Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/070,267

Methods for Forming Perovskite Material Layers

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 28, 2022
Examiner
PENNY, TABATHA L
Art Unit
1712
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Cubicpv Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
46%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 1m
To Grant
68%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 46% of resolved cases
46%
Career Allow Rate
260 granted / 566 resolved
-19.1% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
596
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
59.9%
+19.9% vs TC avg
§102
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 566 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Election/Restrictions Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/22/2025. 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 1-10 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. The dependent claims do not cure the deficiency. The term “thin” in claims 1, 4, 8, and 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “thin” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination, any thickness will meet the claimed limitation. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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) 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Irwin (US 2020/0161127). Regarding Claim 1, Irwin teaches a method comprising: forming a lead halide precursor thin film, wherein forming the lead halide precursor thin film comprises: depositing a lead halide precursor ink onto a substrate; drying the lead halide precursor ink to form a first thin film; and annealing the first thin film ([0238]); and forming a perovskite material layer, wherein forming the perovskite material layer comprises: depositing a benzylammonium halide precursor ink onto the first thin film; drying the benzylammonium halide precursor ink; depositing a formamidinium halide precursor ink onto the benzylammonium halide precursor ink; drying the formamidinium halide precursor ink to form a second thin film; and annealing the second thin film ([0239]). Regarding Claim 2, Irwin teaches wherein the lead halide comprises lead (II) iodide ([0238]). Regarding Claim 3, Irwin teaches wherein the lead halide precursor ink is deposited onto the substrate through blade coating or slot die coating ([0232]). Regarding Claim 4, Irwin teaches wherein the first thin film is annealed at 50 C for 10 minutes ([0232]). Regarding Claim 5, Irwin teaches wherein the benzylammonium halide comprises benzylammonium iodide ([0237]). Regarding Claim 6, Irwin teaches wherein the formamidinium halide comprises formamidinium iodide ([0237]). Regarding Claim 7, Irwin teaches wherein the benzylammonium halide precursor ink and the formamidinium halide precursor ink are deposited onto the substrate through slot die coating ([0227], [0232]). Regarding Claim 8, Irwin teaches wherein second thin film is annealed at 157 C for 5 minutes ([0239]). Regarding Claim 9, Irwin teaches wherein the lead halide precursor ink is deposited onto a nickel oxide substrate ([0238]). 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. 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. 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. Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US 2020/0161127). Regarding Claim 10, Irwin teaches wherein the nickel oxide substrate is formed by a process comprising the steps of depositing a thin nickel oxide film. Irwin teaches the metal oxide films formed by depositing precursor ink on an electrode material to form a third thin film; and annealing the third thin film ([0109]). Irwin does not explicitly teach the embodiment of a nickel oxide precursor material; however, Irwin teaches precursor ink depositing and annealing is a known method of forming the oxide thin film. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the nickel oxide film of Irwin to be formed by a coating method as suggested by the reference because Irwin teaches it is a known method of forming the oxide thin film. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABATHA L PENNY whose telephone number is (571)270-5512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00. 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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 5712721418. 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. /TABATHA L PENNY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601862
LAMELLAR PARTICLES AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599962
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING ADDITIVE POWDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12580176
STRUCTURED COMPOSITE MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576429
METHOD OF WETTING LOW SURFACE ENERGY SUBSTRATE AND A SYSTEM THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576427
APPARATUS AND METHODS USING COATINGS FOR METAL APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
46%
Grant Probability
68%
With Interview (+22.4%)
4y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 566 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month