Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/351,601

Organic Pigment Coating for Electronic Devices, Perovskite Solar Cells, and Methods

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
PILLAY, DEVINA
Art Unit
1726
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Florida State University Research Foundation, Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
339 granted / 778 resolved
-21.4% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
840
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.9%
-21.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 778 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/11/2025 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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iannelli (2022/0093345 A1) in view of Pham (Dopant-free novel hole-transporting materials based on quinacridone dye for high-performance and humidity-stable mesoporous perovskite solar cells). Regarding claims 1-4, Iannelli discloses (See Fig. 1) a composite material comprising: a film comprising a metal halide perovskite (120 [0039] methylammonium lead trihalide), the film having a first side and a second side opposite the first side; and a coating comprising a p-type hole transport layer (115 [0048][0049]), wherein the coating at least partially coats the first side of the film (perovskite and hole transport layer are in direct contact and therefore one coats other). Iannelli discloses a listing of hole transport materials and one of the hole transport materials can comprise quinacridone ([0049]). Quinacridone has the following structure: PNG media_image1.png 200 444 media_image1.png Greyscale Pham discloses that using quinacridone material which have a skeleton of QA leads to a low-lying highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) level, which minimizes the energy offset between the valence band maximum of perovskite and the HOMO of the hole-transporting layer. This increases the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and ultimately the efficiency of PSCs (perovskite solar cells) (see Introduction, pg. 5316, left hand column, first paragraph). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to choose the quinacridone material out of the listing of materials for a hole transporting material of Iannelli because as disclosed by Pham hole transporting materials with this skeleton increase the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and ultimately the efficiency of PSCs (perovskite solar cells). Regarding claims 5 and 6, modified Iannelli discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Iannelli discloses that the perovskite film can have a range of 200 nm to 2 microns. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549. Regarding claim 7, modified Iannelli discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. In addition, Iannelli discloses that the perovskite layer is applied to the hole transport layer through a solution based method ([0103]). Therefore, the perovskite layer will complete coat the hole transport layer and vice-versa since it is applied through a solution based method. Regarding claims 10 and 11, Iannelli discloses (See Fig. 1) a composite material comprising: a film comprising a metal halide perovskite (120 [0039] methylammonium lead trihalide), the film having a first side and a second side opposite the first side; and a coating comprising a p-type hole transport layer (115 [0048][0049]), wherein the coating at least partially coats the first side of the film (perovskite and hole transport layer are in direct contact and therefore one coats other). Iannelli discloses a listing of hole transport materials and one of the hole transport materials can comprise quinacridone ([0049]). PNG media_image1.png 200 444 media_image1.png Greyscale Quinacridone has the following structure: Pham discloses that using quinacridone material which have a skeleton of QA leads to a low-lying highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) level, which minimizes the energy offset between the valence band maximum of perovskite and the HOMO of the hole-transporting layer. This increases the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and ultimately the efficiency of PSCs (perovskite solar cells) (see Introduction, pg. 5316, left hand column, first paragraph). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to choose the quinacridone material out of the listing of materials for a hole transporting material of Iannelli because as disclosed by Pham hole transporting materials with this skeleton increase the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and ultimately the efficiency of PSCs (perovskite solar cells). Iannelli discloses that the perovskite film can have a range of 200 nm to 2 microns. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549. Regarding claims 8, 9, 12 and 13, modified Iannelli discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Iannelli discloses that a hole transporting layer (115 [0052][0049]) on a perovskite layer (120) can consist of quinacridone ([0049]). With regards to the limitation of claims 8, 9, 12, and 13 which includes wherein the quinacridone is derived from a derivative of quinacridone and wherein the derivative is di-tert-butyl-7, 14-dioxo-7, 14-dihydroquinolino[2,3-b ]acridine-5,12-dicarboxylate and wherein the derivative structure is discloses in claims 12 and 13, this is considered a product-by-process limitation. 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). 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Chen (Fully solution processed p-i-n organic solar cells with an industrial pigment – Quinacridone). Chen discloses that a p-type quinacridone layer used in a solar cell can be formed from solution based deposition of a quinacridone derivative, namely Tert-butoxycarbonyl quinacridone which is annealed. Tert-butoxycarbonyl quinacridone has the same structure as disclosed in claims 12 and 13. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 20, 2024
Response Filed
Mar 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604560
SOLAR CELLS FORMED VIA ALUMINUM ELECTROPLATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603600
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR EFFICIENT CONVERSION OF HEAT TO ELECTRICITY VIA EMISSION OF CHARACTERISTIC RADIATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588412
Thermoelectric element, thermoelectric generator, Peltier element, Peltier cooler, and methods manufacturing thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581857
INTEGRATED THERMOELECTRIC DEVICE TO MITIGATE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT HOT SPOTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580267
BATTERY FRAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+26.6%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 778 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month