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
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuo et al. (US 2017/0170338) in view of Zhao et al. (CN 215988787, cited on 01/17/2024 IDS, see attached machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Matsuo discloses a solar cell (abstract) comprising: a plurality of first electrodes and a plurality of second electrodes on a first surface of the solar cell ([0077]; 35, 36, 37, 38 in Figures 1 and 2), wherein each of the plurality of first electrodes has a first busbar extending along a first direction and a plurality of first fingers extending along a second direction ([0077]; 35 and 37 in Figures 1 and 2), each of the plurality of second electrodes has a second busbar extending along the first direction and a plurality of second fingers extending along the second direction ([0077]; 36 and 38 in Figures 1 and 2), and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (direction of 35 and 36 in Figures 1 and 2 in relation to direction of 37 and 38), the first busbar having a first welding point (37 in Figures 1 and 2 necessarily has a point on which welding can occur, therefore, the limitation “a first welding point” is necessarily satisfied by the structure disclosed), and the second busbar having a second welding point (38 in Figures 1 and 2 necessarily has a point on which welding can occur, therefore, the limitation “a second welding point” is necessarily satisfied by the structure disclosed); wherein the plurality of first fingers in a respective first electrode and the plurality of second fingers in a respective second electrode are staggered in an interdigitated pattern (35 in relation to 36 in Figures 1 and 2); and a plurality of insulation structures including first insulation structures in one-to-one correspondence with the first busbars of the plurality of first electrodes (24 in Figures 1 and 2) and second insulation structures in one-to-one correspondence with the second busbars of the plurality of second electrodes (25 in Figures 1 and 2), each first insulation structure being configured to cover an area near a corresponding first busbar to cover ends of second fingers on opposite sides of the corresponding first busbar (24 in relation to 36 and 37 in Figures 1 and 2), each second insulation structure being configured to cover an area near a corresponding second busbar to cover ends of first fingers on opposite sides of the corresponding first busbar (25 in relation to 35 and 38 in Figures 1 and 2); wherein the each first insulation structure leaves open a window over the corresponding first busbar and the first welding point of the corresponding first busbar (24 in Figures 1 and 2 leaves open the top surface of 37; this opening satisfies the limitation “leaves open a window over the corresponding first busbar and the first welding point of the corresponding first busbar”); and wherein the each second installation structure leaves open a window over the corresponding second busbar and the second welding point of the corresponding second busbar (25 in Figures 1 and 2 leaves open the top surface of 38; this opening satisfies the limitation “leaves open a window over the corresponding second busbar and the second welding point of the corresponding second busbar”), wherein each insulation structure of the plurality of insulation structures comprises a first insulation portion and a second insulation portion arranged on opposite sides of a corresponding first or second busbar (shown in annotated Fig. 2 below), and the first insulation portion and the second insulation portion are arranged on opposite sides of the respective first busbar (portions of 24 in relation to 37 in annotated Fig. 2 below), wherein the first insulation portion and the second insulation portion of the each insulation structure extend continuously in the first direction and sandwich the first or second welding point of the corresponding first or second busbar (the first and second insulation portions depicted in annotated Fig. 2 below sandwich the top surface of the respective busbar; the top surface of the respective busbar satisfies the limitation “welding point” as set forth above).
Matsuo does not explicitly disclose the first and second insulation portions are spaced apart from the corresponding first or second busbar.
Zhao discloses a solar cell ([n0001]) and further discloses first and second insulation portions ([n0062]; [n0070]) are spaced apart from the corresponding busbar ([n0062]; 41, 42, 51, 52 in Fig. 6 in relation to corresponding busbar).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the first and second insulation portions of Matsuo such that they are spaced apart from the corresponding busbar, as disclosed by Zhao, because as taught by Zhao, production cost is reduced ([n0062]).
[AltContent: textbox (first insulation portion )]
[AltContent: textbox (second insulation portion )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first insulation portion )][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
203
200
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (second insulation portion )]
Regarding claim 4, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
While modified Matsuo does disclose the first insulation portion and the second insulation portion have a first width along the second direction (Matsuo – annotated Fig. 2 above); modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose a first width L1 along the second direction and 0.9 mm ≤ L1 ≤ 1.1 mm. However, such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 6, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
With regard to the limitation “the first busbar and the second busbar are evenly spaced along the second direction, and there is a second distance d2 between the first busbar and an adjacent second busbar, and 9 mm ≤ d2 ≤ 13 mm,” such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 7, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose the first busbar and the second busbar have a second width L2 along the second direction and 0.2 mm ≤ L2 ≤ 0.3 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the first and second busbars of modified Matsuo such that the first and second busbars have a second width L2 along the second direction and 0.2 mm ≤ L2 ≤ 0.3 mm because such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 8, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose the first and second welding points have a third width L3 along the first direction and 1 mm ≤ L3 ≤ 1.3 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the first and second welding points of modified Matsuo such that a third width L3 along the first direction satisfies 1 mm ≤ L3 ≤ 1.3 mm because such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 9, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose the plurality of insulation structures are hot melt insulations films.
Zhao discloses a solar cell ([0005]; [0027]) and further discloses the plurality of insulation structures are hot melt insulation films (insulating glue disclosed in [0053], [0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the plurality of insulation structures of modified Matsuo with insulating glue, as disclosed by Zhao, because as evidenced by Zhao, the use of insulating glue as an insulating material in a solar cell amounts to the use of a known component/material in the art for its intended purpose to achieve an expected result, and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success when using insulating glue as the insulating material in modified Matsuo based on the teaching of Zhao.
Claims 12, 13, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuo et al. (US 2017/0170338) in view of Zhao et al. (CN 215988787, cited on 01/17/2024 IDS, see attached machine translation) and further in view of Gaume et al. (US 2021/0249549).
Regarding claim 12, Matsuo discloses a solar cell (abstract) comprising: a plurality of first electrodes and a plurality of second electrodes on a first surface of the solar cell ([0077]; 35, 36, 37, 38 in Figures 1 and 2), wherein each of the plurality of first electrodes has a first busbar extending along a first direction and a plurality of first fingers extending along a second direction ([0077]; 35 and 37 in Figures 1 and 2), each of the plurality of second electrodes has a second busbar extending along the first direction and a plurality of second fingers extending along the second direction ([0077]; 36 and 38 in Figures 1 and 2), and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (direction of 35 and 36 in Figures 1 and 2 in relation to direction of 37 and 38), the first busbar having a first welding point (37 in Figures 1 and 2 necessarily has a point on which welding can occur, therefore, the limitation “a first welding point” is necessarily satisfied by the structure disclosed), and the second busbar having a second welding point (38 in Figures 1 and 2 necessarily has a point on which welding can occur, therefore, the limitation “a second welding point” is necessarily satisfied by the structure disclosed); wherein the plurality of first fingers in a respective first electrode and the plurality of second fingers in a respective second electrode are staggered in an interdigitated pattern (35 in relation to 36 in Figures 1 and 2); and a plurality of insulation structures including first insulation structures in one-to-one correspondence with the first busbars of the plurality of first electrodes (24 in Figures 1 and 2) and second insulation structures in one-to-one correspondence with the second busbars of the plurality of second electrodes (25 in Figures 1 and 2), each first insulation structure being configured to cover an area near a corresponding first busbar to cover ends of second fingers on opposite sides of the corresponding first busbar (24 in relation to 36 and 37 in Figures 1 and 2), each second insulation structure being configured to cover an area near a corresponding second busbar to cover ends of first fingers on opposite sides of the corresponding first busbar (25 in relation to 35 and 38 in Figures 1 and 2); wherein the each first insulation structure leaves open a window over the corresponding first busbar and the first welding point of the corresponding first busbar (24 in Figures 1 and 2 leaves open the top surface of 37; this opening satisfies the limitation “leaves open a window over the corresponding first busbar and the first welding point of the corresponding first busbar”); and wherein the each second installation structure leaves open a window over the corresponding second busbar and the second welding point of the corresponding second busbar (25 in Figures 1 and 2 leaves open the top surface of 38; this opening satisfies the limitation “leaves open a window over the corresponding second busbar and the second welding point of the corresponding second busbar”), wherein each insulation structure of the plurality of insulation structures comprises a first insulation portion and a second insulation portion arranged on opposite sides of a corresponding first or second busbar (shown in annotated Fig. 2 below), and the first insulation portion and the second insulation portion are arranged on opposite sides of the respective first busbar (portions of 24 in relation to 37 in annotated Fig. 2 below), wherein the first insulation portion and the second insulation portion of the each insulation structure extend continuously in the first direction and sandwich the first or second welding point of the corresponding first or second busbar (the first and second insulation portions depicted in annotated Fig. 2 below sandwich the top surface of the respective busbar; the top surface of the respective busbar satisfies the limitation “welding point” as set forth above).
Matsuo does not explicitly disclose the first and second insulation portions are spaced apart from the corresponding first or second busbar.
Zhao discloses a solar cell ([n0001]) and further discloses first and second insulation portions ([n0062]; [n0070]) are spaced apart from the corresponding busbar ([n0062]; 41, 42, 51, 52 in Fig. 6 in relation to corresponding busbar).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the first and second insulation portions of Matsuo such that they are spaced apart from the corresponding busbar, as disclosed by Zhao, because as taught by Zhao, production cost is reduced ([n0062]).
Modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose a photovoltaic module comprising a cover plate, a cell string, and an encapsulation layer, wherein the cover plate is located on opposites sides of the cell string, the encapsulation layer is arranged between the cover plate and the cell string, and the cell string is formed by electrically connecting a plurality of the solar cells.
Gaume discloses a photovoltaic module comprising a cell string formed by electrically connecting a plurality of solar cells (4 in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form a cell string, as disclosed by Gaume, by electrically connecting a plurality of the solar cells disclosed in modified Matsu, because electrically connecting a plurality of solar cells increases power output.
While modified Matsuo does disclose a cell string (Gaume – 4 in Fig. 3); modified Matsuo does not explicitly disclose a photovoltaic module comprising a cover plate and an encapsulation layer, wherein the cover plate is located on opposites sides of the cell string, the encapsulation layer is arranged between the cover plate and the cell string.
Gaume discloses a photovoltaic module comprising a cover plate located on opposite sides of a cell string (2 and 5 in relation to 4 in Fig. 3), an encapsulation layer arranged between the cover plate and the cell string (3 in Fig. 3; [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include, as disclosed by Gaume, an encapsulation layer between a cover plate and the cell string of modified Matsuo, because as evidenced by Gaume, the use of a cover plate and an encapsulation layer in a photovoltaic module amounts to the use of known components in the art for their intended purpose to achieve an expected result, and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success when including a cover plate and encapsulation layer in the photovoltaic module of modified Matsuo based on the teaching of Gaume.
Regarding claim 13, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Matsuo further discloses a plurality of welding strips extending along the first direction (Gaume – [0007], [0008], [0012], 6), at least part of the plurality of welding strips are electrically connected to the first busbar by the first welding point, and at least part of the plurality of the welding strips are electrically connect to the second busbar by the second welding point (the welding strips of modified Matsuo necessarily electrically connected to the respective busbars in order to form the disclosed cell string).
Regarding claim 15, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Matsuo further discloses the encapsulation layer is an EVA film (Gaume – [0088]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Matsuo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
With regard to the limitation “the first busbar and the second busbar are evenly spaced along the second direction, and there is a second distance d2 between the first busbar and an adjacent second busbar, and 9 mm ≤ d2 ≤ 13 mm,” such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 4, 6-9, 12-13, 15, and 20 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.
It is noted that the claim amendments overcome the 112 rejections set forth in
the previous office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMIR AYAD whose telephone number is (313) 446-6651. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5pm EST.
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 Barton can be reached at (571) 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.
/TAMIR AYAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726