DETAILED ACTION
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) 2 and 8-14, 17-18, 21-22 and 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banerjee [US 20190074439] in view of Arai [US 20070054051] and Gao [CN 1556231].
Claim 2: Banerjee teaches a chemical vapor deposition of perovskite thin films [title], wherein the method includes heating an organic halide and sublimating the organic halide [0042, 0048]. Banerjee also teaches flowing a carrier gas over the precursor to carry the vaporized precursor to downstream where the substrate is located to deposit onto the substrate [0042]. Banerjee also teaches that a metal halide can be heated to form sublimated metal halide [0042, 0048], and flowing a carrier gas to flow the sublimated metal halide to the substrate to form a film [0042, 0048]. Banerjee also teaches that multiple deposition cycles are performed, and that when a second deposition is perform, the precursor can be different from those used in the previous cycle, and using multiple cycles a multilayer film can be prepared on the substrate with each layer being the same or different [0055]. Although Banerjee does not explicitly teach first flowing the organic halide and depositing onto the substrate and then flowing the metal halide to the substrate, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that since Banerjee does teaches that multiple deposition cycles with different precursors can be performed to form a multilayer a plurality of times, naturally a sequence of metal halide on organic halide would have occurred over the process of forming the multilayer. Banerjee also teaches the sublimation processing temperature for the organic temperature can be 199 degrees C [Table 1] and the sublimation processing temperature is 230 [Table 1]. Although Banerjee does not explicitly teach about 350 degrees, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the sublimation temperature so as produce sufficient amount of vapor to treat the substrate [0078], wherein BiI sublimation temperatures is roughly around 316+-2 degrees C [0078] at a desired film composition. Banerjee also teaches the process chamber pressure is about 1x10-4 Torr [0092]. Although Banerjee teaches providing the precursors in crucibles [0055], Banerjee does not appear to teach providing the first precursor in a second source tube and providing the second precursor (metal halide) in a first source tube. Arai is provided.
Arai teaches a deposition device with an evaporation source of different precursors [abstract], wherein the first precursor is in a second source tube, and the second precursor is in a first source tube [0077]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the deposition device taught by Arai so as to use separate source tubes for each precursor so as to better control the temperature of heating the precursors [0006].
Teaching of the prior art is aforementioned, where Banerjee teaches the process can be repeated three times [0128] of alternating layers (different multilayers) [0055]; but does not appear to teach providing the precursors between filter discs comprising silicon carbide. Gao is provided.
Gao teaches that in a compartment two ends are installed with foam ceramic filter plates [claim 1; pg 2, para 4]. Gao further teaches the filter plates are of silicon carbide [claim 2]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide two silicon carbide filter disks since Gao teaches such arrangement removes impurities from the gases [pg 2, para 4].
Claim 8-9: Banerjee teaches the carrier gas can be N2 (nitrogen gas) [0080].
Claim 10: Arai teaches the substrate can be fastened to a temperature controlled stage [0091; 0076; Fig. 5]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to reversibly fasten the substrate to a temperature controlled stage so as to allow for further processing such as affixing a mask thereto [0085; 0076].
Claim 11: Banerjee teaches the substrate temperature is controlled to 160 degrees [0052]; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the stage at the desired substrate temperature to heat the substrate to the desired substrate temperature. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognize that 160 degrees C would sufficiently read about 150 degrees C.
Claims 12-13: Banerjee teaches that pressure is selected so as to be effective in subliming the precursor pressure [0042]; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the pressure via routine experimentation as a workable parameter so as to sufficiently provide sublimed precursor to the substrate.
Claim 14 and 18: Banerjee teaches the exposing the substrate to the precursors and carrier gas for a predetermined period of time [0015].
Claim 17: Banerjee teaches the coating can be from 50nm or 500 nm and etc. [0054].
Claim 21: Banerjee teaches the process can be repeated twice [0101] or three times [0128].
Claim 22: Arai teaches the source tubes are oriented horizontally (arranged horizontally) [Fig. 2 or 3].
Claim 28: although the prior art does not explicitly teach the claimed growth rate, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the deposition rate as result effective variable through routine experimentation to achieve a particular film quality.
Claim 29: although the prior art does not explicitly teach the claimed film thickness it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the thickness through routine experimentation in absence of criticality.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banerjee in view of Arai as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Snaith [US 20170229249].
Teaching of the prior art is aforementioned, but does not appear to teach the limitations of claims 4-7. Snaith is provided.
Claims 4-7: Snaith teaches known methods for producing layers of organic-inorganic metal halide perovskite materials typically comprise vacuum processing a metal halide and a halide salt of organic component for instance PbI2 and Ch3NH3I (MAI) [0005]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these materials to form the perovskite film since Snaith teaches these materials are well known in the art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MANDY C LOUIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5353. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 1:00PM to 4:00PM 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, Timothy Meeks can be reached at (571)272-1423. 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.
/MANDY C LOUIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715