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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/15/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 11-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (“Nanofabrication for all-soft and high-density electronic devices based on liquid metal”) in view Hieslmair (US 2012/0180862), and further in view of Wijdekop et al. (US 2015/0206663).
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a transparent electrode (or electrode array/all-soft electronic device) comprising:
applying a sacrificial layer (e.g. PAA and PMMA) on a substrate (Si/SiO2, see Fig. 1(a));
forming a plurality of grid structures (see Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(b) which shows a plurality of grid structures) on the sacrificial layer using a liquid metal to provide a main conductive part (see Fig. 1(a));
forming a protective part (soft elastomer such as PDMS) so as to surround the plurality of grid structures (see fig. 1(a);
separating the substrate (Si/SiO2) from the main conductive part and the protective part (PDMS) by removing the sacrificial layer (see fig. 1(a));
wherein the liquid metal comprises a eutectic gallium-indium alloy (EGaIn, see fig. 1);
wherein the grid structure is formed by a printing process (e.g. using mask and pressing by stamp) on the sacrificial layer (PAA and PMMA, see fig. 1).
Kim et al. does not teach forming the grid structure by printing a plurality of linear patterns and printing a plurality of additional linear patterns perpendicular to the previously printed linear patterns to form the grid structure.
Hieslmair discloses forming a grid structure (of fingers 108 and bus bars 112, figs. 1-2) by printing a plurality of linear patterns (or fingers 108 only) and printing a plurality of additional linear patterns (or bus bars 112 only) perpendicular to the previously printed linear patterns (or fingers 108, see figs. 1-2) so that highly conductive additional linear patterns (or bus bars 112) are forms to lower recombination (see [0033] and [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kim et al. to have formed a grid structure by printing a plurality of linear patterns (or fingers 108 only) and printing a plurality of additional linear patterns (or bus bars 112) perpendicular to the previously printed linear patterns so that highly conductive additional linear patterns (or bus bars) are used to lower recombination as taught by Hieslmair.
Kim et al. teaches the method provides an electrode array that can endure mechanical deformation up to 30%, while maintaining electrical functionality (see third paragraph of the right column in page 2). Kim et al. does not teach using the electrode (or the all-soft electronic device) for a solar cell such that the method includes the step of locating an auxiliary conductive part provided under the grid structures of the main conductive part; nor do they teach a width of each of the linear patterns and each of the additional linear patterns is 1 to 10mm, and a pitch of the grid structures is 100 to 200mm.
Wijdekop et al. discloses a solar cell using a transparent electrode (10, fig. 1, [0066]) including a plurality of grid structures (see current collector 11, fig. 1) as a main conductive part surrounded by a protective part (12, fig. 1) such that an auxiliary conductive part (or transparent conductive layer 13, [0066]) is provided under the grid structure (11, see fig. 1) to improve the electrical contact between the grid structures and the transparent conductive adhesive (4, fig. 1, [0066]), wherein the grid structures (or current collector 11) have dimensions of 5mm in width and a pitch of 200mm ([0066]) to provide very good lateral conductivity over large surface area with resistive loses being kept to minimum for a transparent electrode (10, see [0010-0011]). 5mm is right within the claimed range of 1 to 10mm, and 200mm is in the claimed ranged of 100 to 200mm.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Kim et al. by further locating an auxiliary conductive part comprising a conductive material (13) provided under the grid structures of the main conductive part so that the electrode is being used for a solar cell as taught by Wijdekop et al.; because Kim et al. teaches the electrode (or all-soft electronic device) offers unrivaled combination of resolution, electrical conductivity and electronic/wiring density as well as capability of enduring mechanical deformation up to 30% while maintaining electrical functionality (Kim et al.: page 2, third paragraph of the right column), and Wijdekop et al. discloses the auxiliary conductive part (or transparent conductive layer) would improve the electrical contact between the grid structures and the transparent conductive adhesive (see [0066] of Wijdekop et al.). In addition, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the method of modified Kim et al. to form the grid structures having dimensions of 5mm in width and a pitch of 200mm ([0066]) as taught by Wijdekop et al., because Wijdekop et al. teaches such grid structure dimensions would provide very good lateral conductivity over large surface area with resistive loses being kept to minimum for a transparent electrode in the application of solar cell as taught (see [0010-0011] of Wijdekop et al.).
Regarding 12, modified Kim et al. discloses a method as in claim 11 above, wherein Kim et al. discloses the sacrificial layer comprises PMMA (see fig. 1).
Regarding claims 14-15, modified Kim et al. discloses a method as in claim 11 above, wherein Kim et al. discloses the protective part comprises an elastomer comprising PDMS (see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, modified Kim et al. discloses a method as in claim 11 above, wherein Wijdekop et al. discloses the conductive material comprises PEDOT:PSS ([0066]). PEDOT:PSS is a conductive polymer.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Kim et al. (“nanofabrication for all-soft and high-density electronic devices based on liquid metal”) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of de la Vega et al. (US 2011/0175065).
Regarding claim 17, modified Kim et al. discloses a method as in claim 11 above, wherein Wijdekop et al. discloses using PEDOT:PSS as conductive material (see [0066] of Wijdekop et al.).
Modified Kim et al. does not disclose using ITO, which is transparent in the range of visible and infrared, for the conductive material.
de la Vega et al. discloses ITO and PEDOT:PSS are equivalent transparent conductive material known in the art ([0048]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Kim et al. by using ITO for the transparent conductive material (13), because de la Vega et al. teaches ITO is known as a transparent conductive material in the art. Such modification would involve nothing more than use of known material for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish entirely expected result. International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). The Courts have held that the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (See MPEP 2144.07).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Kim (or D1) teaches different pattern of the liquid metal EGaIn from the claimed pattern, Hieslmair (or D2) teaches printing techniques but does not teach printing liquid metal to form the pattern as claimed, and Wijdekop (or D3) discloses using nickel grid and not liquid metal. Applicant goes on and argues the nickel and liquid metal exhibit fundamentally different characteristic.
The examiner replies that Wijidekop is not relied upon for teaching nickel, but for the claimed grid structure pattern, because Wijidekop teaches such grid structure pattern would provide very good lateral conductivity over large surface area with resistive loses being kept to minimum for a transparent electrode in the application of solar cell. See the rejection above. Furthermore, such modification would involve nothing more than an intended use of the method of modified Kim. It is noted that nickel and liquid metal such as eutectic gallium indium are equivalent materials to be used as an electrode for a solar cell application (see [0299] of Seifrid, US 2019/0157581).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH-TRUC TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-6594. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 6:00pm.
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 T. Barton can be reached on 5712721307. 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.
THANH-TRUC TRINH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/THANH TRUC TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726