DETAILED ACTION
This is the final office action 18/604,571, filed 3/14/2024, which is a continuation of PCT/CN2023/077854, filed 2/24/2022, which claims priority to Chinese application CN202210171553.8, filed 2/24/2022.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-11, and 13-15 are pending; Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-11 and 14 are considered herein.
In light of the claim amendments filed 11/11/2025, the objection to Claim 14 is withdrawn, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and the prior art rejections are withdrawn. New grounds of rejection are presented herein.
Additional Prior Art
The Examiner wishes to apprise the Applicant of the following references, which are not currently applied in a rejection herein.
U.S. Patent 4,590,327: This reference teaches a solar cell with finger electrode structures extending in orthogonal directions, with an overlying bus bar (Figs. 1-2 and 10).
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0250114 A1: This reference teaches a bus electrode 16 overlying point contact electrodes 22, with a space between the bus electrode 16 and the underlying silicon substrate 12 (paragraphs [0016]-[0019]).
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0080069 A1: This reference teaches a bus electrodes overlying complex-shaped finger electrodes (Fig. 1).
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0186968 A1: This reference teaches a bus electrodes overlying complex-shaped finger electrodes (Fig. 9).
U.S. Patent 5,380,371: This reference teaches a solar cell with finger electrode structures extending in orthogonal directions, with an overlying bus bar, wherein the bus bar covers surfaces of the underlying finger electrode (Figs. 2A-B).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-11, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “extends along the second direction and arranged along the first direction.” It is the Examiner’s position that this limitation should recite “extends along the second direction and is arranged along the first direction,” or an equivalent. Appropriate correction is required.
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 § 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 1-3, 8-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurahashi, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0018562 A1).
In reference to Claim 1, Kurahashi teaches a solar cell piece 10 (Figs. 11-13, paragraphs [0090] and [0119]-[0122]).
Kurahashi teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple first gate line structures 13b (Fig. 11, paragraph [0090]), wherein the multiple first gate line structures 13b include multiple first gate lines extending along a first direction and arranged along a second direction, and the multiple first gate lines comprise auxiliary gates (i.e. finger electrodes, Fig. 11, paragraph [0090]).
Kurahashi teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple second gate line structures 31, arranged on the multiple first gate line structures 13b, wherein the multiple second gate line structures include multiple second gate lines 31, the second gate lines comprise main gates (i.e. bus bars, Fig. 11, paragraph [0090]). The “multiple second gate line structures” 31 are shown in Fig. 1.
Kurahashi teaches that at least part of an area of at least one second gate line structure 31 is not in contact with a reaction layer of the solar cell piece (i.e. is vertically separated from a top surface of the silicon layer 10 in region 43, Figs. 11-12, paragraphs [0121]-[0122]).
Kurahashi teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces (Fig. 12, shown in the inset below).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the device of Kurahashi is structurally capable of performing in the manner required by the limitation “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures.”
The inset below teaches that at least a second part of the multiple second gate line structures 31 extends along the second direction and is arranged along the first direction.
The inset below teaches that the multiple first gate line structures 31b further includes multiple third gate lines 51 extending along the second direction and arranged along the first direction (paragraph [0121]), and the second part of the multiple second gate lines 31 are located on at least part of the multiple third gate lines 51, wherein the multiple third gate lines are composed of the auxiliary gates (i.e. are contiguous with the finger electrodes/auxiliary gates 13b).
It is noted that “are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces” and “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures” are intended use limitations of the claim.
The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus. See In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). The Courts have held that the manner of operating an apparatus does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)).
PNG
media_image1.png
341
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
322
657
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to Claim 2, the inset of Fig. 11 above teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 include multiple segments 41 of arc-shaped structure.
In reference to Claim 3, the inset of Fig. 11 above teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 include multiple segments of linear structure.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 12 of Kurahashi teaches a solar cell string comprising the solar cell pieces according to claim 1, wherein the connection structure sequentially connects two adjacent solar cell pieces to form the solar cell string.
In reference to Claims 1-3, 8-11, and 14, an alternate interpretation is presented.
In reference to Claim 1, Kurahashi teaches a solar cell piece 10 (Figs. 11-13, paragraphs [0090] and [0119]-[0122]).
Kurahashi teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple first gate line structures 51 (Fig. 11, paragraph [0090]), wherein the multiple first gate line structures 51 include multiple first gate lines extending along a first direction and arranged along a second direction, and the multiple first gate lines 51 comprise auxiliary gates (i.e. electrodes, Fig. 11, paragraph [0122]). The “multiple first gate line structures” 51 are shown in Fig. 1.
Kurahashi teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple second gate line structures 31, arranged on the multiple first gate line structures 51, wherein the multiple second gate line structures include multiple second gate lines 31, the second gate lines comprise main gates (i.e. electrodes, Fig. 11, paragraph [0090]). The “multiple second gate line structures” 31 are shown in Fig. 1.
Kurahashi teaches that at least part of an area of at least one second gate line structure 31 is not in contact with a reaction layer of the solar cell piece (i.e. is vertically separated from a top surface of the silicon layer 10 in region 43, Figs. 11-12, paragraphs [0121]-[0122]).
Kurahashi teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces (Fig. 12, shown in the inset below).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the device of Kurahashi is structurally capable of performing in the manner required by the limitation “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures.”
The inset below teaches that at least a first part of the multiple second gate line structures 31 extends along the first direction and is arranged along the second direction. This “first part” of the multiple gate line structures corresponds to the curved regions 41 of electrodes 31.
The inset below teaches that this “first part” of the multiple second gate line structures 31 are arranged at intervals in both the first direction and the second direction on the multiple first gate lines. This is further shown in Fig. 12.
It is noted that “are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces” and “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures” are intended use limitations of the claim.
The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus.
PNG
media_image3.png
341
582
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
322
657
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to Claim 2, the inset of Fig. 11 above teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 include multiple segments 41 of arc-shaped structure.
In reference to Claim 3, the inset of Fig. 11 above teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 31 include multiple segments of linear structure.
In reference to Claim 8, Fig. 11 teaches that the multiple second gate lines 31 are located on at least part of the multiple first gate lines 51 in a manner that each second gate line 21 half surrounds (i.e. covers at least half of the top of) each first gate line 51.
In reference to Claim 9, Kurahashi teaches that items 31 and 51 are connected by solder (paragraph [0106]).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 9, wherein the solar cell piece further includes a connecting layer (i.e. the solder layer) located between at least part of the multiple first gate line structures 51 and at least part of the multiple second gate line structures 31.
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 10, wherein the connecting layer is composed of at least one of inorganic matter and metal.
In reference to Claim 11, Kurahashi teaches that items 31 and 51 are connected by solder (paragraph [0106]).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 11, wherein a contact surface of the multiple first gate line structures 51 and the multiple second gate line structures 31 further contains a boundary layer, corresponding to the solder layer, and the surfaces of layers 31 and 51 that contact the solder layer.
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 11, wherein the boundary layer includes a portion of the multiple first gate line structures 51 and/or a portion of the multiple second gate line structures 31.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 12 of Kurahashi teaches a solar cell string comprising the solar cell pieces according to claim 1, wherein the connection structure sequentially connects two adjacent solar cell pieces to form the solar cell string.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tohoda (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0104961 A1).
In reference to Claim 1, Tohoda teaches a solar cell piece (Figs. 2-6, paragraphs [0035]-[0062]).
Tohoda teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple first gate line structures 24, wherein the multiple first gate line structures include multiple first gate lines 24 extending along a first (i.e. x) direction and arranged along a second (i.e. y) direction, and the multiple first gate lines comprise auxiliary gates 24 (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0058]-[0062]).
Tohoda teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple second gate line structures 22/23, arranged on the multiple first gate line structures 24 (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0055]-[0062]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 22/23 include multiple second gate lines.
Tohoda teaches that the second gate line structures 22/23 comprise main gates (i.e. bus bar electrodes).
Fig. 4 teaches that at least part of an area of at least one second gate line structure 22/23 is not in contact with a reaction layer of the solar cell piece (i.e. because it is separated from the top surface of the solar cell by electrode layer 24).
Tohoda teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 22/23 are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures 11 between multiple solar cell pieces (Figs. 1-6).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the device of Tohoda is structurally capable of performing in the manner required by the limitation “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures.”
Fig. 2 teaches that at least a first part 23 of the multiple second gate line structures extends along the first (i.e. x) direction and arranged along the second (i.e. y) direction, and the first part 23 of the multiple second gate line structures are arranged at intervals in both the first direction and the second direction on the multiple first gate lines 24.
It is noted that “are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces” and “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures” are intended use limitations of the claim.
The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus.
In reference to Claim 3, Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 22/23 include multiple lines of and/or multiple segments of linear structure.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 1 teaches a solar cell string comprising the solar cell pieces according to claim 1, wherein the connection structure sequentially connects two adjacent solar cell pieces to form the solar cell string.
In reference to Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8-11, and 14, an alternate interpretation is presented.
In reference to Claim 1, Tohoda teaches a solar cell piece (Figs. 2-6, paragraphs [0035]-[0062]).
Tohoda teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple first gate line structures 24, wherein the multiple first gate line structures include multiple first gate lines 24 extending along a first (i.e. x) direction and arranged along a second (i.e. y) direction, and the multiple first gate lines comprise auxiliary gates 24 (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0058]-[0062]).
Tohoda teaches that at least one surface of the solar cell piece (i.e. the top surface) comprises multiple second gate line structures 11, arranged on the multiple first gate line structures 24 (Fig. 2, paragraphs [0050]-[0054]).
Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 11 include multiple second gate lines.
Tohoda teaches that the second gate line structures 11 comprise main gates (i.e. connector electrodes).
Fig. 4 teaches that at least part of an area of at least one second gate line structure 11 is not in contact with a reaction layer of the solar cell piece (i.e. because it is separated from the top surface of the solar cell by electrode layer 24 and resin layer 12).
Tohoda teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 11 are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces (i.e. the portions of layer 11 disposed between the adjacent cells, Figs. 1-6).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the device of Tohoda is structurally capable of performing in the manner required by the limitation “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures.”
Fig. 2 teaches that at least a first part of the multiple second gate line structures extends along the first (i.e. x) direction and arranged along the second (i.e. y) direction, and the first part of the multiple second gate line structures are arranged at intervals in both the first direction and the second direction on the multiple first gate lines 24 (i.e. the portions of items 11 that are arranged on items 24 at intervals in both the first direction and the second direction on the multiple first gate lines 24).
It is noted that “are suitable for being in contact with connecting structures between multiple solar cell pieces” and “a current of the solar cell piece flows through the auxiliary gates to the main gates and then flows out through the connecting structures” are intended use limitations of the claim.
The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus.
In reference to Claim 3, Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate line structures 11 include multiple lines of and/or multiple segments of linear structure.
In reference to Claim 5, Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate lines 11 only extend along the first direction (i.e. the x direction) and are arranged along the second direction (i.e. the y direction).
Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple first gate line structures 24 also includes the multiple third gate lines 22 extending along the second direction (i.e. the y direction) and arranged along the first direction (i.e. the x direction), and the multiple second gate lines 11 span the multiple third gate lines 22.
Tohoda teaches that all components of the electrodes 22/24 of his invention (which are collectively referred to as “electrode 21” in paragraphs [0055]-[0062]) are “integrally formed” (paragraph [0049]) and are made by printing a conductive paste (paragraph [0065]).
Therefore, it appears that Tohoda teaches that the multiple third gate lines 22 and the multiple first gate lines 24 are composed of the same material (i.e. conductive paste), because they are collectively stated to be (1) integrally formed, and (2) printed by a conductive paste.
In reference to Claim 6, Tohoda teaches that at least a part of the multiple second gate line structures 11 further includes multiple fourth gate lines 23 (Fig. 2, paragraph [0049]).
Because these fourth gate lines 23 zigzag and have components extending in both the x- and y-directions, it is the Examiner’s position that the multiple fourth gate lines 23 extend along the second direction (i.e. the y direction) and arranged along the first direction (i.e. the x direction).
Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple fourth gate 23 lines are located on (i.e. cross) at least part of the multiple third gate lines 22.
Fig. 2 teaches that the multiple second gate lines 11 span the multiple third gate lines 22 and the multiple fourth gate lines 23.
Tohoda teaches that all components of the electrodes 22/23 of his invention (which are collectively referred to as “electrode 21” in paragraphs [0055]-[0062]) are “integrally formed” (paragraph [0049]) and are made by printing a conductive paste (paragraph [0065]).
Therefore, it appears that Tohoda teaches that the multiple third gate lines 22 and the multiple fourth gate lines 23 are composed of the same material (i.e. conductive paste), because they are collectively stated to be (1) integrally formed, and (2) printed by a conductive paste.
In reference to Claim 8, Tohoda teaches that the multiple second gate lines 11 are located on at least part of the multiple first gate lines 24 in a manner that the each second gate line 11 half surrounds or completely surrounds the each first gate line 24 (i.e. completely covers the top surface of each first gate line 24).
In reference to Claim 9, Tohoda teaches that the solar cell piece further includes a connecting layer 12 located between at least part of the multiple first gate line structures 24 and at least part of the multiple second gate line structures (Fig. 4, paragraph [0052]).
In reference to Claim 10, Tohoda teaches that the connecting layer 12 is composed of organic matter (i.e. the organic resins listed in paragraph [0052]) or inorganic matter (i.e. the silicone resin listed in paragraph [0052]).
In reference to Claim 11, Tohoda teaches that a contact surface of the multiple first gate line structures 24 and the multiple second gate line structures 11 further contains a boundary layer, corresponding to the interface layer between items 24 and 11 (Fig. 4).
This “boundary layer” includes a portion of the multiple first gate line structures and/or a portion of the second gate line structures, because the layer is defined as the interface between these layers.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 1 teaches a solar cell string comprising the solar cell pieces according to claim 1, wherein the connection structure sequentially connects two adjacent solar cell pieces to form the solar cell string.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art rejections, claim objection, and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, these rejection have been withdrawn.
New grounds of rejection are presented herein, in light of the claim amendments.
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 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
Prosecution Insights