recite “cleaving the substrate to form a solar cell having sidewalls” in the last clause, such that it is unclear how one is to obtain outermost sidewalls for the substrate in which the outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor/emitter region to be laterally retracted from prior to cleaving the substrate as recited, yet after cleaving the substrate to form the semiconductor/emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell in the last clause.
Further, it is unclear the difference between “the sidewalls of the solar cell” in the last clause and “the outermost sidewalls of the substrate”. Clarification is requested.
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.
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 and 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morad et al. (WO 2015/183827) in view of Choe et al. (KR 10 1139458; see English machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Morad discloses a method of fabricating a solar cell (7155a-7155d; [0606]-[0616]; Figures 81A-81J), the method comprising:
forming an emitter region (n+ doped a-Si:H layer 7110) on a substrate (wafer 7105 corresponding to a solar cell), at a light-receiving surface of the substrate ([0607]; see Figure 81B), the substrate having outermost sidewalls (see Figure 81D) and the emitter region having outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate to form laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region such that the outermost sidewalls of the substrate extend laterally beyond corresponding ones of the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region (it is disclosed in Figure 81D the emitter region 7110 is patterned to form isolation trenches 7112 ([00609]) and that the edges of the emitter region 7110 in solar cells 7155a-7155d are passivated by TCO layer 7120 ([00617]), which means the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region 7110 is also patterned. Also, in order to form uniform individual cells, the outermost edges of the emitter region 7110 would also be etched),
wherein the substrate is continuous between the outermost sidewalls of the substrate when the laterally retraced outermost sidewalls of the emitter region are formed (as set forth above; see Figure 81D);
forming a passivation layer (TCO layer 7120) on a top and along the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region to passivate the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter region prior to cleaving the substrate (it is disclosed the TCO layer 7120 coats the outer edges of layers 7110 and fills the trenches 7112 to passivate the surfaces of layer 7110; [0611]; see Figure 81F);
subsequent to forming the passivation layer, forming a plurality of conductive contacts (low temperature silver paste 7130) on the passivation layer prior to cleaving the substrate and is fired after drying (it is disclosed that the silver paste can be fired after drying; [00597]; see Figure 81J); and
subsequent to forming the plurality of conductive contacts, cleaving the substrate to form a solar cell having sidewalls and the emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell (at least 7155b and 7155c are solar cells in which the emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell; it is disclosed the solar cell strips are formed by dicing at the center of the trenches through mechanical cleaving; [00616]).
Morad does not expressly disclose the plurality of conductive contacts are formed through the passivation layer to contact the emitter region.
Choe discloses forming a front electrode made of silver paste that is applied to an anti-reflection layer and then is subjected to a firing process at a relatively low temperature, in which the front electrode passes through the anti-reflection layer to be in electrical contact with the emitter layer (pages 5 and 18-19; see Figure 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would have subjected the plurality of conductive contacts to a low temperature firing process, as taught by Choe, so that the low temperature silver paste would penetrate the passivation layer to be in contact with the emitter layer for good conductivity, as taught by Choe.
Regarding claim 6, Morad discloses a method of fabricating a solar cell (7155a-7155d; [0606]-[0616]; Figures 81A-81J), the method comprising:
forming a semiconductor region (n+ doped a-Si:H layer 7110) on a substrate (wafer 7105 corresponding to a solar cell), at a light-receiving surface of the substrate ([0607]; see Figure 81B), the substrate having outermost sidewalls (see Figure 81D) and the semiconductor region having outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate to form laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor region such that the outermost sidewalls of the substrate extend laterally beyond corresponding ones of the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor region (it is disclosed in Figure 81D the emitter region 7110 is patterned to form isolation trenches 7112 ([00609]) and that the edges of the emitter region 7110 in solar cells 7155a-7155d are passivated by TCO layer 7120 ([00617]), which means the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region 7110 is also patterned. Also, in order to form uniform individual cells, the outermost edges of the emitter region 7110 would also be etched),
wherein the substrate is continuous between the outermost sidewalls of the substrate when the laterally retraced outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor region are formed (as set forth above; see Figure 81D);
forming a passivation layer (TCO layer 7120) on a top and along the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor region to passivate the laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the semiconductor region prior to cleaving the substrate (it is disclosed the TCO layer 7120 coats the outer edges of layers 7110 and fills the trenches 7112 to passivate the surfaces of layer 7110; [0611]; see Figure 81F);
subsequent to forming the passivation layer, forming a plurality of conductive contacts (low temperature silver paste 7130) on the passivation layer prior to cleaving the substrate and is fired after drying (it is disclosed that the silver paste can be fired after drying; [00597]); and
subsequent to forming the plurality of conductive contacts, cleaving the substrate to form a solar cell having sidewalls and the semiconductor region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell (at least 7155b and 7155c are solar cells in which the emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell; it is disclosed the solar cell strips are formed by dicing at the center of the trenches through mechanical cleaving; [00616]).
Morad does not expressly disclose the plurality of conductive contacts are formed through the passivation layer to contact the semiconductor region.
Choe discloses forming a front electrode made of silver paste that is applied to an anti-reflection layer and then is subjected to a firing process at a relatively low temperature, in which the front electrode passes through the anti-reflection layer to be in electrical contact with the semiconductor region (pages 5 and 18-19; see Figure 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would have subjected the plurality of conductive contacts to a low temperature firing process, as taught by Choe, so that the low temperature silver paste would penetrate the passivation layer to be in contact with the semiconductor region for good conductivity, as taught by Choe.
Regarding claims 4 and 7, modified Morad discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region are retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate using laser ablation ([00609]).
Regarding claims 5 and 8, modified Morad discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the outermost sidewalls of the emitter region are retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate using an etch paste delivered by screen print or inkjet (chemical etching via inkjet wet patterning; [00609]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) rejection has been addressed by the amendments and that support for the amended claim language can be found in the specification. However, while the specification discloses forming trenches and passivation structures prior to cleaving the substrate, it is not what the amended claim language describes, as explained in the 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) rejection above.
It is further noted that paragraph [0078] of the instant specification states “[f]igure 13 is a flowchart 1300 representing various operations in a method of fabricating a solar cell, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. At operation 1302, the method involves forming an emitter region in a substrate, at a light-receiving surface of the substrate. At operation 1304, the method involves forming a trench in the emitter region. At operation 1306, the method involves forming a passivation layer on the light-receiving surface of the substrate and in the trench to passivate an emitter edge. At operation 1308, the method involves cleaving the substrate to form a solar cell having sidewalls and an emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell,” such that it is clear that the step of forming the emitter/semiconductor region does not involve any laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter/semiconductor region as recited in amended claims 1 and 6. Further, step 1306 only stated the forming of the passivation layer is in the trench in the emitter region and does not mention the emitter region to have any laterally retracted outermost sidewalls. It isn’t until step 1308 that states the substrate is cleaved to form an individual solar cell having sidewalls and an emitter region having sidewalls laterally retracted from the sidewalls of the solar cell due to the previously formed trench.
It is further noted that throughout the instant specification, only a single trench is disclosed to be formed in the emitter region. See paragraphs [0043], [0046], [0052], [0075], [0077], and [0078].
Therefore, Applicant’s argument that the 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) rejection has been addressed by the amendments was not found to be persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Morad does not teach forming conductive contacts through the passivation layer prior to cleaving the substrate and emitter sidewalls laterally retracted from substrate sidewalls.
However, it is noted that Choe was relied upon to teach forming conductive contacts that contact the emitter/semiconductor region through the passivation layer.
Applicant argues that Morad’s trenches are centered on cleavage planes whereas the present claims recite emitter or semiconductor regions having “outermost sidewalls laterally retracted from the outermost sidewalls of the substrate.” It is unclear the difference between Morad’s method and the claimed method. As previously stated, instant specification explicitly states in paragraph [0076] that “[r]eferring specifically to part (B) of Figure 3, in an embodiment, cleaving the substrate involves cleaving through the passivation layer in the trench to form cells 302 each having a passivation layer 224/226 in a respective recess, as described above in association with part (A) of Figure 2” and in paragraph [0052] that “the cleave performed needs to be within or proximate to the trench defined region. In one embodiment, a full separation region or full trench approach is used.” It is noted that because the instant claims refer to “laterally retracted outermost sidewalls of the emitter/semiconductor region,” it is clear the claims are directed to the embodiments of the invention as depicted in Figures 2A (A), 2B (A), and 2C (A) in which a full separation is created. Therefore, it appears the instant specification describes the method of forming the cleaved solar cell involves cleaving through the trench, such that it is unclear why Morad’s trenches being centered to the cleavage location would result in a different structure.
Applicant’s further arguments that Choe does not teach every element of claims 1 and 6 is a piecemeal analysis of the prior art when Choe was relied upon only to teach the above mentioned feature. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). It is unclear where the combination of Morad and Choe relied upon Applicant’s disclosure without any citation provided by Applicant.
Therefore, the arguments were not found to be persuasive.
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 CHRISTINA CHERN whose telephone number is (408)918-7559. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 AM-5:30 PM PT.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/CHRISTINA CHERN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights