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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “a value of the disconnection distance”, which lacks antecedent basis because no “disconnection distance of each thin gate line” has been previously defined, such that it is unclear how one is to evaluate or assess “a value of the disconnection distance” as claimed.
Clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 10 1902809; see English machine translation) in view of Li et al. (CN 112420853; see English machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a gate line structure of a solar cell (see Figure 6), including a plurality of main gate lines (110) extending along a first direction (vertical direction) and arranged at intervals along a second direction (horizontal direction), and
a plurality of thin gate lines (120) extending along the second direction and arranged at intervals along the first direction (see Figure 6), the first direction and the second direction are not parallel (as set forth above), and the plurality of main gate lines are electrically connected to the plurality of thin gate lines respectively (inherent relationship of bus bar and finger electrodes), wherein, between any two adjacent main gate lines, each thin gate line has a disconnected section (see gap between the finger electrodes 120 in Figure 6), but the reference does not expressly disclose between any two adjacent main gate lines, the disconnected section of an odd-numbered thin gate line and the disconnected section of an even-numbered thin gate line do not overlap or do not completely overlap in the first direction.
Li discloses a staggered configuration for the odd and even fine grid lines (see Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a known technique to improve similar devices such as arranging the disconnected section of the odd-numbered thin gate line and the disconnected section of an even-numbered thin gate line to be staggered in the device of modified Lee, as taught by Li above, so that shading can be reduced and the amount of silver used can be reduced, thus, reducing the cost of the solar battery (page 4). It is noted that if a technique is known to improve a device and one of ordinary skill in the art recognizes it would improve similar devices in the same way, the use of the known technique to improve similar devices would be prima facie obvious as the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art unless the actual application of the technique would have been beyond the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 417, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
Regarding claim 2, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses a length of the disconnected section of each thin gate line in the second direction is disconnection distance (as set forth above), but the reference does not expressly disclose the disconnection distance is less than or equal to twice a spacing between two adjacent thin gate lines.
Li discloses a grid line configuration for a solar cell (see Figure 3), wherein the disconnection distance is less than or equal to twice a spacing between two adjacent thin gate lines (page 4).
As modified Lee is not limited to any specific examples of the relationship between the disconnection distance and spacing between two adjacent thin gate lines and as the preference of the disconnection distance is less than or equal to twice a spacing between two adjacent thin gate lines was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as evidenced by Li above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected any suitable arrangement for the gate line configuration, including one in which the disconnection distance is less than or equal to twice a spacing between two adjacent thin gate lines in the device of Lee. Said combination would amount to nothing more than the use of a known element for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result, and because the configuration reduces shading and the consumption of silver paste and the manufacture cost of the solar cell (page 4).
Regarding claim 3, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses the disconnection distance of the disconnection section of each thin gate line is all equal (see Figure 6).
Regarding claim 5, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above.
Li further discloses between any two adjacent main gate lines, the disconnected sections of any two odd-numbered thin gate lines overlap in the first direction, and the disconnected sections of any two even-numbered thin gate lines also overlap in the first direction (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 7, modified Lee discloses a solar cell (see Figure 6), comprising a basic gate line structure, and the basic gate line structure is the gate line structure according to claim 1 (see Figure 6).
Claim(s) 6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 10 1902809; see English machine translation) in view of Li et al. (CN 112420853; see English machine translation) and in view of Yoon et al. (US 2018/0158970).
Regarding claim 6, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses any two adjacent main gate lines are first main gate line and second main gate line, and between the first main gate line and the second main gate line, an end of the disconnected section of any thin gate line close to the first main gate line is a first end, wherein, a difference between a distance between the first end of any odd-numbered thin gate line's disconnected section and the first main gate line and a distance between the first end of the even-numbered thin gate line's disconnected section or another odd-numbered thin gate line's disconnected section and the first main gate line is a stagger distance value (as set forth above), when the disconnection distance of each thin gate line is equal (see Figure 6), but the reference does not expressly disclose the stagger distance value is equal to a value of the disconnection distance.
Yoon discloses a gate line configuration for a solar cell comprising disconnected portions S located on the finger lines (see Figure 8), where the area of the gate lines can be reduced without obstructing flow of the current, which in turn reduces manufacturing costs and shading loss ([0123]). Yoon also discloses that arrangement of finger lines having disconnected portions S may be variously varied ([0127]), and that when the width of the disconnected portion S is greater than 0.5 times the pitch of the bus bar, electrical characteristics may be degraded because the disconnected portion S is too wide, and when the width of each disconnected portion S is less than 0.5 times the pitch of each finger line, effects of the disconnected portion S may be insufficient because the disconnected portion S is too narrow ([0125]).
Therefore, as the electrical characteristics and shading loss are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said arrangement of disconnected portions on the finger lines, with said electrical characteristics and shading loss both changing as the arrangement of disconnected portions on the finger lines is varied, the precise stagger distance and the disconnection distance would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed relationship between the stagger distance and the disconnection distance cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the stagger distance in the apparatus of modified Lee to obtain the desired balance between the electrical characteristics and shading loss (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 8, Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but the reference does not expressly disclose a supplementary gate line structure, and the supplementary gate line structure includes a plurality of main gate lines extending along the first direction and arranged at intervals along the second direction, and a plurality of thin gate lines extending along the second direction and arranged at intervals along the first direction, the first direction and the second direction are not parallel, and the plurality of main gate lines are electrically connected to the plurality of thin gate lines respectively, and between any two adjacent main gate lines, only odd-numbered thin gate lines or only even-numbered thin gate lines have disconnected sections.
Yoon discloses a gate line structure, and the gate line structure includes a plurality of main gate lines (42b) extending along a first direction (vertical direction) and arranged at intervals along a second direction (horizontal direction), and a plurality of thin gate lines (42a) extending along the second direction and arranged at intervals along the first direction (see Figure 8), the first direction and the second direction are not parallel (see Figure 8), and the plurality of main gate lines are electrically connected to the plurality of thin gate lines respectively (inherent property of gate lines), and between any two adjacent main gate lines, only odd-numbered thin gate lines or only even-numbered thin gate lines have disconnected sections (see Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a known technique to improve similar devices such as arranging between any two adjacent main gate lines, only odd-numbered thin gate lines or only even-numbered thin gate lines have disconnected sections in the device of Lee, as taught by Yoon above, so that process cost and light loss can be reduced and the current flow path can be optimized ([0127]). It is noted that if a technique is known to improve a device and one of ordinary skill in the art recognizes it would improve similar devices in the same way, the use of the known technique to improve similar devices would be prima facie obvious as the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art unless the actual application of the technique would have been beyond the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 417, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
Regarding claim 9, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses any three main gate lines arranged in sequence are a first main gate line, a second main gate line and a third main gate line (see Figure 6), a first region is formed between the first main gate line and the second main gate line (see Figure 6), a second region is formed between the second main gate line and the third main gate line (see Figure 6), but the reference does not expressly disclose parts of the first main gate line, the second main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the first region have the basic gate line structure, and parts of the second main gate line, the third main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the second region have the supplementary gate line structure.
Yoon discloses a gate line configuration for a solar cell comprising disconnected portions S located on the finger lines (see Figure 8), where the area of the gate lines can be reduced without obstructing flow of the current, which in turn reduces manufacturing costs and shading loss ([0123]). Yoon also discloses that arrangement of finger lines having disconnected portions S may be variously varied ([0127]).
Therefore, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, where parts of the first main gate line, the second main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the first region have the basic gate line structure, and parts of the second main gate line, the third main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the second region have the supplementary gate line structure, such that a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 10, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, and further discloses any four main gate lines arranged in sequence are a first main gate line, a second main gate line, a third main gate line and a fourth main gate line (see Figure 6), a first region is formed between the first main gate line and the second main gate line, a second region is formed between the second main gate line and the third main gate line, a third region is formed between the third main gate line and the fourth main gate line (see Figure 6), but the reference does not expressly disclose parts of the first main gate line, the second main gate line, the third main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the first region and the second region are the basic gate line structure, parts of the third main gate line, the fourth main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the third region are the supplementary gate line structure.
Yoon discloses a gate line configuration for a solar cell comprising disconnected portions S located on the finger lines (see Figure 8), where the area of the gate lines can be reduced without obstructing flow of the current, which in turn reduces manufacturing costs and shading loss ([0123]). Yoon also discloses that arrangement of finger lines having disconnected portions S may be variously varied ([0127]).
Therefore, absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, where parts of the first main gate line, the second main gate line, the third main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the first region and the second region are the basic gate line structure, parts of the third main gate line, the fourth main gate line and the plurality of thin gate lines in the third region are the supplementary gate line structure, such that a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Li does not teach or suggest the claimed staggered configuration for the odd and even fine grid lines because the claim requires the main gate lines are extending along a first direction and thin gate lines are extending along a second direction, and between any two adjacent main gate lines, each thin gate line has a disconnected section, where Li discloses along the first direction, the disconnected section of an odd-numbered thin gate line and the disconnected section of an even-numbered thin gate line overlap in the first direction according to Figure 3.
However, it can be seen in Figure 3 of Li that every other thin gate line overlaps in the first direction in the same manner as Figure 3a of the instant application, such that the “odd-numbered thin gate lines” and “even-numbered thin gate lines” do not overlap and are staggered in the first direction as claimed.
Therefore, the argument was not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTINA CHERN whose telephone number is (408)918-7559. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 AM-5:30 PM PT.
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.
/CHRISTINA CHERN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721