DETAILED ACTION
(1)
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 . Applicant’s amendment filed November 25, 2025, is entered. Applicant amended claims 1 and 4 and cancelled claims 3 and 5. No new matter is entered. Claims 1, 2, 4 and 6-8 are pending before the Office for review. Claims 9-17 remain withdrawn in response to a restriction requirement.
(2)
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.
Claims 7 and 8 are 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 1 requires the contact region have a flat texture. Claims 7 and 8, which depend from claim 1, require that the contact region is an array of irregular structures or undulant protrusions. These requirements conflict with that of claim 1 and render the claim scope insolubly ambiguous.
Therefore, the claims are indefinite because their scope is unascertainable to one ordinarily skilled in the art.
(3)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 7 and 8 contain texture requirements for the contact region that are incompatible with the requirements of claim 1, meaning they are not further limiting of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
(4)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. (CN 102854553 A) in view of Ohtsuka (TW 480737 B) and Lee (KR 20110101698 A). English language machine translations of Zheng et al. (CN 102854553 A) and Ohtsuka (TW 480737 B) have been previously provided to Applicant and an English language machine translation of Lee (KR 20110101698 A) is included with this office action. Matsuda (U.S. Publication No. 2002/0025597) is cited to support a statement of fact.
With respect to claims 1 and 4, Zheng teaches a texture structure of a solar cell comprising a texture with a surface comprising a contact region and a non-contact region, wherein the texture of the contact region is flat/smooth and in contact with a metal gate line and a texture of the non-contact region is uneven. Figure 4 and Paragraphs 58-63. Furthermore, given that the contact region is smooth and the non-contact region is uneven, the specific surface area of the contact region is smaller than that of the non-contact region. Figure 4.
Zheng teaches the surface of the contact region is a flat texture and is silent as to whether the surface of the non-contact region has pyramid protrusions of different size and distributed in random positions.
However, Ohtsuka, which deals with solar cells, teaches, as shown in Figure 2A, a random texture comprising a large number of pyramidal protrusions of different sizes is an effective reflection preventing texture for solar cells. Figure 2A and Page 8.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the combination of Zheng with Ohtsuka is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way. Both Zheng and Ohtsuka deal with solar cell texture structures for reducing light reflection. Ohtsuka teaches an effective texture structure comprises a random arrangement of a large number of pyramidal protrusions of different sizes. It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ohtsuka’s pyramidal structure in Zheng’s texture structure because Ohtsuka teaches this to be an effective reflection reducing structure, meaning the modification has a reasonable expectation of success.
Modified Zheng teaches the contact region is a depressed flat texture but is silent as to whether it is depressed inwards from a surface of the non-contact region.
However, Lee, which deals with solar cells, teaches the contact region of a solar cell is flat and formed to be depressed inwards from a surface of the non-contact region to decrease the electrode surface area shading distribution, which allows for more sunlight absorption. Page 5, First Paragraph and Figure 4.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the contact region to be depressed inwards from a surface of the non-contact region because Lee teaches doing so decreases the electrode surface area shading distribution.
With respect to claim 2, Zheng teaches the structure comprises a PN junction (310a/310b) and a passivation layer (330) sequentially arranged in a stacked manner on the surface of the texture, wherein the metal gate line (320a) is located on a surface of the passivation layer corresponding to the contact region. Figure 4 and Paragraphs 58-63. Specifically, Zheng teaches layer 330 is formed of silicon nitride, which as a passivation effect. Paragraphs 58-63. Matsuda is cited to support this statement of fact. Matsuda establishes SiN provides a passivation effect. Paragraph 70.
Regarding the reflectivity of the contact region relative to the non-contact region, Zheng teaches the reflection structure is designed to prevent light loss, meaning the reflectivity of the contact region is greater than that of the non-contact region. Paragraphs 6 and 7.
With respect to claim 6, modified Zheng teaches the non-contact region is an array of irregular pyramidal protrusions distributed at random positions and having different sizes (Ohtsuka, Figure 2A) and the contact region is an array of regular structures comprising two rows of strip-shaped protrusions. Zheng, Figure 4.
(5)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the rejection.
(6)
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 ELI S MEKHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
/ELI S MEKHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights