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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions of Groups II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/29/2023.
Applicant's election with traverse of the election of Species a in the reply filed on 8/29/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden. This is found persuasive because the species of groups (a) to (d) are known groups to bind with lead, as well as, as argued all are lead-sequestration compounds used in perovskite materials devices.
The requirement is withdrawn. All species will be search together with the pending claims 1-15, as appropriate.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 5-7, and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Chen et al (Nature Energy, 2020).
Regarding claim 1: Chen discloses a perovskite solar module comprising: a lead adsorbing coating composition comprising: a cation-exchange resin (CER), wherein the CER provides lead-bonding sites having sulfonate groups (see abstract; page 1003, right column, line 14 to page 1004, right column, line 11; and fig.1).
Regarding claim 4: Chen discloses that the CER is an organo-sulfate (see page 1003, right column, line 14 to page 1004, right column, line 11; and fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5: Chen teaching that the CER is incorporated into carbon-based electrodes to form a lead-adsorbing coating layer, wherein the lead-adsorbing coating layer prevents lead leakage from the perovskite solar module into water (see abstract; page 1003, right column, line 14 to page 1004, right column, line 11; and page 1007, right column, line 23 to page 1008, right column, line 8).
Regarding claims 5-7 and 9-11: Chen discloses that the carbon-based electrodes are made from carbon paste containing graphite flakes having a size of a few microns and carbon blacks having a size of 50-100 nm, wherein carbon black and graphite are solid materials and insoluble in water (see page 1007, right column, line 23 to page 1008, right column, line 8).
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Xiao et al (Sci. Adv., 2021).
Regarding claim 1: Xaio discloses a perovskite module comprising: a lead-adsorbing ionogel composition comprising: one or more lead-bonding sites including carboxylate and phosphate groups (see abstract; internal page 1, right column, line 36 to internal page 2, right column, line 14; and fig.1).
Regarding claim 3: Xaio discloses that the lead-adsorbing ionogel composition comprises an ionic liquid of tributyl (methyl)phosphonium dimethyl phosphate providing the lead-bonding sites (see internal page 1, right column, line 36 to internal page 2, right column, line 14; and fig. 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 12-13: Xiao discloses that the lead-adsorbing ionogel composition comprises the lead-binding monomers of acrylic acid covalently cross-linked by the covalent cross-linker of methylene-bis-acrylamide, wherein the composition can prevent water permeation into the module (see abstract; internal page 1, right column, line 36 to internal page 2, right column, line 14; and fig.1). It is deemed the ionogel is inherently water insoluble since it is a crosslinked gel and taught as preventing water permeation based upon this teachings.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Mokhtar (ChemComm., 2021).
Regarding claims 1, 8-9 and 11: Mokhtar discloses bioinspired scaffolds that sequester lead ions in physically damaged high efficiency perovskite solar cells—see title. Mokhtar that a Pb-sequestering agent (hydroxyapatite: HAP) is blended with TiO2 nanoparticles (titania, 30 nm) as scaffolds (see page 994, right column, line 16 to page 995, left column, line 30).
Regarding claim 3: Hydroxyapatite has the general formula Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2, which as phosphate sites—see page 994, right column, line 15.
Regarding claim 5: Both hydroxyapatite and TiO2 are water insoluble.
Regarding claim 6: Mokhtar discloses the use of TiO2 nanoparticles—see page 994, right column, line 16 to page 995, left column, line 30.
Regarding claim 7: Mokhtar sets forth obtaining dispersions of the blended HAP and TiO2, wherein said dispersion where spin coated and annealed to obtain said HAP/TiO2 scaffolds—see page 995, left column, line 3.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Park et al (KR10-1811243).
Regarding claim 1: Park discloses a perovskite solar cell comprising: a conductive compound providing lead-binding sites having carboxylate groups, wherein the conductive compound prevents lead leakage from the perovskite solar cell (see paragraphs [0008], [0009], [0057]; and fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2: Park discloses that the conductive compound comprises EDTA (see paragraphs [0009], [0057]; and fig. 2).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Mokhtar as applied to claims 1, 4-7 and 9-11 above.
Regarding claim 15: Both Park and Mokhtar are deemed to anticipate the perovskite material device of claim 1. Neither Park nor Mokhtar set forth said material is an anti-reflective coating. However, both set forth said perovskite material are used in solar modulus. It is deemed a skilled artisan could envision the perovskite material in any aspect of said modulus suspectable to lead leakage in an interest to make said solar modules safe for the environment and consumer in absence of evidence to the contrary and/or unexpected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The above cited reference do not expressly teach and/or render obvious the addition of the claimed inorganic additives.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANZA L MCCLENDON whose telephone number is (571)272-1074. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, Heidi Riviere-Kelley can be reached at 571-270-1831. 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.
/SANZA L. McCLENDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
SMc