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 .
Drawings
The Drawings filed 13 November 2023 are approved by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner and an initialed copy is attached.
Citation Notation
The following citations are made for the convenience of the reader:
Citations to PG publications are made to paragraph number under the ¶ format. Citations to other publications made under the format “ col 1/2” or pp 1 are directed to column and line number or to a page - whichever is appropriate. It is noted that any reference to a figure or a table is also directed to any accompanying text in the specification or the document. Notwithstanding those citations, the reference(s) is (are) relied upon for the teachings as a whole.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6 and 13-16 in the reply filed on 22 May 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 22 May 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The limitation “the temperature of the substrate and the temperature of perovskite precursor solution are 100° C. to 120° C. respectively” is ambiguous. It is unclear as to the metes and bounds of the claimed limitation (what is the respective values or ranges being claimed?).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20210066635-A1) in view of Liao NPL (cited in the IDS).
Claims 1, 3, 5, 13: Kim discloses a process of preparing a perovskite with the steps of coating a precursor solution onto a substrate, adding an anti-solvent such as toluene to the coated precursor solution and annealing (abs, ¶113-149 and examples). Further, Kim discloses a heating range of 80 to 200 degrees C (¶113-125). The Kim reference discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the feature of precursor solution and the substrate being heated within 20 degrees of the BP of the anti-solvent. At the onset, it is noted that toluene has a BP of around 110 degrees C – thus the taught temperature falls within the claimed range. In an analogous art, the Liao reference discloses that heating the substrate is a REV well known in the art (abs and pg. 1-6). Further, Liao discloses a heating range of 100 to 180 degrees C – which again falls within the claimed range (pg. 4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Liao to the teachings of Kim would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the cited references shows the ability to apply such features into similar systems, methods and compositions for the benefit gain of achieving the desired nuclear growth of a uniform film. See MPEP 2143. Further, it is noted that obviousness only requires a reasonable expectation of success and there is no evidence nor teaching that the substitution and/or optimization would be repugnant to a skilled artisan.
Claims 2, 4, 14 and 15: Kim and Liao disclose toluene, the spin-coating application and the claimed precursor (Kim: ¶113-149 and examples & Liao: pg. 1-6).
Claims 6 and 16: Regarding the claimed achieved crystallization, if prior art references teach the substantially process to make a similar product, it would be reasonable that the same function and/or property would be imparted or exhibited such as the crystallization. See MPEP 2112.01. Applicant is welcomed to provide any evidence that the disclosed material is exceedingly different from the claimed material - thus the claimed properties would inevitably not be present.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (US-20200090876-A1) in view of Liao NPL (cited in the IDS).
Claims 1, 3, 5, 13: Zhu discloses a process of preparing a perovskite with the steps of coating a precursor solution onto a substrate, adding an anti-solvent such as toluene to the coated precursor solution and annealing (abs, ¶93, 100-109 and examples). Further, Zhu discloses a heating range of 65 to 100 degrees C (¶93 and examples). The Zhu reference discloses the claimed invention but does not explicitly disclose the feature of precursor solution and the substrate being heated within 20 degrees of the BP of the anti-solvent. At the onset, it is noted that toluene has a BP of around 110 degrees C – thus the taught temperature falls within the claimed range. In an analogous art, the Liao reference discloses that heating the substrate is a REV that is well known in the art (abs and pg. 1-6). Further, Liao discloses a heating range of 100 to 180 degrees C – which again falls within the claimed range (pg. 4). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Liao to the teachings of Zhu would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the cited references shows the ability to apply such features into similar systems, methods and compositions for the benefit gain of achieving the desired nuclear growth of a uniform film. See MPEP 2143. Further, it is noted that obviousness only requires a reasonable expectation of success and there is no evidence nor teaching that the substitution and/or optimization would be repugnant to a skilled artisan.
Claims 2, 4, 14 and 15: Zhu and Liao disclose toluene, the spin-coating application and the claimed precursor (Zhu: ¶93, 100-109 and examples & Liao: pg. 1-6).
Claims 6 and 16: Regarding the claimed achieved crystallization, if prior art references teach the substantially process to make a similar product, it would be reasonable that the same function and/or property would be imparted or exhibited such as the crystallization. See MPEP 2112.01. Applicant is welcomed to provide any evidence that the disclosed material is exceedingly different from the claimed material - thus the claimed properties would inevitably not be present.
Claim(s) 6 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim/Zhu and Liao as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Snaith (US-20160380125-A1) or Xiao (CN-111364101-A, a translation is provided).
Remark: this rejection is provided for compact prosecution purposes and is directed to the quasi-2D limitation not flowing from the claimed process.
The Kim/Zhu and Liao references disclose the claimed invention but do not explicitly disclose the quasi-2D feature. In an analogous art, the Snaith or Xiao reference discloses similar processes with coating precursors, adding an anti-solvent, heating and annealing (Snaith: ¶325-356 & pg. 2, 4-6). In particular, Snaith or Xiao discloses achieving the quasi-2D perovskite is a well-known to gain the benefit of enhanced purity and controlled optical/quantum behavior (Snaith: abs, ¶346 and Xiao: pg. 1-6). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Snaith or Xiao to the teachings of Kim/Zhu and Liao would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the cited references shows the ability to apply such features into similar systems, methods and compositions for the benefit gain of enhanced purity and controlled optical/quantum behavior. See MPEP 2143. Further, it is noted that obviousness only requires a reasonable expectation of success and there is no evidence nor teaching that the substitution and/or optimization would be repugnant to a skilled artisan.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Arrie Lanee Reuther can be reached at 571.270.7026. 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.
/TRI V NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764
Prosecution Insights