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 .
Election/Restrictions
It is noted that new claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
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 1-2, 11-14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US 2018/0158976) in view of Lv et al. (“Bromine Doping as an Efficient Strategy to Reduce the Interfacial Defects in Hybrid Two-Dimensional/Three-Dimensional Stacking Perovskite Solar Cells”).
Regarding claims 1 and 18, Ahn discloses a solar cell (abstract) comprising: a first electrode (150 in Fig. 12; [0138]); a photelectric conversion layer (122 in Fig. 3; [0057]; 120 in Fig. 12; [0133]); a hole transport layer (123 in Fig. 3; [0057]); and a second electrode in this order (142 in Fig. 12; [0135]).
Ahn does not explicitly disclose an intermediate layer between the photoelectric conversion layer and the hole transport layer, the intermediate layer includes at least one compound selected from the group consisting of butylammonium bromide, hexylammonium bromide, octylammonium bromide, and phenylethylammonium bromide.
Lv discloses a solar cell and further discloses an intermediate layer including phenylethylammonium bromide between a photoelectric conversion layer and a hole transport layer (page 31757, left column, line 5 of first full paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the interface layer of Lv between the photoelectric conversion layer and the hole transport layer of Ahn, because as taught by Lv, the PCE is enhanced along with improved stability (page 31762, right column, lines 1 and 2). Lv further discloses the bromine-containing layer can improve the long-term durability of PSC’s efficiently. Additionally, LV discloses the direct exposure to moisture is prevented and thus an increase in moisture resistance (page 31762, left column, first full paragraph).
Regarding claim 2, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses the photoelectric conversion layer includes a perovskite compound (Ahn – [0057] L2; Lv – abstract).
Regarding claim 11, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses the oxide includes a conductive oxide of which a matrix is indium oxide (Ahn – [0072], layer 142; [0065]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses wherein the oxide includes an indium-zinc composite oxide (Ahn – [0072], layer 142; [0065]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses the hole transport layer includes a hole transport material, and the hole transport material includes poly[bis(4-phenyl)(2,4,6-triphenylmethyl)amine] (Ahn – [0061]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses the second electrode is in contact with the hole transport layer (Ahn – [0072], 142 on 123 in Fig. 3; Fig. 12; it is noted that that limitation “in contact” does not require direct physical contact or the absence of intermediate components).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US 2018/0158976) in view of Lv et al. (“Bromine Doping as an Efficient Strategy to Reduce the Interfacial Defects in Hybrid Two-Dimensional/Three-Dimensional Stacking Perovskite Solar Cells”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al. (CN 111987218 A – see attached machine translation).
Regarding claim 9, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth
above.
Modified Ahn does not explicitly disclose the at least one compound included in the intermediate layer includes butylammonium bromide.
Li discloses a solar cell ([0008]) and further discloses an intermediate layer between a photoelectric conversion layer and a hole transport layer (BABr-PEAI modification layer 40 – [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include BABr, as disclosed by Li, in the PEAI and PEABr layer of modified Ahn (Lv – page 31757, left column, lines 4 and 5 of first full paragraph), because as taught by Li, the light absorption efficiency of the light absorbing layer is promoted, thereby promoting the increase of photogenerated carriers in PSC’s ([0091]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Ahn discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Ahn further discloses the intermediate layer further comprises phenylethylammonium iodide (Lv – page 31757, left column, lines 4 and 5 of first full paragraph; Li - BABr-PEAI modification layer 40 – [0087]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 9-14, and 18 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 with regard to Applicant’s arguments pertaining to unexpected results, the limitations claimed are not commensurate in scope with the materials/parameters described in the as-filed specification which lead to the disclosed results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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, Jeff 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