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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02 March 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 3-21 as amended in the response dated 02 March 2026 are presently under consideration.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the prior art rejection of record which is thus withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the indefiniteness rejections of record which are thus withdrawn.
Upon performing updated and search of the newly amended claims, new prior art was uncovered and a new grounds of rejection is set forth below.
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, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801).
Regarding claim 1 OH discloses a solar cell (tandem solar cell 10), comprising a bottom cell (second solar cell 200), a recombination layer (intermediate layer 300), and a top cell (first solar cell 100) that are stacked in sequence in a first direction (Figs. 1-2), wherein
the bottom cell (paras [0068]-[0072]) includes a first semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: first conductivity type layer 250), a substrate (Fig. 2 see: substrate 230), and a second semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: second conductivity type layer 210) that are stacked in sequence in the first direction (See Fig. 2), the second semiconductor conductive layer is disposed between the substrate and the recombination layer (Fig. 2 see: layer 210 between layer 300 and layer 230), the substrate is between the first semiconductor conductive layer and the second semiconductor conductive layer (see Fig. 2), and the bottom cell further includes first electrodes formed on a side of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate ([0079]-[0080] Fig. 2 see: second electrode 260 of grid electrodes 262 and transparent electrode layer 261 on a surface of first conductivity type layer 250 facing away from substrate 230); and
the recombination layer is disposed between the second semiconductor conductive layer and the top cell (Fig. 2 see: intermediate layer 300 disposed between second conductivity type layer 210 and first solar cell 100), and is configured to facilitate recombination of charge carriers generated by the bottom cell and charge carriers generated by the top cell (paras [0004] [0015] see: the interlayer performs this function as a tunnel junction recombination layer), the recombination layer includes a first transparent conductive oxide (TCO) layer covering a surface of the second semiconductor conductive layer ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: second dielectric layer 330 of ITO), a second TCO layer in contact with the top cell ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: first dielectric layer 310 of ITO), and a metal layer between the first TCO layer and the second TCO layer ([0019], [0042], Fig. 2 see: metal layer 320 of Ag nanoparticles between the first and second dielectric layer 310 and 330). Furthermore, regarding the claim 1 limitations “the first TCO layer has a first surface facing the second TCO layer, the second TCO layer has a second surface facing the first surface, a first region of the first surface and a first region of the second surface are in contact with and covered by the metal layer, and a second region of the first surface and a second region of the second surface are in direct contact with each other and not covered by the metal layer” OH at paras [0040], [0042] recites the metal layer 320 between dielectric layers 310 and 330 as a plurality of Ag nanoparticles distributed between two layers of ITO which meets these limitations as Forrest further evidences for metal nanoparticles with such a distribution, the surfaces of the transparent conductive layers sandwiching the metal nanoparticles are in direct contact with each other in a second region of the two surfaces not covered by the metal nanoparticle layer (Forrest, [0074] Fig. 2 see: nanoparticles 241 of Ag with intervening layer 240 contacting layer 234 between nanoparticles 241) and as such, OH will also display the structure of dielectric layers 310 and 330 contacting each other in the openings between the distributed Ag nanoparticles of layer 320.
Regarding claim 7 OH discloses solar cell of claim 1, and regarding the claim 7 limitation “wherein conductivity of a material of the metal layer is greater than or equal to conductivity of a material of the first TCO layer” OH teaches in para [0042] where the metal layer is Ag and the first TCO layer is ITO, and silver metal inherently has a higher electrical conductivity than ITO. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 8 WU discloses the solar cell of claim 1, and regarding the claim 8 limitation “wherein a light transmittance rate of a material of the metal layer is less than or equal to a light transmittance rate of a material of the first TCO layer” OH teaches in para [0042] where the metal layer is Ag and the first TCO layer is ITO where Ag will inherently have a light transmittance rate less than a light transmittance rate of ITO under the conditions of the intermediate layer in OH. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 9 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 8, wherein material of the metal layer includes copper, silver, molybdenum, or nickel ([0042] see: metal layer 320 is silver nanoparticles).
Regarding claim 12 WU discloses solar cell of claim 1, wherein the metal layer includes at least one hollow portion running through the metal layer in the first direction ([0040], [0042] see: metal layer 320 is distributed silver nanoparticles); and
Regarding the claim 12 limitation “the solar cell further includes at least one filling structure that fills the at least one hollow portion”, Forrest further evidences for metal nanoparticles with such a discontinuous distribution, the surfaces of the transparent conductive layer covering the metal nanoparticles fills the hollow portions between the metal nanoparticles (Forrest, [0074] Fig. 2 see: nanoparticles 241 of Ag with intervening layer 240 filling spaces between nanoparticles 241) and as such OH will also display the structure of dielectric layers 310 and 330 filling each of the hollow openings between the Ag nanoparticles forming metal layer 320.
Regarding the claim 12 limitation “light transmittance of a material of the at least one filling structure is greater than or equal to light transmittance of a material of the metal layer”, as OH teaches in para [0042] where the metal layer is Ag and the TCO layers are ITO where Ag will inherently have a light transmittance rate less than a light transmittance rate of ITO under the conditions of the intermediate layer in OH. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 13 OH discloses solar cell of claim 12, wherein the respective metal layer includes at least two metal portions, and adjacent metal portions of the at least two metal portions are separated by a corresponding hollow portion; and wherein the at least two metal portions and the at least one hollow portion are alternatingly arranged in a second direction ([0040], [0042] see: metal layer 320 is distributed silver nanoparticles and thus the nanoparticles and the hollow portions are arranged in a second direction).
Regarding claim 19 OH discloses solar cell of claim 1, wherein the top cell includes a perovskite thin film solar cell, a copper indium gallium selenium thin film solar cell, a cadmium telluride thin film solar cell, an amorphous silicon thin film solar cell or a Group III-V thin film solar cell ([0018] Figs. 1-2 see: first solar cell 100 is a perovskite solar cell).
Regarding claim 21 OH discloses a solar cell (tandem solar cell 10), comprising a bottom cell (second solar cell 200), a recombination layer (intermediate layer 300), and a top cell (first solar cell 100) that are stacked in sequence in a first direction (Figs. 1-2), wherein
the bottom cell (paras [0068]-[0072]) includes a first semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: first conductivity type layer 250), a substrate (Fig. 2 see: substrate 230), and a second semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: second conductivity type layer 210) that are stacked in sequence in the first direction (See Fig. 2), the second semiconductor conductive layer is disposed between the substrate and the recombination layer (Fig. 2 see: layer 210 between layer 300 and layer 230), the substrate is between the first semiconductor conductive layer and the second semiconductor conductive layer (see Fig. 2), and the bottom cell further includes first electrodes formed on a side of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate ([0079]-[0080] Fig. 2 see: second electrode 260 of grid electrodes 262 and transparent electrode layer 261 on a surface of first conductivity type layer 250 facing away from substrate 230); and
the recombination layer is disposed between the second semiconductor conductive layer and the top cell Fig. 2 see: intermediate layer 300 disposed between second conductivity type layer 210 and first solar cell 100), and is configured to facilitate carrier recombination between electrons generated by one of the bottom cell and the top cell and holes generated by the other of the bottom cell and the top cell (paras [0004] [0015] see: the interlayer performs this function as a tunnel junction recombination layer), the recombination layer includes a first transparent conductive oxide (TCO) layer covering a surface of the second semiconductor conductive layer ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: second dielectric layer 330 of ITO), a second TCO layer in contact with the top cell ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: first dielectric layer 310 of ITO), and a metal layer between the first TCO layer and the second TCO layer ([0019], [0042], Fig. 2 see: metal layer 320 of Ag nanoparticles between the first and second dielectric layer 310 and 330). Regarding the claim 21 recitations “the first TCO layer has a first surface facing the second TCO layer, the second TCO layer has a second surface facing the first surface, a first region of the first surface and a first region of the second surface are in contact with and at least partially covered by the metal layer, and a second region of the first surface and a second region of the second surface are in direct contact with each other and not covered by the metal layer; wherein the first TCO layer and the second TCO layer collectively define a closed cavity configured to receive the metal layer” OH at paras [0040], [0042] recites the metal layer 320 between dielectric layers 310 and 330 as a plurality of Ag nanoparticles distributed between two layers of ITO which meets these limitations as Forrest further evidences for metal nanoparticles with such a distribution, the surfaces of the transparent conductive layers sandwiching the metal nanoparticles are in direct contact with each other in a second region of the two surfaces not covered by the metal nanoparticle layer (Forrest, [0074] Fig. 2 see: nanoparticles 241 of Ag with intervening layer 240 contacting layer 234 between nanoparticles 241) and as such, OH will also display the structure of dielectric layers 310 and 330 contacting each other in the openings between the distributed Ag nanoparticles of layer 320 and enveloping the Ag nanoparticles within closed cavities.
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.
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 3-5 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) as applied to claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of WU et al (WO 2021/159728 A1 with reference made to US 2023/0074348 as equivalent English translation).
Regarding claim 3 OH discloses solar cell of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the metal layer on the first surface to an area of the first surface is in a range of 0.01 to 1, however WU teaches the light transmittance and overall conductivity of the recombination layer are variables that can be modified by varying the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the metal layer on the first surface to an area of the first surface (WU, [0056], [0073]) with the light transmittance increasing and overall conductivity of the recombination layer decreasing as the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the metal layer on the first surface to an area of the first surface is increased, the precise ratio would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed ratio cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the metal layer on the first surface to an area of the first surface in the solar cell of OH to obtain the desired balance between light transmittance and overall conductivity of the recombination layer (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 4 OH discloses solar cell of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose the claim 4 limitation wherein a ratio of a total thickness of the metal layer to a thickness of the recombination layer is in a range of 0.05 to 0.5 in the first direction but WU discloses regarding the claim 4 limitation “wherein a ratio of a total thickness of the metal layer to a thickness of the recombination layer is in a range of 0.05 to 0.5 in the first direction” the thickness of the metal layer is 0.5-2nm and the total thickness of the recombination layer is 10-25nm (para [0081]) thus giving a range for the ratio of these thicknesses as (0.5/25) to (2/10) or 0.02 to 0.2 which substantially overlaps with applicant’s claimed range. It is well settled that where the prior art describes the components of a claimed compound or compositions in concentrations within or overlapping the claimed concentrations a prima facie case of obviousness is established. See In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 1343, 74 USPQ2d 1951, 1953 (Fed. Cir 2005); In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329, 65 USPQ 2d 1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (CCPA 1990); In re Malagari, 499 F.2d 1297, 1303, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974).
Regarding claim 5 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 1, and OH further discloses where the metal layer has a thickness in a range of 2 nm to 50 nm (para [0035]) which overlaps the endpoint of applicant’s claimed range of 0.1 nm to 2 nm in the first direction. It is well settled that where the prior art describes the components of a claimed compound or compositions in concentrations within or overlapping the claimed concentrations a prima facie case of obviousness is established. See In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 1343, 74 USPQ2d 1951, 1953 (Fed. Cir 2005); In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329, 65 USPQ 2d 1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (CCPA 1990); In re Malagari, 499 F.2d 1297, 1303, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974).
OH does not explicitly disclose wherein the recombination layer has a thickness in a range of 2.5 nm to 25 nm in the first direction; or wherein the first TCO layer has a thickness in a range of 1 nm to 20 nm in the first direction; or wherein the second TCO layer has a thickness in a range of 1 nm to 20 nm in the first direction.
However, WU teaches for such recombination layers they have a thickness in a range of 2.5 nm to 25 nm in the first direction (para [0081] see: tunnel layer has a thickness of 10-25 nm) and their transparent conductive oxide layers have a thickness in a range of 1 nm to 20 nm in the first direction ([0019], [0023] see: the thicknesses of each of the upper and lower transport layers is 2-20 nm).
WU and OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of tandem solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of WU such that the recombination layer of OH has a thickness in a range of 2.5 nm to 25 nm in the first direction as in WU (para [0081] see: tunnel layer has a thickness of 10-25 nm) and the first and second TCO layers of OH each have a thickness in a range of 1 nm to 20 nm in the first direction as in WU ([0019], [0023] see: the thicknesses of each of the upper and lower transport layers is 2-20 nm) as such a modification would have amounted to the mere selection of known recombination layer thicknesses for their intended use in the known environment of a tandem solar cell recombination layer to accomplish the entirely expected results of providing charge carrier recombination while providing sufficient transparency of light to the bottom subcell.
Regarding claim 17 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 13, but does not explicitly disclose wherein a ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least one hollow portion on the first surface to an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least two metal portions on the first surface ranges from 0.01 to 99.
However, WU teaches the light transmittance and overall conductivity of the recombination layer are variables that can be modified by varying the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least one hollow portion on the first surface to an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least two metal portions on the first surface (WU, [0056], [0073]) with the light transmittance increasing and overall conductivity of the recombination layer decreasing as the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least one hollow portion on the first surface to an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least two metal portions on the first surface is increased, the precise ratio would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed ratio cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the ratio of an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least one hollow portion on the first surface to an area of an orthogonal projection of the at least two metal portions on the first surface in the solar cell of OH to obtain the desired balance between light transmittance and overall conductivity of the recombination layer (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 18 OH discloses solar cell of claim 1, wherein the bottom cell further includes:
a tunneling layer disposed between the second semiconductor conductive layer and the substrate (OH, [0064] Fig, 2 see: first passivation membrane (240) functioning as a tunneling layer disposed between substrate 230 and first conductive layer (250)); but does not explicitly disclose a passivation layer disposed on a surface of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate, wherein the first electrodes penetrate the passivation layer to be in ohmic contact with the first semiconductor conductive layer.
However, WU teaches a tandem solar cell where the bottom solar cell includes a passivation layer disposed on a surface of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate, wherein the first electrodes penetrate the passivation layer to be in ohmic contact with the first semiconductor conductive layer (WU, [0084] see: shadow surface of the lower cell unit can be a (PERT (Passivated Emitter and Rear Totally- Diffused) structure which encompasses a rear passivation layer which the rear electrode gridlines penetrated to contact the rear diffused layer (second semiconductor conductive layer).
WU and OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of tandem solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of WU such that the bottom cell includes a passivation layer disposed on a surface of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate, wherein the first electrodes penetrate the passivation layer to be in ohmic contact with the first semiconductor conductive layer as in WU (WU, [0084] see: shadow surface of the lower cell unit can be a (PERT (Passivated Emitter and Rear Totally- Diffused) structure which encompasses a rear passivation layer which the rear electrode gridlines penetrated to contact the rear diffused layer (second semiconductor conductive layer) as such a modification would have amounted to the selection of a known silicon bottom cell back surface contact structure for its intended use in the known environment of a bottoms silicon cell of a tandem cell to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) as applied to claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of Kurtin et al (US 2013/0206219).
Regarding claim 6 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the metal layer has a light transmittance rate of greater than or equal to 95% for light with a wavelength of 550 nm to 1200 nm.
However, Kurtin teaches in such intermediate electrodes the light transmittance rate for such longer wavelengths can be modified by varying the thickness of the electrode material and increasing such a light transmittance rate increases the light incident on the bottom cell and thus the efficiency of the bottom cell (para [0224]).
Therefore the efficiency of the bottom cell is a variable that can be modified, among others, by varying the light transmittance rate of the metal layer in a wavelength of 550 nm to 1200 nm. For that reason, the light transmittance rate of the metal layer, would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the light transmittance rate of the metal layer cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the light transmittance rate of the metal layer in a wavelength of 550 nm to 1200 nm in the solar cell of OH to obtain the desired efficiency of the bottom cell (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) as applied to claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of Collin et al (WO 2022136080A1, reference made to attached English machine translation).
Regarding claim 10 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first TCO layer includes at least two TCO sub-layers stacked sequentially in the first direction, wherein the first TCO layer is closer to the bottom cell than the second TCO layer, and a refractive index of the first TCO layer is greater than refractive index of the second TCO layer.
Collin discloses an intermediate electrode layer for a tandem solar cell (Fig. 1 see: transparent conductive layers 10 between front cell 7 and rear cell 5) where a first TCO layer includes at least two TCO sub-layers stacked sequentially in the first direction (Fig. 1 see: stack of transparent conductive layers 10 includes first layer 11a of a first type and first layer 13a of a second type), wherein the first TCO layer is closer to the bottom cell than the second TCO layer (Fig. 1 see: first layer 11a closer to rear cell 5 than first layer 13a or second layer 13b), and a refractive index of the first TCO layer is greater than refractive index of the second TCO layer (page 2 of translation and bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 of translation, Fig. 1 see: first layer 11a of a first type with a refractive index greater than 1.8 and first layer 13a or second layer 13b of a second type with a refractive index less than 1.7). Collin teaches this allows the layers to function as an antireflective layer for the bottom cell and increase light trapping for better efficiency (see top of page 6 of translation).
Collin and OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of tandem solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of Collin such that the first TCO layer of OH includes at least two TCO sub-layers stacked sequentially in the first direction as in Collin (Fig. 1 see: stack of transparent conductive layers 10 includes first layer 11a of a first type and first layer 13a of a second type), wherein the first TCO layer is closer to the bottom cell than the second TCO layer as in Collin (Fig. 1 see: first layer 11a closer to rear cell 5 than first layer 13a or second layer 13b), and a refractive index of the first TCO layer is greater than refractive index of the second TCO layer as in Collin (page 2 of translation and bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 of translation, Fig. 1 see: first layer 11a of a first type with a refractive index greater than 1.8 and first layer 13a or second layer 13b of a second type with a refractive index less than 1.7) as Collin teaches this allows the layers to function as an antireflective layer for the bottom cell and increase light trapping for better efficiency (see top of page 6 of translation).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) in view of Collin et al (WO 2022136080A1, reference made to attached English machine translation) as applied to claims 1, 7-10, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of Kirner et al (US 2023/0223205).
Regarding claim 11 modified OH discloses solar cell of claim 10, but does not explicitly disclose wherein a refractive index of each of at least part of the at least two TCO sub-layers has a decreased gradient in the first direction.
Kirner teaches a tandem solar cell where the transparent conductive layer of an intermediate layer is formed such that a refractive index has a decreased gradient in the first direction (Kirner, Abstract, [0036]-[0037], [0040], Figs. 1-2 see: metal oxynitride (MnOxNy) layer 103 where the composition is adjusted such that the refractive index increases towards the bottom cell (decreased gradient in the first direction)) to minimize reflectivity losses and improve light absorbance of the bottom cell (Kirner, [0012], [0040]).
Kirner and modified OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of tandem solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of Kirner such that a refractive index of each of at least part of the at least two TCO sub-layers of modified OH has a decreased gradient in the first direction as taught by Kirner (Kirner, Abstract, [0036]-[0037], [0040], Figs. 1-2 see: metal oxynitride (MnOxNy) layer 103 where the composition is adjusted such that the refractive index increases towards the bottom cell (decreased gradient in the first direction)) to minimize reflectivity losses and improve light absorbance of the bottom cell as taught by Kirner (Kirner, [0012], [0040]).
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) as applied to claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of LIU et al (CN 105810772B, reference made to English machine translation).
Regarding claim 14 OH discloses the solar cell of claim 13,
and although OH teaches where the solar cell further includes second electrodes spaced apart from each other in a third direction, the second electrode being disposed on a surface of the top cell facing away from the bottom cell in the first direction, wherein the second direction and the third direction are in a same direction or parallel to each other (OH, [0059], Fig. 2 see: first electrode 140 including spaced apart grid electrodes 142) but OH does not explicitly disclose an orthogonal projection of a respective second electrode on the metal layer is at least partially located in a corresponding metal portion.
LIU discloses a tandem solar cell comprising second electrodes spaced apart from each other in a third direction (LIU, see page 3 of translation, Fig. 1 see: spaced metal top electrode 12), an orthogonal projection of a respective second electrode on the metal layer is at least partially located in a corresponding metal portion; and wherein the second direction and the third direction are in a same direction or parallel to each other (LIU, see page 3 of translation, Fig. 1 see: spaced metal top electrodes 12 have a orthogonal projection that overlaps with metal nanometer particle array 6).
LIU and OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of tandem solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of LIU such that an orthogonal projection of a respective second electrode on the metal layer of OH is at least partially located in a corresponding metal portion of OH as taught by LIU wherein the second direction and the third direction are in a same direction or parallel to each other (LIU, see page 3 of translation, Fig. 1 see: spaced metal top electrodes 12 have a orthogonal projection that overlaps with metal nanometer particle array 6) as such a modification would have amounted to the use of a known top electrode arrangement for its intended use in a known environment of a tandem solar cell to accomplish an entirely expected result of collecting photogenerated current.
Regarding claim 15 modified OH discloses solar cell of claim 14, and LIU teaches wherein the orthogonal projection of the respective second electrode on the metal layer is disposed in the corresponding metal portion (LIU, see page 3 of translation, Fig. 1 see: spaced metal top electrodes 12 have a orthogonal projection that overlaps with metal nanometer particle array 6).
Regarding claim 16 modified OH discloses solar cell of claim 14, and LIU teaches wherein the orthogonal projection of the corresponding metal portion on the first surface is within the orthogonal projection of the respective second electrode on the first surface (LIU, see page 3 of translation, Fig. 1 see: spaced metal top electrodes 12 have a orthogonal projection that overlaps with metal nanometer particle array 6).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH et al (KR 20230070706A, reference made to attached English machine translation) as evidenced by Forrest et al (US 2006/0027801) and further in view of as applied to claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, 19, and 21 above, and further in view of Niira et al (US 2009/0223562).
Regarding claim 20 OH discloses a photovoltaic module, comprising:
a solar cell (tandem solar cell 10), comprising a bottom cell (second solar cell 200), a recombination layer (intermediate layer 300), and a top cell (first solar cell 100) that are stacked in sequence in a first direction (Figs. 1-2), wherein
the bottom cell (paras [0068]-[0072]) includes a first semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: first conductivity type layer 250), a substrate (Fig. 2 see: substrate 230), and a second semiconductor conductive layer (Fig. 2 see: second conductivity type layer 210) that are stacked in sequence in the first direction (See Fig. 2), the second semiconductor conductive layer is disposed between the substrate and the recombination layer (Fig. 2 see: layer 210 between layer 300 and layer 230), the substrate is between the first semiconductor conductive layer and the second semiconductor conductive layer (see Fig. 2), and the bottom cell further includes first electrodes formed on a side of the first semiconductor conductive layer facing away from the substrate ([0079]-[0080] Fig. 2 see: second electrode 260 of grid electrodes 262 and transparent electrode layer 261 on a surface of first conductivity type layer 250 facing away from substrate 230); and
the recombination layer is disposed between the second semiconductor conductive layer and the top cell (Fig. 2 see: intermediate layer 300 disposed between second conductivity type layer 210 and first solar cell 100), and is configured to facilitate recombination of charge carriers generated by the bottom cell and charge carriers generated by the top cell (paras [0004] [0015] see: the interlayer performs this function as a tunnel junction recombination layer), the recombination layer includes a first transparent conductive oxide (TCO) layer covering a surface of the second semiconductor conductive layer ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: second dielectric layer 330 of ITO), a second TCO layer in contact with the top cell ([0019], [0021]-[0022] Fig. 2 see: first dielectric layer 310 of ITO), and a metal layer between the first TCO layer and the second TCO layer ([0019], [0042], Fig. 2 see: metal layer 320 of Ag nanoparticles between the first and second dielectric layer 310 and 330). Furthermore, regarding the claim 1 limitations “the first TCO layer has a first surface facing the second TCO layer, the second TCO layer has a second surface facing the first surface, a first region of the first surface and a first region of the second surface are in contact with and covered by the metal layer, and a second region of the first surface and a second region of the second surface are in direct contact with each other and not covered by the metal layer” OH at paras [0040], [0042] recites the metal layer 320 between dielectric layers 310 and 330 as a plurality of Ag nanoparticles distributed between two layers of ITO which meets these limitations as Forrest further evidences for metal nanoparticles with such a distribution, the surfaces of the transparent conductive layers sandwiching the metal nanoparticles are in direct contact with each other in a second region of the two surfaces not covered by the metal nanoparticle layer (Forrest, [0074] Fig. 2 see: nanoparticles 241 of Ag with intervening layer 240 contacting layer 234 between nanoparticles 241) and as such, OH will also display the structure of dielectric layers 310 and 330 contacting each other in the openings between the distributed Ag nanoparticles of layer 320.
OH does not explicitly disclose the module comprising a plurality of cell strings are formed by connecting a plurality of such solar cells as recited above; an encapsulation layer for covering surfaces of each of the plurality of cell strings; and at least one cover plate, wherein each cover plate is configured to cover a surface of the encapsulation layer facing away from the cell string.
Niira teaches in solar cell modules it's conventional to have a plurality of cell strings, wherein each of the plurality of cell strings is formed by electrically connecting a plurality of solar cells (Fig. 3 see: series of strings of solar cell elements 20) and a structure of at least one cover plate configured to cover a surface of at least one encapsulation layer facing away from the cell string (Niira, [0091] Figs. 3A-3B see: solar cell elements 20 encapsulated by a front surface side filler 24 and a rear surface side filler 25 made of EVA and a transparent member 22 of glass and a rear surface protective member 23).
Niira and OH are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of solar cells.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the solar cell of OH in view of Niira such that a plurality of the solar cells of OH are connected in series in a plurality of strings where at least one encapsulation film is configured to cover a surface of the plurality of cell strings of OH and at least one cover plate is configured to cover a surface of the at least one encapsulation film facing away from the cell string as taught by Niira (Niira, [0091] Figs. 3A-3B see: solar cell elements 20 encapsulated by a front surface side filler 24 and a rear surface side filler 25 made of EVA and a transparent member 22 of glass and a rear surface protective member 23) for the express purpose of protecting the solar cells in the module of OH.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-21 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Irwin et al (US 2021/0159022A1) in Fig. 19 discloses a tandem solar cell with a recombination layer (IFL 1930) of a p-doped layer 1931 and n-doped layer 1932 with metallic nanoparticles 1933 dispersed between said layers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J GOLDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7935. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm.
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.
ANDREW J. GOLDEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/ANDREW J GOLDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726