DETAILED ACTION
This is the third Office Action regarding application number 18/711,868, filed on 05/20/2024, which is a 371 of PCT/CN2023/081171, filed on 03/13/2023, and which claims foreign priority to CN 202210239656.3, filed on 03/11/2022.
This action is in response to the Applicant’s Response received 08/19/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-12, 15, 17, and 19-23 are currently pending.
Claims 13, 14, 16, and 18 are canceled.
Claim 1 is amended.
Claim 23 is withdrawn.
Claims 1-12, 15, 17, and 19-22 are examined below.
No claim is allowed.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s arguments received 08/19/2026 have been carefully considered but they are not found persuasive at this time, and are moot in light of the Office’s new ground of rejection.
The applicant in its remarks makes several statements focused on unique and distinguishing technical features and rationales for recited width and thickness ranges. For example, the applicant mentions a proposed technical project solved by amended claim 1 is “how to balance the light reflection effect and the connection reliability of the electrode structure.” Remarks 6-7.
The examiner carefully reviewed the applicant’s comments and also studied the instant specification and its data tables. The examiner does not understand the applicant’s statements to sufficiently connect its assertions to any of the provided data in its application, and therefore cannot agree with its positions at this time.
The examiner requests follow-up explanation from the applicant about its statement that the primary KIM reference does not disclose or suggest the recited seed layer structure. Remarks 7. The examiner’s review of this reference appears to teach the recited structure, and the applicant does not offer its own interpretation of KIM or explain why it believes that KIM’s structure does not, in fact, correspond to the recited structure.
The applicant’s remaining remarks are understood to describe the instant invention rather than rebut the specific facts and conclusions in the grounds of rejection, and are acknowledged by the examiner, but do not offer compelling explanation of non-obviousness or other clear error in application of the prior art references to the recited claims.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US 2018/0226523 A1).
Regarding claim 1, KIM teaches an electrode structure of a solar cell, comprising
a conducting layer (42b), wherein one end, configured to be connected to the solar cell, of the conducting layer is provided with a seed layer (424),
a width of the seed layer is less than that of the conducting layer (a width W21 at the interface of the seed layer and conducting layer is less than W2 or (W22+W21+W22), Fig. 1), and
a predetermined surface of the conducting layer and the surface of the solar cell form a suspended structure (undercut UC forms a “suspended” structure),
the predetermined surface is a surface of the conducting layer proximate to the seed layer and not covered by the seed layer (see illustration of Fig. 1 showing this arrangement of layers), and
the thickness of the seed layer is 30nm-300nm (para. 59 explains that the thickness of the seed layer 424 may be 50-400nm, overlapping with the range claimed).
PNG
media_image1.png
596
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
KIM further teaches that the width of the seed layer = (20%-98%) * a width of the conducting layer: width W2 may be 100-500 micrometers (para. 64) and W22 may be 1-10 micrometers (para. 67). Thus, the width range of the surface of the seed layer 424 contacting the conducting layer 42b is 100-20=80 micrometers at minimum to 500-2=498 micrometers at maximum. If W22 is selected to be 10 micrometers and W2 is selected to be 100 micrometers, then the width of the seed layer is 80 micrometers compared to the width of the conducting layer 100 micrometers yields a ratio of 80%, within the range claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05. The examiner reviewed the applicant’s application-as-filed and finds no apparent criticality of the recited width relationship.
The examiner also determines that the claimed seed layer thickness range overlaps with the range disclosed by KIM and is prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 6, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, wherein the conducting layer is made of a conductive metal, materials of the conducting layer comprise one or more of Cu, Ag and Al (“second layer 424 may be formed of a metal having excellent reflection properties and may include, for example, Cu, Al, Ag, Au, or an alloy thereof,” para. 58).
Regarding claim 7, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 6, wherein the conducting layer is prepared by one of PVD, screen printing, chemical vapor deposition, electroplating, or electroless plating (para. 71 describes the conducting layer 42b as printed using a pattern, which is equivalent to screen printing; para. 72 discusses plating alternatives).
Regarding claim 9, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, wherein a suspended average height of the suspended structure ranges from 10nm-50 µm, and the suspended average height is a distance between the predetermined surface and the surface of the solar cell (layer 424 has a thickness of 50-400nm, para. 59, overlapping with the range claimed).
Regarding claim 10, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 8, wherein the surface of the solar cell is also provided with a layer of dielectric film (layer 40), the dielectric film is provided with an opening exposing a part of the surface of the solar cell, and the seed layer is locally in contact with the solar cell through the opening (layer 424 contacts solar cell through the opening in layer 40).
Regarding claim 12, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, wherein a width of the conducting layer - the width of the seed layer is > 5 µm (undercut UC width can be about 1-10 micrometers on each edge (thus doubled to about 2-20 micrometers), thus overlapping with the edge of the range claimed of >5, para. 67),
or the width of the seed layer = (30%-90%) * a width of the conducting layer,
or the seed layer is formed by stacking a plurality of sub-seed layers.
Regarding claim 15, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 12, wherein the width of the conducting layer - the width of the seed layer is > 10 µm (undercut UC width can be about 1-10 micrometers on each edge (thus doubled to about 2-20 micrometers), thus overlapping with the edge of the range claimed, para. 67).
Regarding claim 17, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 12, wherein content of functional components of the sub-seed layers stacked gradually decreases in a direction away from the solar cell (claim 12 does not require sub-seed layers, thus claim 17 is optional).
Regarding claim 18, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, wherein the thickness of the seed layer is 10nm-1000nm (424 has layer thickness of 50-400nm, within the range claimed, para. 59).
Regarding claim 19, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 11, wherein the thickness of the conducting layer is 1-800µm (layer 42b has thickness of about 5-50 micrometers, within the claimed range, para. 72).
Regarding claims 20-22, KIM teaches the solar cell, comprising the electrode structure according to claim 1, also constructed to form a solar cell and solar cell module, which is only an obvious duplication of solar cells.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US 2018/0226523 A1) in view of NEE (US 2007/0131276 A1).
Regarding claims 2-4, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, wherein the seed layer is made of an alloy material (“second layer 424 may be formed of a metal having excellent reflection properties and may include, for example, Cu, Al, Ag, Au, or an alloy thereof,” para. 58), but does not disclose expressly that components of the seed layer comprise a functional component and a strengthening component, the functional component and the strengthening component being mixed in a certain ratio (claim 2), that the functional component is a metal having an average refractive index of less than 2 in the wavelength range of 850nm-1200nm (claim 3), or that the functional component is one or more of Al, Ag, Cu and Mg, and the strengthening component comprises any one or more of Mo, Ni, Ti, W, Cr, Si, Mn, Pd, Bi, Nb, Ta, Pa and V, wherein content ratio of the functional component is >50%,and the content ratio of the functional component is a ratio of content of the functional component to a total content, the total content is a sum of the content of the functional component and content of the strengthening component (claim 4).
NEE teaches a conductive layer using an alloy of at least silver with another element such as nickel, in an amount of 0.05-5 atomic percent (para. 11), because this allows for the construction of photo-voltaic cells with thinner and less expensive transparent conductive layers.
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify KIM and combine the seed layer elements to include silver Ag and nickel Ni in the claimed amounts for the construction of photo-voltaic cells with thinner and less expensive transparent conductive layers as taught by NEE.
Regarding claim 5, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 2, wherein the seed layer is prepared by one of Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), screen printing, chemical vapor deposition, electroplating, or electroless plating (layer 424 formed by plating, para. 61-62).
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US 2018/0226523 A1) in view of CALNAN (“Applications of Oxide Coatings in Photovoltaic Devices”).
Regarding claims 8 and 11, KIM teaches the electrode structure of the solar cell according to claim 1, but does not disclose expressly that the electrode structure further comprising a protective layer provided on the surface of the conducting layer away from the seed layer, wherein the protective layer is prepared by Sn or Ag, and the protective layer is prepared by one of PVD, screen printing, chemical vapor deposition, electroplating, or electroless plating (claim 8) or that a transparent conductive film (422) is also provided between the seed layer and the dielectric film (insulating layer 40), and a part of the transparent conductive film is in contact with the solar cell through the opening provided in the dielectric film (422 connects thru the opening to the solar cell, Fig. 2) (claim 11 does not disclose an oxide specifically).
CALNAN describes examples where a transparent conductive oxide film including tin (Sn) is employed within the layer stack of a solar cell (Fig. 4), and mentions that physical vapor deposition is used to produce metal oxide layers (pg. 172).
PNG
media_image2.png
367
601
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify KIM and insert a TCO layer including tin as a protective layer or between a seed layer and dielectric film because CALNAN explains that TCOs can replace many layers within the solar cell stack for the purpose of light management, passivation of electrical defects, and charge separation/transport (abstract).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELO TRIVISONNO whose telephone number is (571) 272-5201 or by email at <angelo.trivisonno@uspto.gov>. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY-FRIDAY, 9:00a-5:00pm EST. The examiner's supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI, can be reached at (571) 272-3433.
/ANGELO TRIVISONNO/
Primary Examiner
