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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/22/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-7, 10, 17-18, 20-21, 55-57, and 59-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 109912458 A) in view of Norman (US 2004/0087143).
Regarding Claims 1, 55, 57, and 59-60, Sun teaches an optoelectronic device including a metal halide perovskite light absorbing surface coated by a cuprous iodide p-type semiconductor (pg. 4 8th para and last para.). Sun teaches a metal halide perovskite which can physically degrade at a temperature as claimed (e.g. FA0.85MA0.15Pb; Example 1). Sun does not explicitly teach the method of producing the cuprous iodide layer; therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to related art to determine an appropriate method of forming the layer.
Norman teaches a method of producing a layer of a copper(I) halide, comprising: providing a substrate ([0026], [0059]); and exposing the substrate to a vapor of halosilane ([0031]) and a vapor of a copper complex ([0034]), wherein the copper complex and halosilane react to produce a layer of copper(I) halide on the substrate ([0034], [0043]). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Sun to include an coating method, as suggested by Norman, because it is a known coating method in the art and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the structure of Sun with a coating method as in Norman.
Regarding Claim 2, Norman teaches the halosilane is a trialkylhalosilane ([0034]).
Regarding Claim 3, Norman teaches trimethylchlorosilane ([0034]) and alkyliodosilanes ([0031]). Norman does not explicitly teach trimethyliodosilane; however, Norman teaches alkyliodosilanes ([0031]) and suggests a trimethyl alkyl group is suitable for use in the alkylhalosilanes ([0034]). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select the alkyliodosilane of Norman to have a trimethyl alkyl group, as suggested by the reference, because Norman teaches an alkylhalosilane with a trimethyl alkyl group being suitable for use with the invention and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of predictability with any of the suggested alkyl groups of Norman.
Regarding Claim 4, Norman teaches alkyliodosilanes ([0031]) halogen-containing precursors, i.e. cuprous iodide product.
Regarding Claim 5, Norman teaches wherein the copper complex comprises an acetonato ligand ([0033]).
Regarding Claim 6, Norman teaches the copper complex comprises a vinyltrimethylsilane ligand ([0033]).
Regarding Claim 7, Norman teaches the copper complex is Cu(hfac)(L), wherein L is a neutral ligand ([0033]).
Regarding Claim 10, Norman teaches the copper complex is Cu(hfac)(vtms) (vinyltrimethylsilane (hexafluoroacetylacetonato) copper(I)) ([0033]).
Regarding Claim 17, Norman teaches the substrate is first exposed to the halosilane vapor ([0035]).
Regarding Claim 18, Norman teaches the precursors in sufficient concentrations to saturate exposed surfaces ([0035]). Norman does not explicitly teach a partial pressure or concentration of the halosilane vapor is from 10 to 500 times that of a copper complex vapor; however, Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05 II A. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to optimize the concentration of precursors, as suggested by Norman, in order to include the precursors in sufficient concentrations to saturate exposed surfaces, and in such an optimization one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at applicant’s claimed concentrations.
Regarding Claim 20, Norman teaches an alternative embodiment of a CVD process, i.e. exposing the substrate to the halosilane and the copper complex at the same time. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select the process of Norman to be a CVD process, as suggested by the reference, because Norman teaches it is a suitable alternative for use with the invention and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of predictably achieving the product of Norman with a CVD process.
Regarding Claim 21, Norman teaches alternating exposure of the substrate to the halosilane and the copper complex separated by a purge to perform a cycle ([0036-0037]).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 109912458 A) in view of Norman (US 2004/0087143) as applied to claims 1-7, 10, 17-18, 20-21, 55-57, and 59-60 above, and further in view of Choi (Choi, Effect of the neutral ligand (L) on the characteristics of hexafluoroacetylacetonate (hfac)Cu(I)-L precursor and on the copper deposition process, Thin Solid Films, 409, 2002, pg. 147-152).
Regarding Claim 8, Norman teaches the ligand is vinyltrimethylsilane. Norman does not teach the claimed ligands; however, Choi discusses the effect of the neutral ligand on the characteristics of copper deposition process, including the morphology and texture of the copper film. Choi teaches ligands including alkenes and aromatic compounds (Fig. 1). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of the combined references to include ligands, as discussed in Choi, in order to achieve a desired morphology and texture of the copper film and because they are known alternatives in the art to the vinyltrimethylsilane ligand of Norman.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see amendment, filed 12/22/2025, with respect to the previous prior art rejection and new claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as discussed above.
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