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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “coating a blocking slurry pattern of the same shape as the first electrode on a surface of the second polysilicon layer”, “depositing a protective film on one side of the selective passivated contact cell close to the second polysilicon layer, removing a thin film layer on a side surface of the selective passivated contact cell away from the second polysilicon layer, and then removing the protective film” and “an oxide layer” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (CN 111048625 A) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (CN 210897294 U).
In regards the claim 1, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) discloses a selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery), characterized in that the selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery) comprises a substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2), wherein a first silicon oxide layer (first tunneling oxide) and a first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) are sequentially arranged (paragraph 9) on a side surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2) in a stacked manner, wherein a surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2) has a non-metal contact region (where no metal coverage resides, non-coverage) and at least (two) metal contact regions (where metal coverage resides); in each of the metal contact regions (where metal coverage resides), a second silicon oxide layer (second tunneling oxide) and a second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) are further arranged sequentially (paragraph 10) on a side surface of the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) away from the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2), and a first electrode (front electrode) is provided on the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer), but does not specifically disclose at least two metal contact regions…the first polysilicon layer has a greater thickness in the metal contact regions than in the non-metal contact region.
Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses tunneling layers (item 20) are silicon oxide, silicon nitride oxide or composite film obtained by the two, wherein a surface of the substrate (item 10) has a non-metal contact region (where no item 50 resides, item 32) and at least two metal contact regions (where items 50 reside, item 31)…the first polysilicon layer (item 30) has a greater thickness in the metal contact regions (where items 50 reside, item 31) than in the non-metal contact region (where no item 50 resides, item 32).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Chen for the purpose of having a plurality of metal electrodes, a thicker/larger portion having high doping concentration which reduces the metal electrode area of the composite loss and contact resistor, while the second small portion of the thickness has a low doping concentration. Examine notes that at the same time, the non-electrode area of the semiconductor substrate for passivation reduces the absorption of the light and improves the conversion efficiency of the solar cell.
In regards the claim 2, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) discloses characterized in that the second polysilicon layer (second doped polysilicon layer) has a grid structure that is the same as a grid structure of the first electrode (front electrode, steps 3-6).
In regards the claim 3, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) discloses characterized in that the selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery) further comprises a first passivation layer (silicon nitride) and a second passivation layer (alumina and silicon nitride), wherein the first passivation layer (silicon nitride) is positioned on a surface of the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, battery front) in the non-metal contact region (where not metal coverage resides) and a surface of the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, battery front), and the second passivation layer (alumina and silicon nitride) is positioned on a side surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2) away from the first silicon oxide layer (first tunneling oxide layer); the selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery), but does not specifically disclose a diffusion layer between the substrate and the first silicon oxide layer; and at least two second electrodes are provided on the side surface of the substrate away from the first silicon oxide layer.
Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses a diffusion layer (item 11) between the substrate (item 10) and the first silicon oxide layer (item 20); and at least two second electrodes (item 70) are provided on the side surface of the substrate (item 10) away from the first silicon oxide layer (item 20).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Chen for the purpose of avoiding damage to the doped polysilicon layer to affect the transmission of the surface current, thus making solar cell structure more stable and reliable.
In regards the claim 4, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the diffusion layer (items 11, Chen) is positioned between the substrate (not shown, Wang, item 10, Chen) and the second passivation layer (alumina and silicon nitride, Wang, items 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen).
In regards the claim 5, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the first polysilicon layer (item 30) in the metal contact regions (item 31) has a thickness of 10 to 450 nm (80 to 300 nm); and the first polysilicon layer in the non-metal contact region (item 32) has a thickness of 1 to 150 nm (10 to 80 nm). Examiner notes that Chen disclose these thickness can be adjusted if need be.
However, the applicant has not established the critical nature of the first polysilicon layer in the metal contact regions having a thickness of 10 to 450 nm; and the first polysilicon layer in the non-metal contact region having a thickness of 1 to 150 nm. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990). To establish unexpected results over a claimed range, applicants should compare a sufficient number of tests inside and outside the claimed range to show criticality of the claimed range. In re Hill, 284 F.2d 955, 128 USPQ 197(CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have various ranges.
In regards the claim 6, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the first polysilicon layer (item 30) in the non-metal contact region (item 32) has a thickness of 10 to 25 nm (10 to 80 nm).
However, the applicant has not established the critical nature of the first polysilicon layer in the non-metal contact region having a thickness of 10 to 25 nm. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990). To establish unexpected results over a claimed range, applicants should compare a sufficient number of tests inside and outside the claimed range to show criticality of the claimed range. In re Hill, 284 F.2d 955, 128 USPQ 197(CCPA 1960). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have various ranges.
In regards the claim 6, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) discloses characterized in that the first silicon oxide layer (first tunneling oxide layer) has a thickness of 0.5 to 5 nm (1 to 3 nm); the second silicon oxide layer (second tunneling oxide layer) has a thickness of 0.5 to 5 nm (1 to 3 nm); and the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) has a thickness of 1 to 300 nm (100 to 200 nm).
In regards the claim 8, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the first passivation layer (silicon nitride, Wang, item 40, Chen) has a thickness of 30 to 200 nm (70 to 85 nm or 80 to 100 nm, Chen); and the second passivation layer (alumina and silicon nitride, Wang, items 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen) has a thickness of 30 to 200 nm (3 to 20 nm, 60 to 150nm or 63 to 170 nm).
In regards the claim 9, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the first passivation layer (silicon nitride, Wang, item 40, Chen) comprises at least one first passivation layer film (silicon nitride, Wang, item 40, Chen) made of a material comprising any one of, or any combination of at least two of, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, silicon oxynitride, silicon nitride, or silicon carbide; and the second passivation layer (alumina and silicon nitride, Wang, items 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen) comprises at least one second passivation layer film (alumina and silicon nitride, Wang, items 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen) made of a material comprising any one of, or any combination of at least two of, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, silicon oxynitride, silicon nitride, or silicon carbide.
In regards the claim 10, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) discloses a preparation method for the selective passivated contact cell according to claim 1, characterized in that the preparation method comprises: providing a first silicon oxide layer (first tunneling oxide) and a first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) a side surface of a substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2), etching such that the first polysilicon layer having a greater thickness in metal contact regions than in a non-metal contact region, sequentially arranging a second silicon oxide layer (second tunneling oxide) and a second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) on a surface of the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer) in the metal contact regions (metal coverage), and providing a first electrode (front electrode) on the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer), but does not specifically disclose etching such that the first polysilicon layer having a greater thickness in metal contact regions than in a non-metal contact region.
Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses etching such that a (first) polysilicon layer (item 30) having a greater thickness in metal contact regions (item 31) than in a non-metal contact region (item 32).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Chen for the purpose of having a thicker/larger portion having high doping concentration which reduces the metal electrode area of the composite loss and contact resistor, while the second small portion of the thickness has a low doping concentration. Examine notes that at the same time, the non-electrode area of the semiconductor substrate for passivation reduces the absorption of the light and improves the conversion efficiency of the solar cell.
In regards the claim 11, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that the preparation method specifically comprises: (I) performing surface finishing a surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2, Wang, item 10, Chen) to form a diffusion layer (item 11, Chen) on the surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2, Wang, item 10, Chen), and sequentially arranging the first silicon oxide layer (first tunneling oxide, Wang, item 20, Chen), the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang, item 30, Chen), the second silicon oxide layer (second tunneling oxide, Wang) and the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang) on a surface of the diffusion layer (item 11, Chen) or a side surface of the substrate (silicon wafer, claim 2, Wang, item 10, Chen) away from the diffusion layer (item 11, Chen); (II) coating a blocking slurry pattern (barrier layer, Wang) of the same shape as the first electrode (front electrode, Wang, item 50, Chen) on a surface of the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang), and etching the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang, item 30, Chen) so that the first polysilicon layer (first intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang, item 30, Chen) has a greater thickness in the metal contact regions (metal coverage, Wang, item 31, Chen) than in the non-metal contact region (where metal coverage does not reside, Wang, item 32, Chen); (III) depositing a protective film (not shown) on one side of the selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery) close to the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang), removing a thin film layer (not shown) on a side surface of the selective passivated contact cell (crystal silicon solar cell, passivation battery contact P-Type battery) away from the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang), and then removing the protective film; and (IV) depositing a first passivation layer (item 40, Chen) and a second passivation layer (items 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen), and printing the first electrode (item 50, Chen) and a second electrode (item 50, Chen).
Examiner notes that the above recitation are product-by-process limitations.
"Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. 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." In re Thorpe, 777 F. 2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (fed Cir. 1985).
The method of forming a device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight.
In regards the claim 13, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that in the step (III), the protective film (items 40, 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen) has a thickness of 2 to 200 nm; the protective film (items 40, 60, 80 or 60 plus 80, Chen) is made of a material comprising any one of, or any combination of at least two of, silicon oxide, silicon carbide, silicon oxynitride or silicon nitride; in the step (III), the method for removing the thin film layer comprises removing by hydrofluoric acid (HF cleaning); and the first electrode (front electrode, Wang, item 50, Chen) is sintered after being printed.
The method of forming a device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (CN 111048625 A) in view of Chen et al. (Chen) (CN 210897294 U) as applied to claims 1-11 and 13 above, and further evidenced by or in view of Zhang et al. (Zhang) (CN 208336240 U).
In regards the claim 12, Wang (paragraphs 2-72) as modified by Chen (Figs. 1-4 and associated text) discloses characterized in that in the step (I), the surface finishing comprises boron doping and/or phosphorus doping (phosphorous-doped, Wang); the diffusion layer (item 11) has a sheet resistance of 80 to 250 ohm/sq; the side surface of the substrate away from the diffusion layer (item 11) is subjected to cleaning (HF solution), comprising etching to remove an oxide film; and the first polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang) and/or the second polysilicon layer (second intrinsic/doped polysilicon layer, Wang) and high temperature annealing, but does not specifically disclose the first polysilicon layer and/or the second polysilicon layer is formed by boron diffusion doping.
As evidence by Zhang (Figs. 1-3 and associated text), a first polysilicon layer (items 131 or 132) and/or the second polysilicon layer (item 131 or 132) can be formed by boron or phosphorous diffusion doping and high temperature annealing/doping.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Zhang for the purpose improving the efficiency of the solar cell and design choice.
Examiner notes that the above recitation are product-by-process limitations.
"Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. 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." In re Thorpe, 777 F. 2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (fed Cir. 1985).
The method of forming a device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhang et al. (CN 110828583 B and CN 113851555A) could both replace Wang as the primary reference. Examiner suggests that the Applicant perfect foreign priority so that these references are excluded as potential prior art in future.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TELLY D GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3204. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at 571-272-2339. 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.
TELLY D. GREEN
Examiner
Art Unit 2898
/TELLY D GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898 January 2, 2026