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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/30/2025 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) 10-14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (KR 101894413 B1, Machine Translation) in view of Irwin (US 2021/0143350 A1).
Regarding claims 10-12, 14, 16-18, Jung discloses a solar cell (see Fig. 1 [0080]-[0088]) comprising a first electrode layer (160 [0023]), a hole transport layer (HTL) (140 [0076]), a photoactive layer (130 [0072][0107]), an electron transport layer (120 [0047]-[0050]), and a second electrode layer (110 [0078]) stacked in sequence,
wherein the electron transport layer comprises a metal oxide layer ([0050]SnO2), the metal oxide layer being a uniform thin film (Fig. 4, shows uniform thin film) of a metal oxide subjected to surface modification by attaching a carboxyl group (--COOH)- (see Fig. 6 after CBAH treatment or after OLA treatment [0103]) containing compound to a surface thereof ([0101]-[0104]).
With regards to “wherein the hole transport layer or the electron transport layer is formed by applying and drying a dispersion comprising a metal oxide surface-modified with a carboxylic acid, a dispersion solvent, and a hydroxide, and wherein the carboxylic acid is acetic acid or trifluoroacetic acid” the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus or product. The determination of patentability is based upon the apparatus structure itself. The patentability of a product or apparatus does not depend on its method of production or formation. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (see MPEP § 2113).
However, Jung does not disclose a substrate layer above the first electrode.
Irwin discloses a perovskite solar cell with a substrate above the first electrode and an additional substrate beneath the second electrode (see Fig. 1, [0053] or Fig. 6, glass substrate shown).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the solar cell of Jung by adding an additional substrate above the first electrode as disclosed by Irwin because Irwin discloses that having a substrate above a first electrode in a perovskite solar cell is a well-known perovskite solar cell structure.
Regarding claim 13, modified Jung discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Jung discloses that the second electrode (110) is FTO/ITO ([0021]).
Jung discloses that the first electrode is Ag ([0108]), however, does not disclose that the first electrode is indium tin oxide (ITO), indium cerium oxide (ICO), indium tungsten oxide (IWO), zinc indium tin oxide (ZITO), aluminum-doped zinc oxide (AZO), fluorine tin oxide (FTO).
Irwin discloses that the first electrode is Ag or that the first electrode is indium tin oxide (ITO), indium cerium oxide (ICO), indium tungsten oxide (IWO), zinc indium tin oxide (ZITO), aluminum-doped zinc oxide (AZO), and fluorine tin oxide (FTO) (see [0111], see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the Ag electrode of modified Jung with any one of the materials listed above as disclosed by Irwin because Irwin discloses that Ag and the above transparent electrode materials are equivalent.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, modified Jung discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However Jung does not disclose that the solar cell comprises a perovskite-perovskite structure in which the perovskite layer comprises a first perovskite layer and a second perovskite layer stacked on the first perovskite layer or the solar cell has a silicon perovskite tandem structure in which the substrate layer comprises a silicon solar
cell.
Irwin discloses that photoactive materials (see Fig. 2, layers 3906 or 3908) and that these materials can comprise either tandem perovskite materials ([0097]) or can comprise a perovskite material in a cell combined with a silicon cell ([0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of modified Jung by adding an additional subcell which included either perovskite or silicon photoactive materials as disclosed by Irwin because it would allow for a user to capture a wider portion of the solar energy spectrum.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (KR 101894413 B1, Machine Translation) in view of Irwin (US 2021/0143350 A1) as applied to claims 10-14 and 16-18 above and in further view of Wu (US 2015/0311364 A1).
Regarding claim 15, modified Jung discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Jung discloses that the hole transport layer comprises Spiro-OMeTAD ([0108]) however, does not disclose that the hole transport layer comprises NiOx, Wox, MoOx, or V2O5.
Wu discloses that the hole transport layer in a perovskite solar cell can comprise Spiro-OMeTAD, NiOx, Wox, MoOx, or V2O5 ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the hole transport layer of Spiro-OMeTAD of modified Jung with any one of the NiOx, Wox, MoOx, or V2O5 as disclosed by Wu because Wu discloses that Spiro-OMeTAD and the above hole transport materials are equivalent.
Claim(s) 10-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US 2021/0143350 A1) in view of Bob (Nanoscale Dispersions of Gelled SnO2: Material Properties and Device Applications).
Regarding claims 10-14 and 16-18, Irwin discloses a solar cell comprising (See Fig. 1 also Fig. 6): a substrate layer (Fig. 1 1010 [0053] or Fig. 6 422 [0127]), a first electrode layer (Fig. 1 1020 [0053] or Fig. 6 423 [0127] ), a hole transport layer (HTL Fig. 1 1030 [0030] [0053][0100] or Fig. 6 424 [0127]), a photoactive layer ( [0072][0055]-[0058] Fig. 1 1040 [0053] Fig. 6 431 [0127]), an electron transport layer ( Fig. 1 1050 [0053] Fig. 6 414 [0127]), and a second electrode layer (Fig. 1 1060 [0053] Fig. 6 413 [0127]) stacked in sequence, wherein the hole transport layer or the electron transport layer comprises a metal oxide layer ([0077], SnO2).
However, Irwin does not disclose the metal oxide layer being a uniform thin film of a metal oxide subjected to surface modification by attaching a carboxyl group (-COOH)-containing compound to a surface thereof, wherein the hole transport layer or the electron transport layer is formed by applying and drying a dispersion comprising a metal oxide surface-modified with a carboxylic acid, a dispersion solvent, and a hydroxide, and wherein the carboxylic acid is acetic acid or trifluoroacetic acid.
Bob discloses (see Experimental methods, pg. 4279) an electron transport layer comprising a SnO2 film wherein the SnO2 film is formed by applying and drying a dispersion comprising a metal oxide surface-modified with a carboxylic acid (tin oxide films were then deposited by spin coating at 5000 rpm, and then heating at 150 °C for 10 min, photovoltaic device fabrication section pg. 4273), a dispersion solvent (water portion of TMAH), and a hydroxide (ammonium hydroxide), and wherein the carboxylic acid is acetic acid. Bob discloses that this method of forming a SnO2 electron transport layer results in continuous smooth films (See pg. 4728, third paragraph) and in addition has resulted in higher conversion efficiencies for solar cells (Conclusion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of the invention to modify the electron transport layer in the solar cell of Irwin by forming it as disclosed by Bob because Bob discloses that this results in films with smooth continuous morphology and also has resulted in higher conversion efficiencies than electron transport layers formed by alternative methods.
The claimed and prior art products are produced by identical or substantially identical processes and therefore the feature of “a metal oxide subjected to surface modification by attaching a carboxyl group (-COOH)-containing compound to a surface thereof” is present in modified Irwin. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, modified Irwin discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Irwin discloses that photoactive materials (see Fig. 2, layers 3906 or 3908) and that these materials can comprise either tandem perovskite materials ([0097]) or can comprise a perovskite material in a cell combined with a silicon cell ([0113]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US 2021/0143350 A1) in view of Bob (Nanoscale Dispersions of Gelled SnO2: Material Properties and Device Applications) as applied to claims 10-14 and 16-20 above and in further view of Wu (US 2015/0311364 A1).
Regarding claim 15, modified Irwin discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Irwin discloses that the hole transport layer comprises Spiro-OMeTAD ([0115]) however, does not disclose that the hole transport layer comprises NiOx, Wox, MoOx, or V2O5.
Wu discloses that the hole transport layer in a perovskite solar cell can comprise Spiro-OMeTAD, NiOx, Wox, MoOx, or V2O5 ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the hole transport layer of Spiro-OMeTAD of modified Irwin with any one of the NiOx, WOx, MoOx, or V2O5 as disclosed by Wu because Wu discloses that Spiro-OMeTAD and the above hole transport materials are equivalent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726