DETAILED ACTION
Examiner’s Notes
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I corresponding to claims 60-88 in the reply on 12/20/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that “the Restriction Requirement has not provided sufficient evidence to establish lack of novelty or lack of inventive step. Bai does not recite the method steps of claim 60 and does not teach or disclose many of the features of Applicant's claims”. The traversal is not persuasive.
Regarding claim 89 in Group II, since the claim 89 is a product/apparatus claim, as outlined in the Requirement for Restriction/Election dated on 11/10/2025, the recitation of method steps required in claim 60 is directed to the method of making a product and it is noted that said limitations are not given patentable weight in product claims. Even though a product-by-process is defined by the process steps by which the product is made, determination of patentability is based on the product itself and does not depend on its method of production. See MPEP 2113 Product-by-Process Claims [R-9]. See also In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 227 USPQ 964 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Only “the structure(s)” is(are) given patentable weight. Therefore, the common technical feature between Group I (claim 60) and Group II (claim 89) is “A PSC comprising a functionalized material on a perovskite layer, where the functionalized material is a material that is functionalized with one or more functionalizing compounds”. As outlined in the Requirement for Restriction/Election dated on 11/10/2025, the common technical feature is already known in BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene). Accordingly, the special technical feature linking the Groups of inventions does not provide a contribution over the prior art, and no single general inventive concept exists. Therefore, restriction is appropriate.
Therefore, the restriction requirement is still deemed proper and is made FINAL.
Claims 89-91 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected Groups and Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicants timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03/02/2017.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(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 71-73 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 71 recites “formula (IIIb)” in line 1. It is unclear whether the claimed “formula (IIIb)” is identical to or a different feature from the claimed “
PNG
media_image1.png
156
204
media_image1.png
Greyscale
” in claim 63. For the purpose of office action, the claimed “formula (IIIb)” is will be treated as if it recites “
PNG
media_image1.png
156
204
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 72 recites “formula (V)” in line 1. It is unclear whether the claimed “formula (V)” is identical to or a different feature from the claimed “
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
” in claim 63. For the purpose of office action, the claimed “formula (V)” is will be treated as if it recites “
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 73 recites “formula (I)” in line 4. It is unclear whether the claimed “formula (I)” is identical to or a different feature from the claimed “(1) R1a-CO-OH (I)” in claim 63. For the purpose of office action, the claimed “formula (I)” is will be treated as if it recites “(1) R1a-CO-OH (I)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 73 recites “formula (II)” in line 5. It is unclear whether the claimed “formula (II)” is identical to or a different feature from the claimed “(2) R2a-O-CS2-M+2a (II)” in claim 63. For the purpose of office action, the claimed “formula (II)” is will be treated as if it recites “(2) R2a-O-CS2-M+2a (II)”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 60-62, 75-76, and 80-87 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene).
Regarding claim 60, BAI teaches a method for preparing a Perovskite Solar Cell (PSC) (see the method for preparing the perovskite solar cell; see Fig. 1 and Methods), the method comprising:
- dissolving a functionalized material (see C60-substituted benzoic acid self-assembled monolayer (C60-SAM)) in a solvent (see 1:1 volume ratio of tetrahydrofuran : DCB mixture solvent) (see Methods; C60-substituted benzoic acid self-assembled monolayer (C60-SAM) material (1-Materials) was selected as the starting material. C60-SAM (2 wt.%) was dissolved in a 1:1 volume ratio of tetrahydrofuran : DCB mixture solvent), where the functionalized material is a material that is functionalized with one or more functionalizing compounds (see substituted benzoic acid) (see Methods);
- depositing a deposit composition (see the C60-SAM solution) on a perovskite layer (see Methods; The C60-SAM solution was spin-coated on top of the perovskite films), where the deposit composition comprises the dissolved functionalized material (see the C60-SAM solution) (see Methods);
- heating the deposit composition (see Methods: Subsequently, all the films were put on a hotplate); and - optionally removing some or all of the one or more functionalizing compounds from the deposit composition (This recitation is optional to the instant claim and is not positively recited. Since the prior art meets all positively recited limitations, the instant claim is considered to be met by the prior art).
Regarding claim 61, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the material of the functionalized material comprises one or more of a doping substance (see Methods; A small amount (5–20 wt.%) of MAI (pre-dissolved in
2-propanol) was blended in the C60-SAM solution before spin-coating to dope it).
Regarding claim 62, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the material of the functionalized material comprises one or more of an organic material, a metal oxide, a doped metal oxide, TiO2, SnO2, NiOX, CuO, ZnO, Zn2SO4, WO3, In2O3, SrTiO3, Nb2O5, BaSnO3, Y:SnO2, Cu:NiOx, C60, C70, PC61BM, PC71BM, or fullerene (see substituted benzoic acid and C60).
Regarding claim 75, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the solvent comprises a protic solvent, an anhydrous protic solvent, anhydrous methanol, anhydrous ethanol, anhydrous isopropanol, anhydrous C1-io alcohol, THF, dimethyl ether, diethyl ether, an anhydrous ether, an ether, chlorobenzene (CB), or a combination thereof (see tetrahydrofuran and DCB solvents; see Methods; C60-SAM (2 wt.%) was dissolved in a 1:1 volume ratio of tetrahydrofuran: DCB mixture solvent).
Regarding claim 76, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the depositing step is performed by one or more of blade coating, spin coating, slot die, gravure, flexo, spray, or inkjet (see spin coating; see Methods; The C60-SAM solution was spin-coated on top of the perovskite films).
Regarding claim 80, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the perovskite layer comprises one or more of CH3NH3PbX3, CH3NH3PbI3, H2NCHNH2PbX3, CH3NH3SnX3, or Csa(CH5NH3)b(CH3NH3)PbI31-y>Br3y where X is a halogen which can be the same or different between or within each formula, a is about 0 to about 0.5, b is about 0 to about 0.8, c is about 0 to about 0.8, and y is about 0 to about 1 (see MAPbI3; see Methods).
Regarding claim 81, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the perovskite layer is part of a structure that further comprises one or more of an anode; a hole transport layer (HTL); or a cathode (see Fig.1; see TCO, HTL, electrode).
Regarding claim 82, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the perovskite layer is part of a structure that further comprises one or more of an anode; an electron transport layer (ETL); or a cathode (see Fig.1; see TCO, Doped CLCS, electrode).
Regarding claim 83, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the method further comprises adding a cathode (see Fig.1; see the adding the electrode).
Regarding claim 84, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the PSC has an open circuit voltage (Voc) of from about 0.7 V to about 1.3V (see Fig. 3b; Voc = 1.07 V).
Regarding claim 85, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the PSC has fill factor (FF) of from about 35% to about 80% (see Fig. 3b; FF = 80.6%).
Regarding claim 86, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the PSC has a current density (Jsc) of from about 10 mA/cm2 to about 25 mA/cm2 (see Fig. 3b; Jsc = 22.6 mA cm-2).
Regarding claim 87, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the PSC has a Power Conversion Efficiency (PCE) of from about 4% to about 20% (see Fig. 3b; PCE = 19.5%).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 77-79 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by, or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene).
Regarding claim 77, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
Regarding the claimed “wherein the heating step removes some or all of the one or more functionalizing compounds”, since BAI teaches substantially same composition and heating step as the Applicant’s disclosure (Applicant’s Specification discloses the material of the functionalized material can be C60 [0084], the functionalizing compounds is (1) R1a-CO-OH (I), where R1a can be substituted butyl [0085]-[0086], and the heating comprises heating using hot plates at about 100°C for about 5 to about 20 minutes and the heating can remove some or all of the one or more functionalizing compounds [00101]; BAI teaches the material of the functionalized material is C60, the functionalizing compounds is phenyl substituted butyric acid, and the annealing process comprises heating on a hotplate at 100 oC for 60 min [see the rejection of claim 60 and Methods]), BAI’s heating step is considered to inherently provide the same predictable result regarding “wherein the heating step removes some or all of the one or more functionalizing compounds”, and the result regarding “wherein the heating step removes some or all of the one or more functionalizing compounds” would obviously have been present in BAI’s heating step. “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.” In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 78, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein the removing step occurs (BAI discloses the annealing step at 100 oC for 60 min [see Methods]; The annealing step at 100 oC for the first 20 min is considered to correspond to the claimed “heating step” and the annealing step at 100 oC for the other 40 min is considered to correspond to the claimed “removing step”) (see the rejection of claim 77 and Methods).
Regarding claim 79, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
BAI teaches wherein (i) the heating step removes some of the one or more functionalizing compounds and (ii) the removing step occurs, and further removes some of or all of the remainder of the one or more functionalizing compounds (BAI discloses the annealing step at 100 oC for 60 min [see Methods]; The annealing step at 100 oC for the first 20 min is considered to correspond to the claimed “heating step”, which removes some of the one or more functionalizing compounds, and the annealing step at 100 oC for the other 40 min is considered to correspond to the claimed “removing step”, which further removes some of the one or more functionalizing compounds) (see the rejection of claim 77 and Methods).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 63-73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene) as applied to claim 60 above, further in view of QIAO (Self-assembly monolayers boosting organic–inorganic halide perovskite solar cell performance).
Regarding claim 63, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
Regarding the claimed “wherein the one or more functionalizing compounds is one or more of: (1) R1a-CO-OH (I), or salts thereof, where Ria is substituted or unsubstituted alkyl; (2) R2a-O-CS2-M+2a (II), where R2a is substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, and M+2a is a cation;
PNG
media_image3.png
156
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
where X3 is an anion; R3a, R3c, R3d, and R3e is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted aryl; R3b is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted aryl, substituted or unsubstituted Lewis base, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates,
PNG
media_image4.png
172
564
media_image4.png
Greyscale
where X4 is an anion; R4a, R4c, R4d, R4e, R4f, and R4g is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted aryl; R4b is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted aryl, substituted or unsubstituted Lewis base, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates;
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
where Rsa, Rsb, and R5c is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted aryl;
PNG
media_image5.png
152
214
media_image5.png
Greyscale
where R6b, R6c
PNG
media_image6.png
7
9
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and R6d is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted aryl; R6a is H, substituted or unsubstituted alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted aryl, where the R6a substituted alkyl is optionally substituted with one or more substituted or unsubstituted Lewis bases, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates, where the R6a substituted aryl is optionally substituted with one or more substituted or unsubstituted Lewis bases, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates; or (7) R7a-NH-CS2-M+7a (VII), where R7a is a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl and M+7a is a cation”, BAI teaches the one or more functionalizing compounds is substituted benzoic acid (see C60 - substituted benzoic acid SAM for perovskite solar cells; see Methods and Fig. 1), but does not explicitly disclose the claimed feature. However, QIAO discloses SAM-boosted perovskite solar cells for high performance and practical application, wherein the SAMs (
PNG
media_image7.png
188
708
media_image7.png
Greyscale
) as shown in Fig. 2 are used in the perovskite solar cells (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the PC60BA (
PNG
media_image8.png
130
126
media_image8.png
Greyscale
) SAM material for the SAM material in BAI as taught by QIAO, because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144). Therefore, modified BAI teaches wherein the one or more functionalizing compounds is one or more of:(1) R1a-CO-OH (I) (see the substitued butyric acid,
PNG
media_image9.png
117
253
media_image9.png
Greyscale
), or salts thereof, where R1a is substituted or unsubstituted alkyl (see the substituted butyl,
PNG
media_image10.png
94
188
media_image10.png
Greyscale
).
Regarding claim 64, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein R1a is a substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl, methyl, ethyl, propyl, or butyl (see the substituted butyl) (see the rejection of claim 63).
Regarding claim 65, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein R2a is a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl C1-C36 alkyl, methyl, ethyl, propyl, butyl, dodecyl, or octadecyl; M+2a is Na+, K+, or Li+; or a combination thereof (Since the claimed limitation further limits the (2) R2a-O-CS2-M+2a (II) of claim 63, wherein the (2) R2a-O-CS2-M+2a (II) is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 66, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein X3 is Cl-, Br-,I-, BF4, PF6 , or CF3SO3-; R3a, R3c,R3d, and R3e is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted phenyl; R3b is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted phenyl, -C(O)H, -C(O)OH, -C(O)NHR3f, -CH2OR3f, -CH2NHR3f, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates, R3f is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-Cs alkyl; or a combination thereof (Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image3.png
156
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image3.png
156
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 67, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein X4 is Cl-, Br-,I-, BF4,PF6 , or CF3SO3-; R4a, R4c,R4d, R4e, R4f, and R4g is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted phenyl; R4b is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted phenyl, -C(O)H, -C(O)OH, -C(O)NHR4h, -CH2OR4h, -CH2NHR4h, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates, R4h is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-Cs alkyl; or a combination thereof (Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image4.png
172
564
media_image4.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image4.png
172
564
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 68, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein R5a, R5b, and R5c is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-Cs alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted phenyl (Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 69, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein R6b, R6c
PNG
media_image6.png
7
9
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and R6d is the same or different and is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-Cs alkyl, or substituted or unsubstituted phenyl; R6a is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-Cs alkyl, substituted or unsubstituted phenyl, where the R6a substituted alkyl is optionally substituted with one or more -C(O)H, -C(O)OH, -C(O)NHR6e, - CH2OR6e, -CH2NHR6e, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates, where the R6a substituted aryl is optionally substituted with one or more -C(O)H, -C(O)OH, - C(O)NHR6e, -CH2OR6e, -CH2NHR6e, quaternary nitrogen salts, carboxylates, xanthates, alkoxides, or thiolates, R6e is H, substituted or unsubstituted C1-C alkyl; or a combination thereof (Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image5.png
152
214
media_image5.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image5.png
152
214
media_image5.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 70, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein R7a is a substituted or unsubstituted alkyl C1-C36 alkyl, methyl, ethyl, propyl, butyl, dodecyl, or octadecyl; M+7a is Na+, K+, or Li+; or a combination thereof (Since the claimed limitation further limits the (7) R7a-NH-CS2-M+7a (VII) of claim 63, wherein the (7) R7a-NH-CS2-M+7a (VII) is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 71, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein formula (IIIb) is
PNG
media_image11.png
168
616
media_image11.png
Greyscale
(Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image3.png
156
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image3.png
156
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 72, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein formula (V) is selected from triarylamines (TAA), substituted TAA, triphenylamine, substituted triphenylamines, triethylamine and substituted triethylamines (Since the claimed limitation further limits the
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
of claim 63, wherein the
PNG
media_image2.png
96
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
is not relied on for the art rejection of claim 63, the claimed limitation is considered to be already met by modified BAI).
Regarding claim 73, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 63.
Modified BAI teaches wherein the functionalized material comprises one or more of a metal oxide, a doped metal oxide, TiO2, SnO2, NiOX, CuO, ZnO, Zn2SO4, WO3,In203, SrTiO3, Nb2Os, BaSnO3, Y:SnO2, Cu:NiOx, C60, C7o, PC61BM, PC71BM, or fullerene (see C60 in the PC60BA (
PNG
media_image8.png
130
126
media_image8.png
Greyscale
) SAM), where each is independently functionalized with (i) one or more of formula (I) (see the substituted butyric acid,
PNG
media_image9.png
117
253
media_image9.png
Greyscale
) or salts thereof, where R1a is C1-C4 alkyl (see the substituted butyl,
PNG
media_image10.png
94
188
media_image10.png
Greyscale
), (ii) one or more of formula (II), where R2a is C1-C27 alkyl and M+2a is Na+, K+, or Li+, (iii) triethylamine, or (iv) a combination thereof.
Claim 74 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene) as applied to claim 60 above, further in view of WANG (Organic Ligands Armored ZnO Enhances Efficiency and Stability of CsPbI2Br Perovskite Solar Cells).
Regarding claim 74, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
Regarding the claimed “wherein the functionalized material comprises one or more of TiO2, ZnO, NiOX, or SnO2 where each is independently functionalized with one or both of acetate or propionate”, BAI teaches the functionalized material (see C60-substituted benzoic acid self-assembled monolayer (C60-SAM)) comprises C60 where each is independently functionalized with substituted benzoic acid, but does not explicitly disclose the claimed feature. However, BAI discloses that the C60-substituted benzoic acid self-assembled monolayer layer is applied as an electron transport layer (ETL) in the perovskite solar cell (see Methods). WANG discloses a perovskite solar cell, wherein acetate ligands armored ZnO material is used as an electron transport layer (ETL) in the perovskite solar cell, which provides remarkable enhanced performance (see Abstract, Fig. 1, and Experimental Section). And, WANG teaches dissolving a functionalized material (see acetate ligands armored ZnO material) in a solvent (see 2-methoxyethanol) ([Experimental Section] ZnO precursor was prepared by dissolving 200 mg Zinc acetate and 56 μL ethanolamine in 2 mL 2-methoxyethanol, and was stirred at least 12 h before use, then was spin-coated and annealed to obtain ZnO layer with different amount of organic ligands residue), where the functionalized material is a material that is functionalized with one or more functionalizing compounds (see acetate ligands) (see Abstract, Fig. 1, and Experimental Section). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the acetate ligands armored ZnO material prepared as described above for the electron transport layer in BAI as taught by WANG, because acetate ligands armored ZnO material provides remarkable enhanced performance in the perovskite solar cell, and because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144).
Claim 88 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAI (Enhancing stability and efficiency of perovskite solar cells with crosslinkable silane-functionalized and doped fullerene) as applied to claim 60 above, further in view of JUNG (Flexible Perovskite Solar Cells).
Regarding claim 88, Applicant is directed above for a full discussion as applied to claim 60.
Regarding the claimed “wherein the PSC is a flexible PSC”, BAI uses a glass substrate the perovskite solar cells, but does not explicitly disclose a flexible PSC. However, JUNG discloses polymer substrate would be ideal in terms of flexibility, light weight, low cost, and R2R processability (see P1853). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the polymer material for the substrate in BAI as taught by JUNG, because polymer substrate provides flexibility, light weight, low cost, and R2R processability, and because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAE-SIK KANG whose telephone number is 571-272-3190. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am – 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew T. Martin can be reached on 571-270-7871. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAE-SIK KANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728