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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 12th, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed November 12th, 2025 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The drawing objections are withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The 112(a) rejections of claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-18, 20-23 are withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The 112(b) rejection of claim 5 is withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The rejections based over Sheats et al. are maintained.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 11-12, 14-18, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sheats et al. (US 2007/0295385 A1).
In view of Claim 1, as best understood by the Examiner, Sheats et al. teaches a roll (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142): comprising a laminate (Paragraph 0142) comprising: a plurality of solar cells, wherein the plurality of solar cells comprises: a first solar cell, a second solar cell, and a third solar cell (Figure 14, #10 & Paragraph 0126), wherein the first solar cell and the second solar cell are separated in a first direction by a first distance (Figure 14, the gap between the leftmost solar cell 10 and the middle solar cell 10), wherein the second solar cell and the third solar cell are separated in the first direction by a second distance (Figure 14, the gap between the middle solar cell 10 and the rightmost solar cell 10), wherein each of the first, second, and third solar cells comprises: a width in the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the width is in the “x” direction), and a length in a second direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration), wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration). Sheats et al. discloses a first encapsulant, wherein the first encapsulant encapsulates the plurality of solar cells (Figure 14, #300 encapsulates solar cells #10), and wherein the first encapsulant includes a first surface (Figure 14, #300 top surface), and a second surface opposite the first surface (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface), a front sheet, wherein the front sheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #320 top surface) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the front sheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface), wherein the second surface of the front sheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface) is adjacent the first surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 top surface); and a backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack – Paragraph 0133 – layer 350 may comprise “four or more discrete layers”), wherein the backsheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #350 top surface of the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #340 bottom surface of the bottom layer of the five layer stack), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – the bottom layer of the five layer stack) is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface),
a support layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “middle” layer of the five layer stack), wherein the support layer is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300) and above the back sheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack), and the support layer includes an upper surface (Figure 14, #350 middle layer top surface) and a lower surface opposite the upper surface Figure 14, #350 middle layer bottom surface), and
a second encapsulant wherein the second encapsulant encapsulants the support layer with a first layer and a second layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “second” and “fourth” layer), wherein at least a portion of the first layer would be above the upper surface of the support layer, thus a first portion would be disposed above the upper surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the second layer of the five layer stack would be above the middle layer), and at least a portion of the second layer would be below the lower surface of the support layer, thus a second portion disposed below the lower surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the five layer stack would be below the middle layer), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack) would be adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the stack is between the middle layer and the bottom layer).
and wherein the widths of the first, second, and third solar cells, and the first and second distances are sized to permit at least a portion of the first surface of the frontsheet to be juxtaposed circumferentially with at least a portion of the second surface of the backsheet (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142-0143).
Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14
PNG
media_image1.png
457
875
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 2, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the backsheet comprises a thermoplastic polyolefin (Figure 14, #356 & Paragraph 0135 – bottommost layer).
In view of Claim 4, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches a longitudinal axis, wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis and the second direction is parallel to the longitudinal axis (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 18, below).
Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 18
PNG
media_image2.png
589
816
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 5, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – bottommost layer of the five layer stack) contacts the second layer of the second encapsulant (Figure 14, fourth layer of the five layer stack adjacent to the bottommost layer of the five layer stack).
In view of Claim 6, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the frontsheet (Figure 14, #320) contacts the first surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 top surface).
In view of Claim 7, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the frontsheet comprises a transparent material (Figure 14, #320 & Paragraph 0127 – “sufficient transparency).
In view of Claim 8, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 7. Sheats et al. teaches that the transparent material comprises at least one polymer (Paragraph 0129).
In view of Claim 11, Sheats et al. teaches a method comprising obtaining a roll (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142): comprising a laminate (Paragraph 0142) comprising: a plurality of solar cells, wherein the plurality of solar cells comprises: a first solar cell, a second solar cell, and a third solar cell (Figure 14, #10 & Paragraph 0126), wherein the first solar cell and the second solar cell are separated in a first direction by a first distance (Figure 14, the gap between the leftmost solar cell 10 and the middle solar cell 10), wherein the second solar cell and the third solar cell are separated in the first direction by the first distance (Figure 14, the gap between the middle solar cell 10 and the rightmost solar cell 10), wherein each of the first, second, and third solar cells comprises: a width in the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the width is in the “x” direction), and a length in a second direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration), wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration). Sheats et al. discloses a first encapsulant, wherein the first encapsulant encapsulates the plurality of solar cells (Figure 14, #300 encapsulates solar cells #10), and wherein the first encapsulant includes a first surface (Figure 14, #300 top surface), and a second surface opposite the first surface (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface), a front sheet, wherein the front sheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #320 top surface) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the frontsheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface), wherein the second surface of the frontsheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface) is adjacent the first surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 top surface); and a backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack – Paragraph 0133 – layer 350 may comprise “four or more discrete layers”), wherein the backsheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #350 top surface of the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #340 bottom surface of the bottom layer of the five layer stack), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – the bottom layer of the five layer stack) is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface),
a support layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “middle” layer of the five layer stack), wherein the support layer is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300) and above the back sheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack), and the support layer includes an upper surface (Figure 14, #350 middle layer top surface) and a lower surface opposite the upper surface Figure 14, #350 middle layer bottom surface), and
a second encapsulant wherein the second encapsulant encapsulants the support layer with a first layer and a second layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “second” and “fourth” layer), wherein at least a portion of the first layer would be above the upper surface of the support layer, thus a first portion would be disposed above the upper surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the second layer of the five layer stack would be above the middle layer), and at least a portion of the second layer would be below the lower surface of the support layer, thus a second portion disposed below the lower surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the five layer stack would be below the middle layer), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack) would be adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the stack is between the middle layer and the bottom layer).
and wherein the widths of the first, second, and third solar cells, and the first and second distances are sized to permit at least a portion of the first surface of the frontsheet to be juxtaposed circumferentially with at least a portion of the second surface of the backsheet (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142-0143), and unrolling the roll so as to install the laminate on a roof deck, wherein the second surface of the backsheet is juxtaposed with a surface of the roof deck (Figs. 18-19 & Paragraph 0142-0144).
Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14
PNG
media_image1.png
457
875
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 12, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. teaches that unrolling the roll comprises unrolling the roll so as to install the laminate directly on the roof deck without any intervening member between the laminate and the roof deck (Figs. 18-19 & Paragraph 0142-0144).
In view of Claim 14, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. teaches that the roof deck can take the form of a flat roof deck (Paragraph 0144).
In view of Claim 15, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. teaches that the roof deck can take the form of a sloped roof deck (Paragraph 0144).
In view of Claim 16, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the backsheet comprises a thermoplastic polyolefin (Figure 14, #356 & Paragraph 0135).
In view of Claim 17, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. teaches that the frontsheet comprises a transparent material (Figure 14, #320 & Paragraph 0127 – “sufficient transparency).
In view of Claim 18, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 17. Sheats et al. teaches that the transparent material comprises at least one polymer (Paragraph 0129).
In view of Claim 21, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. teaches that the materials of the support layer can comprising thermoplastic polyolefin (Paragraph 0135).
In view of Claim 23, as best understood by the Examiner, Sheats et al. teaches a roll (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142): comprising a laminate (Paragraph 0142) comprising: a plurality of solar cells, wherein the plurality of solar cells comprises: a first solar cell, a second solar cell, and a third solar cell (Figure 14, #10 & Paragraph 0126), wherein the first solar cell and the second solar cell are separated in a first direction by a first distance (Figure 14, the gap between the leftmost solar cell 10 and the middle solar cell 10), wherein the second solar cell and the third solar cell are separated in the first direction by a second distance (Figure 14, the gap between the middle solar cell 10 and the rightmost solar cell 10), wherein each of the first, second, and third solar cells comprises: a width in the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the width is in the “x” direction), and a length in a second direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration), wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (See Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14, below – the length is in the “z” direction – see Fig. 15 for spatial configuration). Sheats et al. discloses a first encapsulant, wherein the first encapsulant encapsulates the plurality of solar cells (Figure 14, #300 encapsulates solar cells #10), and wherein the first encapsulant includes a first surface (Figure 14, #300 top surface), and a second surface opposite the first surface (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface), a front sheet, wherein the front sheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #320 top surface) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the frontsheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface), wherein the second surface of the frontsheet (Figure 14, #320 bottom surface) is adjacent the first surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 top surface); and a backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack – Paragraph 0133 – layer 350 may comprise “four or more discrete layers”), wherein the backsheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #350 top surface of the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #340 bottom surface of the bottom layer of the five layer stack), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – the bottom layer of the five layer stack) is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface),
a support layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “middle” layer of the five layer stack), wherein the support layer is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300) and above the back sheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack), and the support layer includes an upper surface (Figure 14, #350 middle layer top surface) and a lower surface opposite the upper surface Figure 14, #350 middle layer bottom surface), and
a second encapsulant wherein the second encapsulant encapsulants the support layer with a first layer and a second layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “second” and “fourth” layer), wherein at least a portion of the first layer would be above the upper surface of the support layer, thus a first portion would be disposed above the upper surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the second layer of the five layer stack would be above the middle layer), and at least a portion of the second layer would be below the lower surface of the support layer, thus a second portion disposed below the lower surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the five layer stack would be below the middle layer), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack) would be adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the stack is between the middle layer and the bottom layer).
and wherein the widths of the first, second, and third solar cells, and the first and second distances are sized to permit at least a portion of the first surface of the frontsheet to be juxtaposed circumferentially with at least a portion of the second surface of the backsheet (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142-0143). Sheats et al. teaches that the frontsheet is juxtaposed circumferentially with at least a portion of the backsheet (Figure 18 & Paragraph 0142).
Annotated Sheats et al. Figure 14
PNG
media_image1.png
457
875
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 10, 22, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheats et al. (US 2007/0295385 A1) in view of Hem-Jensen (US 2020/0343397 A1).
In view of Claim 10, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. does not disclose a configuration where the first encapsulant and the second encapsulant comprise a same material
Hem-Jensen discloses a configuration where a plurality of solar cells are encapsulated by a first encapsulant that comprises EVA (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, below & Paragraph 0091) and a second encapsulant that comprises EVA (Figure 13, #5 & Paragraph 0117). Hem-Jensen discloses that a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cells (Paragraph 0012), and often it is desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles (Paragraph 0011). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to adopt the configuration of Hem-Jensen in Sheats et al. such that first encapsulant and the second encapsulant comprise a same material for the advantages of having a configuration that has a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cell and because it is often desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles.
Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13
PNG
media_image3.png
673
1149
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 20, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. does not disclose a configuration where the first encapsulant and the second encapsulant comprise a same material
Hem-Jensen discloses a configuration where a plurality of solar cells are encapsulated by a first encapsulant that comprises EVA (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, below & Paragraph 0091) and a second encapsulant that comprises EVA (Figure 13, #5 & Paragraph 0117). Hem-Jensen discloses that a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cells (Paragraph 0012), and often it is desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles (Paragraph 0011). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to adopt the configuration of Hem-Jensen in Sheats et al. such that first encapsulant and the second encapsulant comprise a same material for the advantages of having a configuration that has a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cell and because it is often desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles.
Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13
PNG
media_image3.png
673
1149
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In view of Claim 22, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Sheats et al. does not teach that the backsheet includes a first layer and a second layer wherein the first layer of the backsheet is adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant.
Hem-Jensen teaches a backsheet includes a first layer (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, above, #2 bottommost layer) and a second layer (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, above, #6 bottommost layer), wherein the first layer of the backsheet (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, above, #2 bottommost layer) is adjacent to the second layer (See Annotated Hem-Jensen Figure 13, above). Hem-Jensen discloses that a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cells (Paragraph 0012), and often it is desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles (Paragraph 0011). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to adopt the configuration of Hem-Jensen in Sheats et al. such that the backsheet includes a first layer and a second layer wherein the first layer of the backsheet is adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant for the advantages of having a configuration that has a high degree of flexibility is available when designing the appearances of solar cell and because it is often desirable that solar modules should show saturated colors and have a homogenous look from different angles.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheats et al. (US 2007/0295385 A1) in view of Okawa et al. (US 2018/0316302 A1).
In view of Claim 13, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. does not disclose welding the laminate to the roof deck.
Okawa et al. teaches that a laminate can be bonded to a roof deck using any appropriate method that includes welding (Paragraph 0015). In the instant case, there are several methods to attach a laminate to a roof deck and their functions are known in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the known method of welding a laminate to a roof deck and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. See MPEP 2143, I, B.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheats et al. (US 2007/0295385 A1) in view of Iakovlev (US 2021/0211087 A1).
In view of Claim 13, Sheats et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Sheats et al. does not disclose welding the laminate to the roof deck.
Iakovlev discloses welding a laminate to a roof deck (Figure 1, #2 is laminated to #6 – Paragraph 0009 & 0022). Iakovlev teaches that the problem of the invention is to develop a simple, repairable device for attaching flexible solar panels to a PVC roofing membrane (Paragraph 0008). Iakovlev also discloses that previous methods of attaching laminates to roof decks using other adhesives are prone to gradual degradation of adhesion properties when exposed to atmospheric phenomena, which include, first of all, ultraviolet radiation and temperature drops (Paragraph 0007). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate the method of attaching a laminate to a roof deck via welding as disclosed by Iakovlev for Sheats et al. laminate for the advantages of having a method of attachment that is simple and allows the solar panels to be repairable and obviates other known problems of adhesive attachment methods such as gradual degradation of adhesion properties when exposed to atmospheric phenomena, which include, first of all, ultraviolet radiation and temperature drops.
Priority
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 17/900,604, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. In the instant case, Application No. 17/900,604 provides no support for a “roll” or “the first and second distances are sized to permit at least a portion of the first surface of the frontsheet to be juxtaposed circumferentially with at least a portion of the second surface of the back sheet” in reference to Claim 1, and in reference to claim 11, Application No. 17/900,60 provided no support for “A method, comprising: obtaining a roll”, and “unrolling the roll so as to install the laminate on a roof deck, wherein the second surface of the backsheet is juxtaposed with a surface of the roof deck”. Accordingly, the effective filing date of the instant application for the purposes of relevant prior art is considered to be December 23rd, 2022.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that Sheats et al. does not disclose a second encapsulant that encapsulates a support layer above and below within the laminate. The Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out to Applicant that Sheats et al. discloses a backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack – Paragraph 0133 – layer 350 may comprise “four or more discrete layers”), wherein the backsheet includes a first surface (Figure 14, #350 top surface of the “bottom” layer of the five layer stack) and a second surface opposite the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #340 bottom surface of the bottom layer of the five layer stack), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 – the bottom layer of the five layer stack) is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300 bottom surface),a support layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “middle” layer of the five layer stack), wherein the support layer is below the second surface of the first encapsulant (Figure 14, #300) and above the back sheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack), and the support layer includes an upper surface (Figure 14, #350 middle layer top surface) and a lower surface (Figure 14, #350 middle layer bottom surface), and
a second encapsulant wherein the second encapsulant encapsulants the support layer with a first layer and a second layer (Figure 14, #350 – in particular the “second” and “fourth” layer), wherein at least a portion of the first layer would be above the upper surface of the support layer, thus a first portion is disposed above the upper surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the second layer of the five layer stack would be above the middle layer), and at least a portion of the second layer would be below the lower surface of the support layer, thus a second portion would be disposed below the lower surface of the support layer (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the five layer stack would be below the middle layer), wherein the first surface of the backsheet (Figure 14, #350 the bottom layer of the five layer stack) would be adjacent to the second layer of the second encapsulant (Figure 14, the fourth layer of the stack is between the middle layer and the bottom layer).
Applicant argues that Sheat’s protective films and barrier do not meet the “second encapsulant” requirement because Sheat’s barrier/protective layers are taught for encapsulating cells or cell strings and as module level barrier films. The Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out to Applicant that Sheats et al. discloses that the multi-layer stack 350 is an “encapsulant layer”, thus the layers the Examiner relies upon in the rejection of record are in fact, disclosed as being associated as an encapsulant. Furthermore, Applicant’s structure as claimed is identical to Applicant’s claimed second structure of a support layer that’s sandwiched by two other layers, this is shown in Figure 13 of the instant application where top layer 85, is a first portion the second encapsulant above the support layer 80, and the bottom layer 85 is the second portion of the second encapsulant, which is simply a 3-ply stack of layers. Applicant has not claimed any material differences, thus Sheats et al. is disclosing the same 3-ply layer stack as Applicant’s claimed configuration. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, this argument is unpersuasive.
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 DANIEL P MALLEY JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-1638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm EST.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 571-272-1307. 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.
/DANIEL P MALLEY JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726