DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits for 18/457,333, filed 8/28/2023, which claims priority to Chinese application CN202211603377.7, filed 12/14/2022, after the request for continued examination filed 11/28/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending, and are considered herein.
In light of the claim amendments filed 11/28/2025, the claim rejections are withdrawn, the objection to Claim 20 is withdrawn, and new grounds of rejection are presented herein.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/28/2025 has been entered.
Additional Prior Art
The Examiner wishes to apprise the Applicant of the following reference, which is not currently applied in a rejection.
Singh, et al. (Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 2022; 30: 899-909)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7-8, 11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu, et al. (Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159679).
In reference to Claim 1, Yu teaches a solar cell (Fig. 4b, described in Fig. 3, “Experiment B,” section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4).
The solar cell of Yu comprises a body and a first electrode, the body having a first region (corresponding to the indicated region of the cell in the inset below, which encompasses all but the right-most 0.5 nm of the tunneling layer and the “first doped conductive layer”) and a second region (corresponding to the indicated region of the cell in the inset below).
The inset below teaches that, along a thickness direction of the solar cell, at least part of the first region covers the first electrode, and the second region is a region of the body other than the first region.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a substrate.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a first tunneling layer arranged on a side of the substrate, wherein the first tunneling layer has a greater thickness in the first region than in the second region. Specifically, the thickness of the first tunneling layer is taught to be ~1.5 nm (section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4). Therefore, because the “second region” encompasses the indicated region of the solar cell, including the outer 0.5 nm right-most side of the tunneling layer, the thickness of the first tunneling layer is 1.5 nm, which is thicker than the thickness of the first tunneling layer in the “second region,” i.e. 0.5 nm.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a first doped conductive layer arranged on a surface of the first tunneling layer away from the substrate, and electrically connected to the first electrode. This “first doped conductive layer” corresponds to the “p+-poly” silicon layer indicated in the inset below.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a second doped conductive layer arranged on a side of the first tunneling layer adjacent to the substrate (i.e. indirectly on a side of the first tunneling layer adjacent to the substrate), wherein the second doped conductive layer has a smaller thickness in the first region than that in the second region. Specifically, the inset below teaches that the bottom electrode penetrates a portion of the “second doped conductive layer” in the first region, thus causing the thickness of the second doped conductive layer in the first region to have a smaller thickness in the first region than in the second region.
The inset below teaches that the first tunneling layer is arranged between the first doped conductive layer and the second doped conductive layer.
PNG
media_image1.png
560
1067
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 7, wherein a thickness H11 of the first tunneling layer in the first region satisfies: 1 nm ≤ H11 ≤ 2.5 nm (i.e. 1.5 nm).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 8, wherein a thickness H12 of the first tunneling layer in the second region satisfies: 0.5 nm ≤ H12 ≤ 2 nm (i.e. 0.5 nm).
In reference to Claim 9, Yu teaches that the maximum thickness of the second doped conductive layer (i.e. the doped polycrystalline silicon conductive layer on the rear surface of the device) is 150 nm (section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4).
Therefore, this disclosure teaches that all regions of the second doped conductive layer are between 0-150 nm thick.
Therefore, Yu teaches the limitations of Claim 9, wherein a thickness H21 of the second doped conductive layer in the first region satisfies: 0 μm <H21 < 0.5 μm (i.e. between 0 and 150 nm, or 0.150 μm).
In reference to Claim 10, Yu teaches that the maximum thickness of the second doped conductive layer (i.e. the doped polycrystalline silicon conductive layer on the rear surface of the device) is 150 nm (section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4).
Therefore, this disclosure teaches that all regions of the second doped conductive layer are between 0-150 nm thick.
Therefore, Yu teaches the limitations of Claim 10, wherein a thickness H22 of the second doped conductive layer in the second region satisfies: 0 μm <H21 < 0.5 μm (i.e. 150 nm, or 0.150 μm).
In reference to Claim 11, Fig. 4b teaches that the first region is arranged alternately with the second region along a width direction of the solar cell, as shown in the inset above.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 4b teaches that the body further comprises an emitter (corresponding to the “p+” layer indicated in the inset below) arranged on a surface of the substrate away from the first tunneling layer (i.e. facing the first tunneling layer), and the solar cell further comprises a second electrode electrically connected to the emitter (indicated in the inset below).
PNG
media_image2.png
511
1152
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to Claim 15, Fig. 4b teaches that the body further comprises a first passivation layer arranged on a side of the first doped conductive layer away from the substrate; and a second passivation layer arranged on a side of the emitter away from the substrate. These features are indicated in the inset below.
PNG
media_image3.png
511
1351
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
Claims 1, 7-8, 13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ichihashi, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0349146 A1).
In reference to Claim 1, Ichihashi teaches a solar cell (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0025]-[0056]).
The solar cell of Ichihashi comprises a body and a first electrode 14, the body having a first region R1’ and a second region R2 (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 teaches that, along a thickness direction of the solar cell, at least part of the first region R1’ covers the first electrode 14, and the second region R2 is a region of the body other than the first region R1’.
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a substrate 10 (paragraph [0026]) and a first tunneling layer 19 arranged on a side of the substrate 10 (i.e. a 1-2 nm thick layer of silicon oxide, paragraph [0040]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the first tunneling layer 19 has a greater thickness in the first region R1’ than in the second region R2, because the first tunneling layer is not present in at least part of the second region, and therefore has a thickness of 0 in at least part of the second region.
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a first doped conductive layer 13p arranged on a surface of the first tunneling layer 19 away from the substrate 10, and electrically connected to the first electrode 14 (i.e. electrically connected at least through the substrate, paragraph [0035]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a second doped conductive layer 12n arranged on a side of the first tunneling layer 19 adjacent to the substrate 10, wherein the second doped conductive layer has 12n a smaller thickness in the first region R1’ than that in the second region R2. Specifically, Fig. 2 teaches that the second doped conductive layer 12n is absent from at least a portion of region R1’, and is present in at least a portion of region R2. Therefore, the second doped conductive layer 12n has a smaller thickness (i.e. 0) in the first region than in the second region (i.e. non-zero).
Fig. 2 teaches that the first tunneling layer 19 is arranged between the first doped conductive layer 13p and the second doped conductive layer 12n.
PNG
media_image4.png
724
1086
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 7, wherein a thickness H11 of the first tunneling layer 19 in the first region satisfies: 1 nm ≤ H11 ≤ 2.5 nm (i.e. 1-2 nm).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 8, wherein a thickness H12 of the first tunneling layer in the second region satisfies: 0.5 nm ≤ H12 ≤ 2 nm (i.e. 1-2 nm).
In reference to Claim 13, the inset above teaches that, along a width direction of the solar cell, a ratio of a width D2 of the first electrode to a width D1 of the first region satisfies: 0.3≤D2/D1≤1, i.e. 1.
In reference to Claim 16, the inset of Fig. 2 below teaches that the body further comprises a second tunneling layer 19 arranged on a side of the substrate 10 away from the first tunneling layer (i.e. in a different area from the first tunneling layer 19).
The inset below teaches that the second tunneling layer 19 has a greater thickness in the first region R1’ than in the second region R2, because the second tunneling layer 19 is not present in at least part of the second region R2, and therefore has a thickness of 0 in at least part of the second region.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a third doped conductive layer 13p arranged on a surface of the second tunneling layer 19 away from the substrate10.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a fourth doped conductive layer 12n located on a side of the substrate 10 adjacent to the second tunneling layer 19.
The inset below teaches that the fourth doped conductive layer 12n has a smaller thickness in the first region R1’ than in the second region R2. Specifically, Fig. 2 teaches that the fourth doped conductive layer 12n is absent from at least a portion of region R1’, and is present in at least a portion of region R2. Therefore, the second doped conductive layer 12n has a smaller thickness (i.e. 0) in the first region than in the second region (i.e. non-zero).
The inset below teaches that the solar cell further comprises a third electrode 15 electrically connected to the third doped conductive layer 13p (paragraph [0044]).
PNG
media_image5.png
724
1207
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
In reference to Claim 17, Ichihashi teaches that the body further comprises a first passivation layer 13i (paragraph [0043]) arranged on a side of the first doped conductive layer 13p away from the substrate 10 (i.e. arranged on a side of the first doped conductive layer 13p disposed away from the substrate).
Ichihashi further teaches that the body comprises and a third passivation layer 13i arranged on a side of the third doped conductive layer 13p away from the substrate (i.e. arranged on a side of the first doped conductive layer 13p disposed away from the substrate).
PNG
media_image6.png
724
1214
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
In reference to Claim 18, the inset below teaches that, along the thickness direction of the solar cell, a distance between the second doped conductive layer 12n in the first region R1’ and the first doped conductive layer 13p is greater than a distance between the second doped conductive layer 13p in the second region R2 and the first doped conductive layer 13p. Specifically, the inset below teaches that the first doped conductive layer 12n directly contacts the second doped conductive layer 13p along the thickness direction of the solar cell (i.e. the vertical direction) in the second region R2, while the first doped conductive layer 13p is separated from the second doped conductive layer 12n in the first region R1’.
PNG
media_image7.png
724
933
media_image7.png
Greyscale
In reference to Claim 19, Ichihashi teaches that the first doped conductive layer 13p comprises a first surface (i.e. a bottom surface) and a second surface (i.e. a top surface) opposite to each other.
The inset of Fig. 2 above teaches that the first surface (i.e. bottom) is in contact with the first tunneling layer 19 (i.e. at least in electrical contact with the first tunneling layer), and the second surface (i.e. the top surface) is uneven (i.e. stepped) in the second region R2.
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 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 3 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu, et al. (Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159679), in view of Chae, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0319430 A1).
In reference to Claim 3, Yu teaches that the first tunneling layer in the first region protrudes toward (i.e. is disposed toward) the first doped conductive layer with respect toward the first tunneling layer in the second region
Yu does not teach that the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the substrate with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region.
However, he teaches that the top surface of the photovoltaic cell is textured (Fig. 4b).
To solve the same problem of providing a silicon solar cell, Chae teaches that texturing both the front and rear surfaces of a silicon solar cell (and the layers deposited on these surfaces, see Fig. 3) provides the benefit of reduce reflection of light through the front and rear surfaces of the solar cell, thus increasing an amount of light entering the cell and reducing light loss (paragraph [0038]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed the substrate and all of the layers on the back surface of the substrate of the device of Yu to be textured, based on the teachings of Chae that such texturing reduces light loss within the cell.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 3, wherein the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region. Specifically, this modification teaches that the second doped conductive layer has portions that protrude toward the substrate and away from the substrate. Therefore, at least a portion of the second doped conductive layer in the second region (i.e. a portion pointing toward the first doped conductive layer) protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region (i.e. a portion pointing away from the first doped conductive layer).
In reference to Claim 20, Yu teaches a solar cell (Fig. 4b, described in Fig. 3, “Experiment B,” section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4).
The solar cell of Yu comprises a body and a first electrode, the body having a first region (corresponding to the indicated region of the cell in the inset below, which encompasses all but the right-most 0.5 nm of the tunneling layer and the “first doped conductive layer”) and a second region (corresponding to the indicated region of the cell in the inset below).
The inset below teaches that, along a thickness direction of the solar cell, at least part of the first region covers the first electrode, and the second region is a region of the body other than the first region.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a substrate.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a first tunneling layer arranged on a side of the substrate, wherein the first tunneling layer has a greater thickness in the first region than in the second region. Specifically, the thickness of the first tunneling layer is taught to be ~1.5 nm (section 2.2.2, column 1, page 4). Therefore, because the “second region” encompasses the indicated region of the solar cell, including the outer 0.5 nm right-most side of the tunneling layer, the thickness of the first tunneling layer is 1.5 nm, which is thicker than the thickness of the first tunneling layer in the “second region,” i.e. 0.5 nm.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a first doped conductive layer arranged on a surface of the first tunneling layer away from the substrate, and electrically connected to the first electrode. This “first doped conductive layer” corresponds to the “p+-poly” silicon layer indicated in the inset below.
The inset below teaches that the body comprises a second doped conductive layer arranged on a side of the first tunneling layer adjacent to the substrate (i.e. indirectly on a side of the first tunneling layer adjacent to the substrate), wherein the second doped conductive layer has a smaller thickness in the first region than that in the second region. Specifically, the inset below teaches that the bottom electrode penetrates a portion of the “second doped conductive layer” in the first region, thus causing the thickness of the second doped conductive layer in the first region to have a smaller thickness in the first region than in the second region.
The inset below teaches that the first tunneling layer is arranged between the first doped conductive layer and the second doped conductive layer.
PNG
media_image1.png
560
1067
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
Yu does not teach that the cell of his invention is connected into a module having the structure recited in Claim 20.
To solve the same problem of providing a silicon solar cell having a textured surface, Chae teaches a solar module (Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0022]-[0032]).
The module of Chae comprises a solar cell string comprising a plurality of solar cells connected to one another (Figs. 1-2); an encapsulation layer 131 configured to cover a surface of the solar cell string; and a cover plate 210 configured to cover a surface of the encapsulation layer away from the solar cell string (Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0022]-[032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have connected the solar cells of Yu into a panel structure like that of Chae, in order to optimize the voltage and current produced by a string of the cells, and to protect the cells from the elements.
Therefore, modified Yu teaches all of the structural limitations of Claim 20.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu, et al. (Journal of Alloys and Compounds 870 (2021) 159679), in view of Wu, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0007878 A1).
In reference to Claim 12, Yu is silent regarding the width of the first region.
Therefore, he does not teach that the width of the first region satisfies the values in Claim 12.
However, he teaches that the width of the first region aligns with the width of the finger electrodes (Fig. 3).
To solve the same problem of providing a solar cell with finger electrodes, Wu teaches that width, number, and spacing of finger electrodes in a solar cell can be tuned, in order to improve the conversion efficiency of the solar cell (paragraph [0052]). Wu further teaches that a preferred width of the rear finger electrodes of the device of his invention is less than 40 microns (paragraph [0047]), specifically embodied as widths of 10-40 microns (Tables 1-2). Wu specifically teaches that these embodiments have improved efficiency (paragraph [0047]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed both the finger electrodes of the device of Yu, and their corresponding “first regions” to have a width of 10-40 microns, based on the teachings of Wu.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 12, wherein, along a width direction of the solar cell, a width D1 of the first region satisfies: 10 microns < D1< 200 microns.
Claims 2-3 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihashi, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0349146 A1), in view of Chae, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0319430 A1).
In reference to Claim 2, Ichihashi does not teach that the first tunneling layer and the second doped conductive layer have the structures required by Claim 2.
To solve the same problem of providing a silicon solar cell, Chae teaches that texturing both the front and rear surfaces of a silicon solar cell (and the layers deposited on these surfaces, see Fig. 3) provides the benefit of reduce reflection of light through the front and rear surfaces of the solar cell, thus increasing an amount of light entering the cell and reducing light loss (paragraph [0038]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed the substrate and all of the layers on the front and back surfaces of the substrate of the device of Ichihashi to be textured, based on the teachings of Chae that such texturing reduces light loss within the cell.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 2, wherein the first tunneling layer in the first region protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer with respect to the first tunneling layer in the second region; and the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the substrate with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region.
Specifically, this modification teaches that the first tunneling layer and the second doped conductive layer have portions that protrude toward the substrate and away from the substrate.
Therefore, at least a portion of the first tunneling layer in the first region (i.e. a portion pointing toward the first doped conductive layer) protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer with respect to the first tunneling layer in the second region (i.e. a portion pointing toward the substrate), and at least a portion of the and the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the substrate (i.e. points toward the substrate) with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region (i.e. a portion that points away from the substrate in the first region).
In reference to Claim 3, Ichihashi does not teach that the first tunneling layer and the second doped conductive layer have the structures required by Claim 3.
To solve the same problem of providing a silicon solar cell, Chae teaches that texturing both the front and rear surfaces of a silicon solar cell (and the layers deposited on these surfaces, see Fig. 3) provides the benefit of reduce reflection of light through the front and rear surfaces of the solar cell, thus increasing an amount of light entering the cell and reducing light loss (paragraph [0038]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed the substrate and all of the layers on the front and back surfaces of the substrate of the device of Ichihashi to be textured, based on the teachings of Chae that such texturing reduces light loss within the cell.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 3, wherein the first tunneling layer in the first region protrudes towards the substrate with respect to the first tunneling layer in the second region: and the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region.
Specifically, this modification teaches that the first tunneling layer and the second doped conductive layer have portions that protrude toward the substrate and away from the substrate.
Therefore, this modification teaches that at least a portion of the first tunneling layer 19 in the first region protrudes towards the substrate (i.e. points toward the substrate) with respect to the first tunneling layer in the second region (i.e. a region that points away from the substrate), and at least a portion of the second doped conductive layer in the second region protrudes towards the first doped conductive layer (i.e. points toward the first doped conductive layer) with respect to the second doped conductive layer in the first region (i.e. a portion that points away from the first doped conductive layer).
In reference to Claim 20, Ichihashi teaches a solar cell (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0025]-[0056]).
The solar cell of Ichihashi comprises a body and a first electrode 14, the body having a first region R1’ and a second region R2 (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 teaches that, along a thickness direction of the solar cell, at least part of the first region R1’ covers the first electrode 14, and the second region R2 is a region of the body other than the first region R1’.
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a substrate 10 (paragraph [0026]) and a first tunneling layer 19 arranged on a side of the substrate 10 (i.e. a 1-2 nm thick layer of silicon oxide, paragraph [0040]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the first tunneling layer 19 has a greater thickness in the first region R1’ than in the second region R2, because the first tunneling layer is not present in at least part of the second region, and therefore has a thickness of 0 in at least part of the second region.
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a first doped conductive layer 13p arranged on a surface of the first tunneling layer 19 away from the substrate 10, and electrically connected to the first electrode 14 (i.e. at least electrically connected through the substrate, paragraph [0035]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the body comprises a second doped conductive layer 12n arranged on a side of the first tunneling layer 19 adjacent to the substrate 10, wherein the second doped conductive layer has 12n a smaller thickness in the first region R1’ than that in the second region R2. Specifically, Fig. 2 teaches that the second doped conductive layer 12n is absent from at least a portion of region R1’, and is present in at least a portion of region R2. Therefore, the second doped conductive layer 12n has a smaller thickness (i.e. 0) in the first region than in the second region (i.e. non-zero).
Fig. 2 teaches that the first tunneling layer 19 is arranged between the first doped conductive layer 13p and the second doped conductive layer 12n.
PNG
media_image4.png
724
1086
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It is noted that “arranged on a side of” does not require direct physical contact.
Ichihashi does not teach that the cell of his invention is connected into a module having the structure recited in Claim 20.
To solve the same problem of providing a silicon solar cell having a textured surface, Chae teaches a solar module (Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0022]-[0032]).
The module of Chae comprises a solar cell string comprising a plurality of solar cells connected to one another (Figs. 1-2); an encapsulation layer 131 configured to cover a surface of the solar cell string; and a cover plate 210 configured to cover a surface of the encapsulation layer away from the solar cell string (Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0022]-[032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have connected the solar cells of Ichihashi into a panel structure like that of Chae, in order to optimize the voltage and current produced by a string of the cells, and to protect the cells from the elements.
Therefore, modified Ichihashi teaches all of the structural limitations of Claim 20.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihashi, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0349146 A1), in view of Heng, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0020342 A1).
In reference to Claim 4, Ichihashi does not teach that, in the second doped conductive layer, a doping concentration of a dopant element in the first region is less than that in the second region.
To solve the same problem of providing an interdigitated back contact silicon solar cell with a rear tunneling layer, Heng teaches that rear amorphous silicon layers that form part of rear contact structures for such solar cells may suitably be formed to have graded dopant concentrations between 1x1015/cm3 to 5x1020/cm3 (paragraphs [0051]-[0052]). Heng further teaches that the contact structures of his invention provide the benefit of good ohmic contact and large built-in potential to facilitate good tunneling contact (paragraph [0051]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed the dopant layers 12n and 13p of Ichihashi to have graded dopant profiles, based on the teachings of Heng.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 4, wherein, in the second doped conductive layer, a doping concentration of a dopant element in the first region (i.e. in a region that is lower-doped in the graded layer) is less than that in the second region (i.e. in a region that is higher-doped in the graded layer).
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 5, wherein the doping concentration c1 of the dopant element in the second doped conductive layer in the first region satisfies: 1x1018 atoms/cm3≤c1≤1x1020 atoms/cm3.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In the instant case, the claimed range of 1x1018 atoms/cm3≤c1≤1x1020 atoms/cm3 lies within the taught range of 1x1015/cm3 to 5x1020/cm3.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 6, wherein the doping concentration c2 of the dopant element in the second doped conductive layer in the second region satisfies: 1x1019 atoms/cm3 ≤ c2 ≤ 2x1020 atoms/cm3.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In the instant case, the claimed range of 1x1019 atoms/cm3 ≤ c2 ≤ 2x1020 atoms/cm3 lies within the taught range of 1x1015/cm3 to 5x1020/cm3.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihashi, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0349146 A1), in view of Wu, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0007878 A1).
In reference to Claim 12, Ichihashi is silent regarding the width of the first region.
Therefore, he does not teach that the width of the first region satisfies the values in Claim 12.
However, he teaches that the width of the first region aligns with the width of the finger electrodes (Fig. 2).
To solve the same problem of providing a solar cell with finger electrodes, Wu teaches that width, number, and spacing of finger electrodes in a solar cell can be tuned, in order to improve the conversion efficiency of the solar cell (paragraph [0052]). Wu further teaches that a preferred width of the rear finger electrodes of the device of his invention is less than 40 microns (paragraph [0047]), specifically embodied as widths of 10-40 microns (Tables 1-2). Wu specifically teaches that these embodiments have improved efficiency (paragraph [0047]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have formed both the finger electrodes of the device of Ichihashi, and their corresponding “first regions” to have a width of 10-40 microns, based on the teachings of Wu.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 12, wherein, along a width direction of the solar cell, a width D1 of the first region satisfies: 10 microns < D1< 200 microns.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, these rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are presented herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADIE WHITE whose telephone number is (571)272-3245. The examiner can normally be reached 6am-2:30pm ET.
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, Allison Bourke, can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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.
/SADIE WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721