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 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stan et al. (US 20140116500 and provisional application 61/720595 filed on Oct. 31, 2012) in view of DeGroot et al. (US 20130167910) and further in view of Liu (US 20020140565).
Regarding claim 1, Stan discloses that a method of fabricating a multijunction solar cell array on a carrier using one or more automated processes, the method comprising:
providing a first multijunction solar cell including a first contact pad and a second contact pad 501 disposed adjacent the top surface of the multijunction solar cell along a first peripheral edge thereof (Fig. 13AB and 14B);
attaching a first electrical interconnect 552 to the first contact pad of said first multijunction solar cell (Fig. 13AB and 14C, more than 1 cells);
attaching a second electrical interconnect to the second contact pad of the first multijunction solar cell (Fig. 13AB and 14C, more than 1 cells);
positioning said first multijunction solar cell over an adhesive region 513 of a permanent carrier 514 using an automated machine/vision apparatus; and
bonding said first multijunction solar cell to said adhesive region using pressure and/or heat (Fig. 14E, note: certain pressure is applied to adjoin cells together).
Stan fails to specify that attaching a first electrical interconnect and second electrical interconnect using a pick and place process and positioning said first multijunction solar cell over an adhesive region using an automated machine/vision apparatus.
However, DeGroot suggests that a terminal bars can be placed using pick and place process (para. 0080).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide DeGroot with attaching a first electrical interconnect and second electrical interconnect using a pick and place process as taught by Stan in order to enhance secured in place (para. 0080) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Stan & DeGroot fail to specify that positioning said first multijunction solar cell over an adhesive region using an automated machine/vision apparatus.
However, Liu suggests that positioning can be done using an automated machine/vision apparatus (para. 0025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Stan & DeGroot with positioning can be done using an automated machine/vision apparatus as taught by Liu in order to enhance detecting abnormal condition (para. 0025) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Reclaim 2, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that fabricating a semiconductor wafer by providing a first semiconductor substrate; depositing on the first semiconductor substrate a sequence of layers of semiconductor material forming at least first, second, and third solar subcells;
forming a grading interlayer on said first, second, and/or said third solar subcell;
depositing on said grading interlayer a second sequence of layers of semiconductor material forming a fourth solar subcell, the fourth solar subcell being lattice mismatched to the third solar subcell;
mounting and bonding a surrogate substrate on top of the sequence of layers; and removing the first semiconductor substrate (Fig. 13ab-14a).
Reclaim 3. , Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that forming the graded interlayer comprises: picking an interlayer composed of InGaAlAs using a computer program to identify a set of compositions of the formula (InxGa₁-x)yAl₁-yAs defined by specific values of X and y, wherein 0<x<1 and 0<y<1, each composition having a constant bandgap; identifying a lattice constant for one side of the grading interlayer that matches the lattice constant of the third solar subcell and a lattice constant for an opposing side of the grading interlayer that matches the lattice constant of the fourth solar subcell; and identifying a subset of compositions of the formula (InₓGa1-ₓ)yAl1-yAs having the constant bandgap that are defined by specific values of X and y, wherein 0 < X < 1 and 0 < y < 1, and wherein the subset of compositions has lattice constants ranging from the identified lattice constant that matches the third solar subcell to the identified lattice constant that matches the fourth solar subcell (Fig. 14A).
Reclaim 4, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu discloses that providing a support disposed below the surrogate substrate including a polyimide film layer composed of poly (4,4"- oxydiphenylene-pyromellitimide) (Fig. 14A).
Reclaim 5, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the support has a thickness of between 25 and 100 microns, or between 1 mil (25.4 µm) and 4 mil (101.6 µm) (Fig. 14A).
Reclaim 6, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the support has a thickness of between 10 and 25 microns (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 7, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that providing a metal layer attached to the top surface of the support adjacent to the surrogate substrate in an adhesive- less manner to limit outgassing when used in a space environment (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 8, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the support is a metallic structure. 9. A method as defined in claim 8, wherein the metallic structure is an aluminum honeycomb structure with carbon composite face sheet (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 10, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that subsequent to the bonding step, at least two multijunction solar cells are automatically interconnected using parallel gap welding of the first and second electrical interconnects (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 11, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the contact pads are formed by an automatic metallic plating process (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 12, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the at least two multijunction solar cells are automatically electrically connected, with the at least two multijunction solar cells having co-planar front-side electrical contacts (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 13, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the multijunction solar cells are III-V compound semiconductor multijunction solar cells, and further comprising; providing a metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) system configured to independently control the flow of source gases for gallium, indium aluminum, and arsenic; and selecting a reaction time and temperature and a flow rate for each source gas to form the continuously-graded interlayer disposed on the bottom subcell, wherein the source gas for indium is trimethylindium (InMe₃), the sources gas for gallium in trimethylgallium (GaMe₃), the source gas for arsenic is arsine (AsH₃), and the source gas for aluminum is trimethylaluminum (Al₂Me₆)to form the multijunction solar cell (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 14, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that providing a multijunction solar cell comprises fabricating a semiconductor wafer utilizing a metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) reactor; metallizing the backside of the semiconductor wafer; lithographically patterning and depositing metal of the front side of the semiconductor wafer; forming a mesa on the front side of the semiconductor wafer by lithography and etching; depositing an antireflective coating (ARC) over the wafer; dicing one or more solar cells from the semiconductor wafer; testing the functionality of the one or more solar cells; attaching interconnects to the one of more solar cells; attaching a cover glass to each solar cell to form a Cell-Interconnect-Cover Glass (CIC) (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 15, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that forming a string configuration of CICs; interconnecting string configurations of CICs; bonding string configurations or interconnected string configurations to a substrate; configuring and wiring a panel circuit; configuring a blocking diode; wiring a first terminal and a second terminal of first and second polarities, respectively, for the solar cell panel; and testing the functionality of the solar cell panel; wherein at least one of the preceding method steps is performed using an automated process (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 16, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that providing a supply cassette including a plurality of multijunction solar cells connected in electrical series (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 17, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that placing and adhering said solar cell assemblies to the support, and utilizing a wire bonding laser welding machine for attaching the interconnects to one or more multijunction solar cells. 18. A method as defined in claim 1, wherein the one or more automated processes comprises imaging-based automatic inspection and analysis by (2D visible light) imaging, line scan imaging, 3D imaging of surfaces, or X-ray imaging (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 19, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that the 3D imaging of surfaces is scanning based triangulation utilizing motion of the multijunction solar cell during the imaging process, or time of flight, grid based, or stereoscopic imaging (Fig. 14A-E).
Reclaim 20, Stan, DeGroot, & Liu disclose that forming a multijunction solar cell on a semiconductor wafer utilizing a metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) reactor (para. 0108);
metallizing 625 the backside of the semiconductor wafer 623;
lithographically patterning and depositing metal of the front side of the semiconductor wafer (Fig. 14A-E);
forming a mesa on the front side of the semiconductor wafer by lithography and etching; depositing an antireflective coating (ARC) (para. 0106) over the wafer 623;
dicing one or more individual multijunction solar cells from the semiconductor wafer (Fig. 14);
testing the functionality of the one or more multijunction solar cells (para. 0114);
attaching interconnects 552 to the one of more multijunction solar cells;
attaching a cover glass 514 to each multijunction solar cell to form a Cell-Interconnect- Cover Glass (CIC);
forming a string configuration of CICs;
interconnecting a plurality of string configurations of CICs; bonding string configurations or interconnected string configurations to a substrate to form a solar cell array panel (Fig. 14C); configuring and wiring an electrical circuit on the panel; and
testing the functionality of the solar cell panel (para. 0114);
wherein at least one of the preceding method steps is performed using an automated process (Stan in view of DeGroot & Liu).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 9608156 in view of Stan et al. (US 20140116500 and provisional application 61/720595 filed on Oct. 31, 2012) in view of DeGroot et al. (US 20130167910) and Liu (US 20020140565).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 9748432 in view of Stan et al. (US 20140116500 and provisional application 61/720595 filed on Oct. 31, 2012) in view of DeGroot et al. (US 20130167910) and Liu (US 20020140565).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights