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 .
Summary
This is the response to the Amendment/Request for Reconsideration filed on 11/28/2025.
Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application with claims 18-19 are withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishimoto et al. (JP2001325998) with provided machine English translation.
Addressing claims 1-4 and 20, Kishimoto discloses a photoelectric conversion device (figs. 1-2) comprising:
a photoelectric conversion layer (5+7), and
an electron transport layer (3+4), wherein
the electron transport layer includes metal oxide particles (paragraph [0019] of the translation document discloses tin oxide, titanium oxide or zinc oxide with particle size from 5 to 100 nm that qualify as the claimed metal oxide particles) and a metal oxide precursor of a metal oxide (the precursor for the formation of the metal oxide layer 4 as described in paragraphs [0024-0027]), the metal oxide precursor includes an OH group (paragraph [0024] discloses aqueous solution of titanium oxide precursor, which includes an OH group), and
in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis on the electron transport layer, two peaks representing 1s orbitals of oxygen atoms are detected, and a formula Y/(X+Y) ≥ 0.5 is satisfied, where a peak area of a peak on a low energy side among the two peaks is X and a peak area on a high-energy side among the two peaks is Y (the limitation would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Kishimoto for the following reasons:
according to the Applicants’ Remarks, the peak Y on the high-energy side comes from the hydroxyl group of the metal oxide precursor (page 10 of the Remarks in reference to paragraph [0074] of the published publication of current application) and the peak X on the low energy-side comes from the oxygen of the metal oxide. It is asserted that the electron transport layer of Kishimoto has the claimed X and Y peaks in response to performing an X-ray photoelectric spectroscopy because the electron transport layer of Kishimoto includes the oxygen of the titanium oxide metal particles on the lower energy side and the oxygen of the OH group of the titanium oxide precursor on the high energy side.
Kishimoto further discloses in paragraph [0026] heat treating the electron transport layer after the deposition of the metal oxide precursor in a temperature between 25 to 100 oC in order to optimize productivity and metal oxide film uniformity. The range of heat treatment temperature affects the amount of precursor material and by extension the amount of OH group within the resulting electron transport layer.
Therefore, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the photoelectric conversion device of Kishimoto to arrive at the property “in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy … among the two peaks is Y” when perform routine experimentation with the temperature of the heat treatment process in order to optimize productivity and metal oxide film uniformity (Kishimoto, [0026]).
Addressing claims 5-6, the metal oxide film 4 of Kishimoto is the claimed metal oxide film arranged between the metal oxide particles. The metal oxide film comprises titanium oxide [0026].
Claim(s) 1-9 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yumoto et al. (US 2018/0374652) in view of Krebs et al. (US 2013/0277669).
Addressing claims 1-7 and 20, Yumoto discloses a photoelectric conversion device (fig. 3) comprising:
a photoelectric conversion layer (either the second semiconductor layer 130 or the light-absorbing layer disposed between the semiconductor layer 130 and the first semiconductor layer 140, described in paragraph [0169], as the structural equivalence to the claimed photoelectric conversion layer), and
an electron transport layer (the first semiconductor layer 140 is the structural equivalence to the claimed electron transport layer because it is configured to transport electron for the following reasons: firstly, the layer 140 is positioned adjacent to an electron extraction layer [0169]; secondly, paragraph [0118] discloses that the metal oxide particles in the first semiconductor layer are configured for moving electron [0118 and 0123-0125]; therefore, the layer 140 is the structural equivalence to the claimed electron transport layer) includes metal oxide particles [0050, 0052] and a metal oxide film arranged between the metal oxide particles (Yumoto discloses in fig. 1 that the first semiconductor layer, or the claimed electron transport layer, includes metal oxide particles 51 with a compound 52 having relative permittivity of 2 or more, in film form, filling the space between the metal oxide particles. The metal oxide particles 51 include AZO [0052] and the compound 52 is made of inorganic compounds [0070] that includes zinc oxide [0076]).
Yumoto further discloses that the solution for forming the film 52 between the metal oxide particles is formed by mixing the solution containing the compound 52 with the solution containing the metal oxide particles [0324] or spin coating the solution containing the compound 52 onto the layer containing the metal oxide particles that had been formed [0289 and 0295].
Yumoto is silent regarding the electron transport layer includes a metal oxide precursor that is a precursor of a metal oxide and the metal oxide precursor includes a OH group.
Krebs discloses a method for forming an electron transport layer for a photovoltaic cell that is made of ZnO [0011]; wherein, the ZnO film is formed by depositing a solution of zinc oxide precursor containing OH group (paragraph [0013] discloses zinc acetate dihydride) followed by heat treatment to substantially converting zinc acetate to zinc oxide [0025]. The heating step is carried out at 140 oC between 5 and 40 mins [0025] in order to optimize manufacturing process and efficiency [0004, 0025, 0047-0048].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify photoelectric conversion device of Yumoto with the known step of forming the ZnO film in the electron transport layer using the zinc oxide precursor containing OH group followed by the heating step disclosed by Krebs in order to obtain the predictable result forming an electron transport layer comprising zinc oxide film between the zinc oxide particles (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143). With regard to the limitation “in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron … among the two peaks is Y”, in the modified device of Yumoto with the method of forming the zinc oxide film using the zinc oxide precursor disclosed by Krebs, the resulting electron transport layer includes the claimed X and Y peaks in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy because the zinc oxide precursor containing OH group is subjected to heat treatment which converts most but not all of the zinc oxide precursor to zinc oxide film, with the remaining precursor material containing the OH group materializes a the peak Y of the claimed formula and the oxygen of the zinc oxide material in the electron transport layer materialize as the peak X of the claimed formula. Therefore, one would have arrived at the claimed property “in response to performing X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy … high-energy side among the two peaks is Y” when perform routine experimentation with the heat treatment process disclosed by Krebs, which affects the amount of OH group of the precursor remaining in the electron transport layer, in order to optimize the manufacturing process and efficiency of the resulting photoelectric device.
Addressing claim 8, Yumoto discloses the photoelectric conversion device comprises first electrode 150, the electron transport layer 140, the photoelectric conversion layer (light-absorbing layer as discussed above), the hole transport layer 130, and the second electrode 120 are included in sequence (fig. 3).
Addressing claim 9, Yumoto further discloses a junction interface layer [0144]; therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the photoelectric conversion device in fig. 3 with an interface layer positioned between electron transport layer 130 and the hole transport layer 140 to arrive at the claimed sequence of a first electrode 150, the electron transport layer 140, an intermediate layer (interface layer), the photoelectric conversion layer (light-absorbing layer), the hole transport layer 130 and a second electrode 120 are included in sequence.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai et al. (WO2020/026752) in view of Yumoto et al. (US 2018/0374652) and Krebs et al. (US 2013/0277669).
Addressing claims 1-7 and 20, Arai discloses a photoelectric conversion device (fig. 1) comprising:
a photoelectric conversion layer 5, and
an electron transport layer 4, wherein the electron transport layer includes metal oxide particles made of zinc oxide or aluminum doped zinc oxide with average diameter between 5 to 20 nm [0012].
Arai is silent regarding the limitation the electron transport layer includes a metal oxide precursor that is a precursor of a metal oxide, the metal oxide precursor includes an OH group and “in response to performing an X-ray … a peak area of a peak on a high-energy side among the two peaks is Y”.
Yumoto discloses an electron transport layer 140 (the first semiconductor layer 140 is the structural equivalence to the claimed electron transport layer because it is configured to transport electron for the following reasons: firstly, the layer 140 is positioned adjacent to an electron extraction layer [0169]; secondly, paragraph [0118] discloses that the metal oxide particles in the first semiconductor layer are configured for moving electron [0118 and 0123-0125]; therefore, the layer 140 is the structural equivalence to the claimed electron transport layer) includes metal oxide particles [0050, 0052]. Yumoto further discloses metal oxide film 52 (inorganic compound that includes zinc oxide, [0070 and 0076]) arranged between the metal oxide particles 51 (fig. 1).
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the electron transport layer of Arai with the metal oxide film 52 arranged between the metal oxide particles disclosed by Yumoto in order to decrease the amount of defects on the surface of the metal oxide particles thus preventing carrier transfer from being interfered with the defect level and prevent recombination of carries that leads to reduction in resistance, improved filling factor and increased photoelectric conversion efficiency (Yumoto, [0120]).
Krebs discloses a method for forming an electron transport layer for a photovoltaic cell that is made of ZnO [0011]; wherein, the ZnO film is formed by depositing a solution of zinc oxide precursor containing OH group (paragraph [0013] discloses zinc acetate dihydride) followed by heat treatment to substantially converting zinc acetate to zinc oxide [0025]. The heating step is carried out at 140 oC between 5 and 40 mins [0025] in order to optimize manufacturing process and efficiency [0004, 0025, 0047-0048].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the modified photoelectric conversion device of Arai in view of Yumoto with the known step of forming the ZnO film in the electron transport layer using the zinc oxide precursor containing OH group followed by the heating step disclosed by Krebs in order to obtain the predictable result forming an electron transport layer comprising zinc oxide film between the zinc oxide particles (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143). With regard to the limitation “in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron … among the two peaks is Y”, in the modified device of Yumoto with the method of forming the zinc oxide film using the zinc oxide precursor disclosed by Krebs, the resulting electron transport layer includes the claimed X and Y peaks in response to performing an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy because the zinc oxide precursor containing OH group is subjected to heat treatment which converts most but not all of the zinc oxide precursor to zinc oxide film, with the remaining precursor material containing the OH group materializes a the peak Y of the claimed formula and the oxygen of the zinc oxide material in the electron transport layer materialize as the peak X of the claimed formula. Therefore, one would have arrived at the claimed property “in response to performing X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy … high-energy side among the two peaks is Y” when perform routine experimentation with the heat treatment process disclosed by Krebs, which affects the amount of OH group of the precursor remaining in the electron transport layer, in order to optimize the manufacturing process and efficiency of the resulting photoelectric device.
Addressing claim 8, fig. 1 of Arai discloses the first electrode 3, the electron transport layer 4, the photoelectric conversion layer 5, the hole transport layer 6 and the second electrode 7 are included in sequence.
Addressing claims 9 and 14, Arai discloses in paragraph [0014] the second electron transport layer, which is formed between the first electron transport layer and the photoelectric conversion layer, as the structural equivalence to the claimed intermediate layer containing the claimed compound.
Addressing claim 10, Arai discloses the photoelectric conversion layer includes a donor organic material with HOMO level of 5.1 to 5.5 eV and average molecular weight of 10,000 or less [0015-0016].
Addressing claim 12, Arai discloses the claimed compound in paragraph [0016].
Addressing claim 13, Arai discloses the claimed fullerene material in paragraph [0017].
Addressing claims 15-17, fig. 3 of Arai discloses the claimed electronic device comprising the photoelectric conversion device according to claim 1, a power supply IC electrically connected to the photoelectric conversion device, a storage battery 12 electrically connected to the photoelectric conversion device and a device electrically connected to the photoelectric conversion device and the storage battery.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai et al. (US 2021/0296603) in view of Yumoto et al. (US 2018/0374652) as applied to claims 1-10, 12-17 and 20 above, and further in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 2022/0013742).
Addressing claim 11, Arai and Yumoto are silent regarding the photoelectric conversion layer further contains an organic material having the claimed properties.
Yamamoto discloses a photoelectric conversion layer 3 for an organic solar cell; wherein , the photoelectric conversion layer comprises a mixture of electron-donating organic semiconductor and electron-accepting organic semiconductor material [0040] similarly to that of Arai. The electron-donating organic semiconductor comprises two or more kinds of organic substances that include 2, 1, 3-benzothiadiazole-thiophene [0043] that can have up to 1000 repeating units [0045]. The 2, 1, 3-benzothiadiazole-thiophene organic-donating material is the claimed organic material having a HOMO level of 5.2 eV or more and 5.6 eV or less and a number-average molecular weight (Mn) of 10,000 or more.
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the photoelectric conversion layer of Arai with the known 2, 1, 3-benzothiadiazole-thiophene organic-donating material disclosed by Yamamoto in order to obtain the predictable result of forming photoelectric conversion material in conjunction with fullerene electron-accepting material (Yamamoto, [0051]) for generating electrical current from sunlight (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, 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.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 01/02/2026