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 .
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, 6, and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iannelli (US 20220093345 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, 6, 9, and 10, Iannelli discloses an electronic device comprising (see Fig. 1):
an electrode (130, see Fig. 1),
a composite material (115 and 120, see Fig. 1), and
a counter electrode (110);
wherein the composite material (115 and 120, see Fig. 1) is arranged between the electrode (130) and the counter electrode (110);
wherein the composite material comprises (i) a film (120 [0039] methylammonium lead trihalide) having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, and (ii) a coating (115 0048][0049]) that at least partially coats the first side of the film; wherein the film comprises a metal halide perovskite ([0039] methylammonium lead trihalide).
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 claim 11, 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 filing 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 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 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).
Claim(s) 2-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iannelli (US 20220093345 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) as applied to claims 1, 6, and 9-13 above and in further view of Liu (CN 110350092 A, Machine Translation).
Regarding claim 2-5 and 7-8, Iannelli discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Iannelli does not disclose an additional hole transport layer between the coating comprising quinacridone and the counter electrode.
Liu discloses that a double hole transport layer (5 and 6) for a perovskite layer (4) can include multiple layers wherein the second hole transport layer includes Spiro-OMeTAD ([0037][0047]) and that having a double hole transport layer improves the solar cell resistance to humidity ([0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the hole transport layer of Pham by including an additional hole transport layer formed of Spiro-OMeTAD between the counter electrode and the first hole transporting layer as disclosed Liu because Liu discloses having a double hole transport layer improves the solar cell resistance to humidity.
Regarding the following limitations as claims 7 and 8:
wherein the solar cell, after 240 hours of storage at 85°C, exhibits a power conversion efficiency that is equal to or greater than 80 % of an initial power conversion efficiency measured prior to storage
wherein the solar cell, after 1000 hours of storage at ambient conditions, exhibits a power conversion efficiency that is equal to or greater than 90% of an initial power conversion efficiency measured prior to storage
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iannelli (US 20220093345 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) in view of Liu (CN 110350092 A, Machine Translation).
Regarding claims 14-20, Iannelli discloses an electronic device comprising (see Fig. 1):
an electrode (130, see Fig. 1),
a composite material (115 and 120, see Fig. 1), and
a counter electrode (110);
wherein the composite material (115 and 120, see Fig. 1) is arranged between the electrode (130) and the counter electrode (110);
wherein the composite material comprises (i) a film (120 [0039] methylammonium lead trihalide) having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, and (ii) a coating (115 0048][0049]) that at least partially coats the first side of the film; wherein the film comprises a metal halide perovskite ([0039] methylammonium lead trihalide).
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).
However, Iannelli does not disclose an additional hole transport layer between the coating comprising quinacridone and the counter electrode.
Liu discloses that a double hole transport layer (5 and 6) for a perovskite layer (4) can include multiple layers wherein the second hole transport layer includes Spiro-OMeTAD ([0037][0047]) and that having a double hole transport layer improves the solar cell resistance to humidity ([0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the hole transport layer of Pham by including an additional hole transport layer formed of Spiro-OMeTAD between the counter electrode and the first hole transporting layer as disclosed Liu because Liu discloses having a double hole transport layer improves the solar cell resistance to humidity.
Regarding the following limitations as claims 19 and 20:
wherein the solar cell, after 240 hours of storage at 85°C, exhibits a power conversion efficiency that is equal to or greater than 80 % of an initial power conversion efficiency measured prior to storage
wherein the solar cell, after 1000 hours of storage at ambient conditions, exhibits a power conversion efficiency that is equal to or greater than 90% of an initial power conversion efficiency measured prior to storage
Regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant notes that since the "acceptor" portion of this geometry is QA (i.e., quinacridone), the teachings of Pham, as a whole, would not have provided any reason or motivation to select and use quinacridone without the end-capping donor groups. Applicant argues that Pham explicitly-and further-teaches at page 5316, as explained above, that "a donor-acceptor-donor (D-A-D) geometry ... has recently been shown to provide high performance and stability" in devices. Therefore, if Pham actually had been combined with Iannelli, and Iannelli actually had been modified in view of Pham, then a person of ordinary skill in the art would have used in the devices of Iannelli one of the substituted quinacridone derivatives of Pham, based on the teachings of Pham, as a whole.
Pham also discloses "QA is a well-known acceptor material owing to the presence of two electron-withdrawing ketonic groups in the conjugated backbone. The electron-withdrawing 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" (see pg. 5316, left hand column first paragraph). Ianelli discloses a list of hole transporting materials in para [0049] and one of those materials include quinacridone. Motivation is provided by Pham to choose quinacridone out of the listing of hole transporting compounds disclosed by Iannelli.
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.
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 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
Prosecution Insights