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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-42 are cancelled and new claims 43-60 are presently under consideration as set forth in applicant’s response dated 15 January 2026.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the prior art and indefiniteness rejections of record which are thus withdrawn.
Upon search and consideration of applicant’s new claims, new prior art was uncovered and new prior art grounds of rejection are set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments and remarks where applicable are addressed below.
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.
Claims 43-46, 49, 51-52, and 58-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (WO 2020/155628A1, reference made to US 2022/0140773A1 as equivalent English translation), and further in view of Capps et al (US 2012/0090661) or in the alternative, in further view of KRAJEWSKI (US 2021/0020586).
Regarding claim 43 Zhang discloses a method for manufacturing a decorative laminate panel, the method comprising the steps of:
producing a core construction in a first processing step ([0408], Figs. 1-2 see: selecting or providing a substrate layer 3 such as a ceramic material selected as the substrate);
producing an photovoltaic element in a second processing step ([0408], Figs. 1-2 see: selecting or providing a solar cell layer 2-2 such as a polycrystalline silicon solar cell sheet);
producing a decor layer in a third processing step ([0399]-[0407] Figs. 1-2 see: molding and processing an optical adjustment layer (decorative surface) as an artificial light-transmitting resin sheet);
arranging the core construction, the photovoltaic element, and the decor layer to form a stack wherein the photovoltaic element is positioned between the core construction and the decor layer ([0408]-[0409] Figs. 1-2 see: the substrate was covered with EVA layer which was then covered with the polycrystalline silicon solar cell sheet which was then covered with the prepared decorative protective layer optical adjustment layer); and
laminating the stack in a fourth processing step to form an integral lamination ([0409] see: The power-generating layer of the solar cell assembly and the protective layer were adhered by the EVA and sealed by lamination). The above steps are also recited in paras [0087]-[0097].
Zhang does not explicitly disclose where the photovoltaic element is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps.
However, Capps teaches such photovoltaic elements can be produced in a separate step prior to stacking and lamination as an encapsulated photovoltaic element (Capps, [0018], [0054], [0133] Figs. 1A-1C, 2, 11 see: individually encapsulated solar cells or strings formed by first encapsulating the solar cell(s) 10 with protective layer 20 prior to stacking in a module with EVA encapsulants/pottant layers and performing vacuum lamination). Capps teaches this additional protective layer has a chemical composition that prevents moisture from entering the solar cell (Abstract and [0009]).
Additionally KRAJEWSKI also teaches such photovoltaic elements can be produced in a separate step prior to stacking and lamination as an encapsulated photovoltaic element ([0047]-[0052] Figs. 3A-3B see: PV layer 110 is encapsulated by applying a planarization material 310 prior to lamination of the planarized PV layer with intermediate layers 170a, b and layers 130a, b). KRAJEWSKI teaches this planarizing encapsulation prevents forces from being localized near protrusion features of the photovoltaic element to lessen the occurrence of cracks, defects, and/or shunts during lamination to thus increase manufacturing yield rate (paras [0048]-[0050]).
Zhang, Capps and KRAJEWSKI are combinable as they are all concerned with the field of manufacturing photovoltaic apparatuses.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Zhang in view of Capps such that photovoltaic element of Zhang is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps as in Capps (Capps, [0018], [0054], [0133] Figs. 1A-1C, 2, 11 see: individually encapsulated solar cells or strings formed by first encapsulating the solar cell(s) 10 with protective layer 20 prior to stacking in a module with EVA encapsulants/pottant layers and performing vacuum lamination) as Capps teaches this additional protective layer has a chemical composition that prevents moisture from entering the solar cell (Abstract and [0009]).
In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Zhang in view of KRAJEWSKI such that photovoltaic element of Zhang is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps as in KRAJEWSKI ([0047]-[0052] Figs. 3A-3B see: PV layer 110 is encapsulated by applying a planarization material 310 prior to lamination of the planarized PV layer with intermediate layers 170a, b and layers 130a, b) as KRAJEWSKI teaches this planarizing encapsulation prevents forces from being localized near protrusion features of the photovoltaic element to lessen the occurrence of cracks, defects, and/or shunts during lamination to thus increase manufacturing yield rate (paras [0048]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 44 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and Capps and KRAJEWSKI each discloses wherein the encapsulated photovoltaic element is embedded within at least two layers of encapsulant (Capps, [0102] Figs. 6-7 see: protective film 100 includes multiple layers 102, 104) (KRAJEWSKI, [0061]-[0063], Figs. 3B and 4B, 4G see: PV layer 110 encapsulated in front and back layers of protective material 310).
Regarding claim 45 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 44, and Capps and KRAJEWSKI each discloses wherein the encapsulant comprises polymeric or copolymeric material having adhesive properties selected from the group including a glue, a thermoset resin, a thermoplastic resin, an elastomer, ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), polyolefin elastomer (POE), polyvinyl butyral (PVB), silicone-urethane (TPU), polyolefin elastomer (POE), and ionomer polymers (Capps, [0102] Figs. 6-7 see: protective film 100 includes multiple layers 102 of polymer such as polyethylene naphthalate (PEN), polyether etherketone (PEEK) (thermoplastics)) (KRAJEWSKI, [0061]-[0062] Figs. 3B and 4B, 4G see: front and back layers of protective material 310 of a material such as PVB, EVA).
Regarding claim 46 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and Zhang further discloses wherein the core construction comprises a core and one or more encapsulant layers ([0326], [0408]-[0409] Fig. 4 see: substrate 3-2 includes glue film 3-1).
Regarding claim 49 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 46, and Zhang further discloses wherein the core includes at least one of resin impregnated papers, prepregs, non-wovens and wovens of wood fibers, glass fibers, textile fibers, synthetic fibers, metallic fibers, ceramic fibers, and carbon fibers ([0324], [0307] Figs. 1-2 see: substrate layer 3 of an engineering structure board such as a cement-based fiber board).
Regarding claim 51 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and regarding the claim 51 recitations “wherein the fourth processing step is performed at a temperature in a range from 100°C to 160°C, for a duration time from 20 minutes to 30 minutes, and at a pressure less than 1 bar” Zhang teaches in para [0097] packaging can include lamination at a temperature range of 70° C to 175° C, at a vacuum of below 0.01 Pa and curing for 5 to 30 min which ranges entirely encompass the claimed fourth processing step ranges. It is well settled that where the prior art describes the components of a claimed compound or compositions in concentrations within or overlapping the claimed concentrations a prima facie case of obviousness is established. See In re Harris, 409 F.3d 1339, 1343, 74 USPQ2d 1951, 1953 (Fed. Cir 2005); In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1329, 65 USPQ 2d 1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936-37 (CCPA 1990); In re Malagari, 499 F.2d 1297, 1303, 182 USPQ 549, 553 (CCPA 1974).
Regarding claim 52 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and Zhang further teaches wherein the fourth processing step comprises one or more of heating, evacuation, pressure build up, and aeration ([0097], [0025], [0029], [0408]-[0409] see: performing packaging lamination of the stack of layers including at least a step of heating and evacuation).
Regarding claim 58 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and Zhang further teaches wherein the photovoltaic element is a thin film ([0164], [0509] see: the solar cell can be thin film such as copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS) solar cell, cadmium telluride (CdTe) solar cell, amorphous silicon solar cell).
Regarding claim 59 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, and Zhang further teaches wherein the decor layer is semi- transparent ([0010], [0399] see: the optical adjustment layer (décor layer) is partly translucent or transparent).
Regarding claim 60 modified Zhang discloses the method according to claim 43, wherein the first processing step, the second processing step, and the third processing step are performed in any order relative to one another, and wherein the fourth processing step is performed after completion of the first, second, and third processing steps ([0406]-[0409] see: the solar cell element, substrate (core) layer and optical adjustment (decor) layer are each prepared in separate steps that can be performed in any order prior to stacking and lamination).
Claims 43-46, 49-50, 52, 54, and 56-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kjellander et al (WO 2020/050713A1), and further in view of Capps et al (US 2012/0090661) or in the alternative, in further view of KRAJEWSKI (US 2021/0020586).
Regarding claim 43 Kjellander discloses a method for manufacturing a decorative laminate panel (Abstract), the method comprising the steps of:
producing a core construction in a first processing step (Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-2 see: sheet acting as a core material is separately provided prior to receiving the photovoltaic element);
producing a photovoltaic element in a second processing step (Paragraph bridging pages 14-15 see: separately manufactured solar cell is provided);
producing a decor layer in a third processing step (Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-11 see: an outermost décor layer is separately produced/provided prior to lamination);
arranging the core construction, the photovoltaic element, and the decor layer to form a stack wherein the photovoltaic element is positioned between the core construction and the decor layer (Figs. 1-3 and 10-11, Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-2, section bridging pages 19-20 see: photovoltaic element 2 is arranged in a stack between a sheet acting as a core (core layer 3 or core layer 4) and an outermost décor layer 1); and
laminating the stack in a fourth processing step to form an integral lamination (section bridging pages 19-20 see: the panels is pressed at 160°C, 70 bars for 20 min to form the laminate panel).
Kjellander does not explicitly disclose where the photovoltaic element is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps.
However, Capps teaches such photovoltaic elements can be produced in a separate step prior to stacking and lamination as an encapsulated photovoltaic element (Capps, [0018], [0054], [0133] Figs. 1A-1C, 2, 11 see: individually encapsulated solar cells or strings formed by first encapsulating the solar cell(s) 10 with protective layer 20 prior to stacking in a module with EVA encapsulants/pottant layers and performing vacuum lamination). Capps teaches this additional protective layer has a chemical composition that prevents moisture from entering the solar cell (Abstract and [0009]).
Additionally KRAJEWSKI also teaches such photovoltaic elements can be produced in a separate step prior to stacking and lamination as an encapsulated photovoltaic element ([0047]-[0052] Figs. 3A-3B see: PV layer 110 is encapsulated by applying a planarization material 310 prior to lamination of the planarized PV layer with intermediate layers 170a, b and layers 130a, b). KRAJEWSKI teaches this planarizing encapsulation prevents forces from being localized near protrusion features of the photovoltaic element to lessen the occurrence of cracks, defects, and/or shunts during lamination to thus increase manufacturing yield rate (paras [0048]-[0050]).
Kjellander, Capps and KRAJEWSKI are combinable as they are all concerned with the field of manufacturing photovoltaic apparatuses.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of Capps such that photovoltaic element of Kjellander is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps as in Capps (Capps, [0018], [0054], [0133] Figs. 1A-1C, 2, 11 see: individually encapsulated solar cells or strings formed by first encapsulating the solar cell(s) 10 with protective layer 20 prior to stacking in a module with EVA encapsulants/pottant layers and performing vacuum lamination) as Capps teaches this additional protective layer has a chemical composition that prevents moisture from entering the solar cell (Abstract and [0009]).
In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of KRAJEWSKI such that photovoltaic element of Kjellander is produced as an encapsulated photovoltaic element prior to the arranging and laminating steps as in KRAJEWSKI ([0047]-[0052] Figs. 3A-3B see: PV layer 110 is encapsulated by applying a planarization material 310 prior to lamination of the planarized PV layer with intermediate layers 170a, b and layers 130a, b) as KRAJEWSKI teaches this planarizing encapsulation prevents forces from being localized near protrusion features of the photovoltaic element to lessen the occurrence of cracks, defects, and/or shunts during lamination to thus increase manufacturing yield rate (paras [0048]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 44 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Capps and KRAJEWSKI each discloses wherein the encapsulated photovoltaic element is embedded within at least two layers of encapsulant (Capps, [0102] Figs. 6-7 see: protective film 100 includes multiple layers 102, 104) (KRAJEWSKI, [0061]-[0063], Figs. 3B and 4B, 4G see: PV layer 110 encapsulated in front and back layers of protective material 310).
Regarding claim 45 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 44, and Capps and KRAJEWSKI each discloses wherein the encapsulant comprises polymeric or copolymeric material having adhesive properties selected from the group including a glue, a thermoset resin, a thermoplastic resin, an elastomer, ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), polyolefin elastomer (POE), polyvinyl butyral (PVB), silicone-urethane (TPU), polyolefin elastomer (POE), and ionomer polymers (Capps, [0102] Figs. 6-7 see: protective film 100 includes multiple layers 102 of polymer such as polyethylene naphthalate (PEN), polyether etherketone (PEEK) (thermoplastics)) (KRAJEWSKI, [0061]-[0062] Figs. 3B and 4B, 4G see: front and back layers of protective material 310 of a material such as PVB, EVA).
Regarding claim 46 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the core construction comprises a core and one or more encapsulant layers (Pages 4-6, 11, Figs. 1-3 and 10-11 see: the integrated photovoltaic element(s) is/are encapsulated by the HPL panel where the photovoltaic elements can be embedded (encapsulated) within a layer of the core (Figs. 10-11), and bonded to the core layer through an adhesive layer, such an adhesive layer considered to be an encapsulant).
Regarding claim 49 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 46, and Kjellander discloses wherein the core includes at least one of resin impregnated papers, prepregs, non-wovens and wovens of wood fibers, glass fibers, textile fibers, synthetic fibers, metallic fibers, ceramic fibers, and carbon fibers (Page 16, Figs. 1-3 see: cores 3 and 4 formed of resin impregnated papers or prepregs respectively).
Regarding claim 50 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 46, wherein the core comprises an outermost layer comprising a coating layer comprising a thermally cured resin or a radiation-cured resin, wherein the radiation-cured resin is selected from the group including electron beam radiation (EBC) curable resins, UV radiation curable resins, X- ray radiation curable resins, or a combination thereof (Page 6 and bottom of Page 10 see: core includes a coating of resin which is a thermo curable resin).
Regarding claim 52 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Kjellander discloses wherein the fourth processing step comprises one or more of heating, evacuation, pressure build up, and aeration (Top of page 20, see: the laminating include a step of heating and pressing).
Regarding claim 54 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the decor layer comprises a coated substrate layer comprising a substrate layer including a base coat layer, the base coat layer including a topcoat layer, and the topcoat layer optionally including a release foil (Page 25, see: the decorative layer, décor, consists of a paper impregnated by thermoset resins (substrate layer) with coating giving color(base coat layer) and coatings giving other surface specific qualities such as resistance to scratch, abrasion, UV-light and weather wear (top coat)).
Regarding claim 56 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 54, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the substrate layer is a non- pigmented or pigmented substrate layer selected from the group including paper, resin impregnated paper, and polymeric foil (Page 11, see: the substrate layer of the décor layer is resin impregnated paper but can be polymeric foil).
Regarding claim 57 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 56, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the resin of the resin impregnated paper is at least one of a thermoset resin, a thermoplastic resin, a phenol resin, a melamine resin, a urea resin, an epoxy resin, a polyester resin, a polyisocyanate resin, melamine acrylate, and polyurethane acrylate (Page 26, claims 1, 4 see: the outermost décor layer comprises a resin impregnated paper where said resin of said resin impregnated paper is phenol resin, melamine resin, urea resin, epoxy resin, polyester resin, polyisocyanate resin, melamine acrylate, polyurethane acrylate).
Regarding claim 58 modified Kjellander discloses method according to claim 43, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the photovoltaic element is a thin film (Paragraph bridging pages 14-15 see: the solar cell is for example a thin film solar cell).
Regarding claim 59 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Kjellander further discloses wherein the decor layer is semi- transparent (Top of page 4 see: the outermost décor layer is transparent to the wavelength of light that power the photovoltaic element).
Regarding claim 60 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, wherein the first processing step, the second processing step, and the third processing step are performed in any order relative to one another, and wherein the fourth processing step is performed after completion of the first, second, and third processing steps (Figs. 1-3 and 10-11, Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-2, section bridging pages 19-20 see: the photovoltaic element 2, sheet acting as a core (core layer 3 or core layer 4) and the outermost décor layer 1 are all separately produced prior to the arrangement and lamination steps and thus their respective production steps can be performed in any order relative to one another produced prior to the arrangement and lamination steps).
Claims 47-48 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kjellander et al (WO 2020/050713A1) in view of Capps et al (US 2012/0090661) or alternatively in view of KRAJEWSKI (US 2021/0020586) as applied to claims 43-46, 49-50, 52, 54, and 56-60 above, and further in view of Funayama et al (US 2012/0305080).
Regarding claim 47 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 46, and regarding the claim 47 recitation “wherein the core construction comprises, in succession, a first back-side decor, the core, the one or more encapsulant layers, and a second back-side décor” Kjellander discloses in Fig. 3 and Page 16-17 the core construction formed of a décor layer 1/core layer 4/décor layer 1/ décor layer 1 where the middle décor layer 1 can be considered as one or more encapsulant layers given Kjellander discloses décor layers can include protective coatings (Page 25, decorative layer including scratch, abrasion and weather resistant coating(s)) and thus can be interpreted to meet the limitations of one or more encapsulant layers.
In the alternative where it’s not clear Kjellander discloses the core construction has the further one or more encapsulant layers, Funayama teaches solar cells integrated with ornamental laminates for building construction (Abstract, [0002], [0010] Fig. 1A) where the construction comprises a core resin layer between metal layers where an adhesive layer (encapsulant) can be present between the core (base) layer and one or more of the metal layers (Funayama, [0034], [0037]-[0038] Fig. 1A see: base resin layer 16B between metal layers 16A where the metal-resin composite substrate 16 may contain one or more layers (for example, an adhesive agent layer) other than the metal layer 16A and the resin layer 16B between the two layers).
Kjellander and Funayama are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of manufacturing power generating ornamental laminates.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of Funayama such that the core construction of Funayama further comprises one or more encapsulant layers (adhesive layers) between the décor layer and core as in Funayama ([0034], [0037]-[0038] Fig. 1A see: base resin layer 16B between metal layers 16A where the metal-resin composite substrate 16 may contain one or more layers (for example, an adhesive agent layer) other than the metal layer 16A and the resin layer 16B between the two layers) for the purpose of providing adhesion of the décor layer to the core layer in Kjellander.
Regarding claim 48 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 46, and regarding the claim 48 recitation “wherein the core construction comprises, in succession, a first aluminum decor, the core, the one or more encapsulant layers, and a second aluminum décor” Kjellander discloses in Fig. 3 and Page 16-17 the core construction formed of a décor layer 1/core layer 4/décor layer 1/ décor layer 1 where the décor layers can be manufactured with metallic foils (Page 11) but does not explicitly disclose where the metallic foils are aluminum or the one or more encapsulant layers between the core and the further décor.
Funayama teaches solar cells integrated with ornamental laminates for building construction (Abstract, [0002], [0010] Fig. 1A) where the construction comprises a core resin layer between metal aluminum layers where an adhesive layer (encapsulant) can be present between the core (base) layer and one or more of the metal aluminum layers (Funayama, [0034], [0037]-[0038] Fig. 1A see: base resin layer 16B between metal layers 16A of aluminum where the metal-resin composite substrate 16 may contain one or more layers (for example, an adhesive agent layer) other than the metal layer 16A and the resin layer 16B between the two layers).
Kjellander and Funayama are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of manufacturing power generating ornamental laminates.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of Funayama such that the metallic foils of the décor layers of Kjellander are aluminum and one or more encapsulant layers are present between the core and the further décor in Kjellander as in Funayama (Funayama, [0034], [0037]-[0038] Fig. 1A see: base resin layer 16B between metal layers 16A of aluminum where the metal-resin composite substrate 16 may contain one or more layers (for example, an adhesive agent layer) other than the metal layer 16A and the resin layer 16B between the two layers) as such a modification would have amounted to the selection of a known metal for its intended use in a décor layer of a core construction of a power generating ornamental laminate and the use of an adhesive (encapsulant) for its known and intended use of adhering an outer layer of a laminate construction to the core.
Regarding claim 51 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and although Kjellander discloses laminating is performed at a temperature of 160°C, 70 bars for 20 min (Page 20) Kjellander does not explicitly disclose wherein the laminating in the fourth step is performed at a temperature in a range from 100° C. to 160° C., for a duration time from 20 minutes to 30 minutes, and at a pressure less than 1 bar.
However, Funayama teaches solar cells integrated with ornamental laminates for building construction (Abstract, [0002], [0010] Fig. 1A) that are manufacturing by lamination at a temperature in a range from 100° C. to 160° C., for a duration time from 20 minutes to 30 minutes, and at a pressure less than 1 bar ([0097], [0123], Fig. 1A see: thermal lamination for a combined 20 minutes performed at 150° C and at a vacuum and thus under 1 bar (atmospheric pressure)).
Kjellander and Funayama are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of manufacturing power generating ornamental laminates.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of Funayama such that the lamination is performed at a temperature in a range from 100° C. to 160° C., for a duration time from 20 minutes to 30 minutes, and at a pressure less than 1 bar as in Funayama ([0097], [0123], Fig. 1A see: thermal lamination for a combined 20 minutes performed at 150° C and at a vacuum and thus under 1 bar (atmospheric pressure)) as such a modification would have amounted to the use of a known vacuum lamination process and conditions for their intend purpose in manufacturing a power generating ornamental laminate to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kjellander et al (WO 2020/050713A1) in view of Capps et al (US 2012/0090661) or alternatively in view of KRAJEWSKI (US 2021/0020586) as applied to claims 43-46, 49-50, 52, 54, and 56-60 above, and further in view of Cheung (US 2005/0224108).
Regarding claim 53 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 43, and Kjellander discloses wherein the fourth processing step comprises:
laminating the encapsulated photovoltaic element and the decor layer to obtain a laminated composite(Paragraph bridging pages 10-11 see: décor is laminated onto the sheet with photovoltaic element(s) with an adhesive) but Kjellander does not explicitly disclose gluing the laminated composite together with the core construction to obtain the decorative laminate panel.
Cheung teaches manufacturing photovoltaic modules integrated with buildings (Abstract) where a laminated panel is glued with a building support material to obtain the final laminate panel (Cheung, [0019], [0021]-[0022] Figs. 1-2 see: the layers of a photovoltaic element 12 including solar cells 14 and EVA encapsulants are first laminated together and then glued with an adhesive layer 28 to support panel structure 26 which is an aluminum composite material (ACM) used for building facades). Cheung teaches this allows the photovoltaic laminate to be easily integrated with a building façade at the installation site (Cheung, Abstract, [0022]).
Kjellander and Cheung are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of manufacturing photovoltaic modules integrated with building façades.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of Cheung such that the laminated composite of Kjellander is then glued together with the core construction of Kjellander to obtain the decorative laminate panel as in Cheung (Cheung, [0019], [0021]-[0022] Figs. 1-2 see: the layers of a photovoltaic element 12 including solar cells 14 and EVA encapsulants are first laminated together and then glued with an adhesive layer 28 to support panel structure 26 which is an aluminum composite material (ACM) used for building facades) as Cheung teaches this allows the pre-manufactured photovoltaic laminate to be easily integrated with a building façade at the installation site (Cheung, Abstract, [0022]).
Claim 55 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kjellander et al (WO 2020/050713A1) in view of Capps et al (US 2012/0090661) or alternatively in view of KRAJEWSKI (US 2021/0020586) as applied to claims 43-46, 49-50, 52, 54, and 56-60 above, and further in view of van der Hoeven (US 4,789,604).
Regarding claim 55 modified Kjellander discloses the method according to claim 54, wherein the base coat layer and the top coat layer comprise a resin comprising at least an oligomer selected from the group including a polyether acrylate, a polyether methacrylate, an acrylic acrylate, an acrylic methacrylate, an epoxy-acrylate, an epoxy-methacrylate, a silicone-acrylate, a silicone-methacrylate, a polyester acrylate, a polyester methacrylate, a urethane acrylate, and a urethane methacrylate (Kjellander, page 4 see: resin of the décor layer includes epoxy resin, polyester resin, polyisocyanate resin, polyurethane acrylate) but does not explicitly disclose said resin is a radiation-cured resin. However, Kjellander (Page 1) teaches such high-pressure compact laminates (HPL) materials are known from van der Hoeven (US 4,789,604) which teaches such base coat layer and the top coat layer resins are polymerized by radiation (van der Hoeven, Abstract, C4/L25-37, C5/L1-10, Figs. 1a or 3a see: panel 14 having paper layer 1 with decorative layer 2 and transparent layer 6 with coating layers formed from radiation-cured resins such as polyester acrylate oligomers and especially an aliphatic urethane acrylate oligomer).
Modified Kjellander and van der Hoeven are combinable as they are both concerned with the field of manufacturing high-pressure compact laminates (HPL).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Kjellander in view of van der Hoeven such that the base coat layer and the top coat layer resin of Kjellander is a radiation-cured resin as taught by van der Hoeven (Abstract, C4/L25-37, C5/L1-10, Figs. 1a or 3a see: panel 14 having paper layer 1 with decorative layer 2 and transparent layer 6 with coating layers formed from radiation-cured resins such as polyester acrylate oligomers and especially an aliphatic urethane acrylate oligomer) as such a modification would have amounted to the mere selection of known base coat and top coat layer resins for their intended use in a high-pressure compact laminate to accomplish the entirely expected result of forming decorative layers and protective top coatings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, regarding the prior art of Kjellander, applicant argues on page 7 of the response filed 15 January 2026 that the prior art of Kjellander does not disclose producing a décor layer, core construction, and encapsulated photovoltaic element as separate components in discrete processing steps but instead, the layers and PV elements in Kjellander are integrated during the pressing operation, not independently fabricated and then assembled and as such, at least the first, second, and third processing steps recited in claim 43 are not disclosed or suggested in Kjellander.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. As recited above, Kjellander discloses producing a core construction in a first processing step (Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-2 see: sheet acting as a core material is separately provided prior to receiving the photovoltaic element); producing a photovoltaic element in a second processing step (Paragraph bridging pages 14-15 see: separately manufactured solar cell is provided); producing a decor layer in a third processing step (Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-11 see: an outermost décor layer is separately produced/provided prior to lamination); arranging the core construction, the photovoltaic element, and the decor layer to form a stack wherein the photovoltaic element is positioned between the core construction and the decor layer (Figs. 1-3 and 10-11, Page 10/L24-34, Page 11/L1-2, section bridging pages 19-20 see: photovoltaic element 2 is arranged in a stack between a sheet acting as a core (core layer 3 or core layer 4) and an outermost décor layer 1); and laminating the stack in a fourth processing step to form an integral lamination (section bridging pages 19-20 see: the panels is pressed at 160°C, 70 bars for 20 min to form the laminate panel).
The core (thermoformable sheet) outer decor layer and solar cell element in Kjellander are produced separately before being stacked and laminated in a pressing operation. If applicant means to claim more particular production operations for the first, second or third processing steps or a more particular lamination process in the fourth processing step to distinguish over the prior art of record, the claim language should explicitly recite such features to distinguish over the prior art of record. Applicant’s further arguments and remarks to Kjellander are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection in view of Capps or KRAJEWSKI.
Second, regarding the prior art of Zhang, applicant argues on pages 8-9 of the response filed 15 January 2026 that the prior art of Zhang does not disclose or inherently teach the independent formation of three components in discrete processing steps. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not found persuasive.
As recited above, Zhang in paras [0399]-[0409] separately produces a core construction in a first processing step ([0408], Figs. 1-2 see: selecting or providing a substrate layer 3 such as a ceramic material selected as the substrate); producing an photovoltaic element in a second processing step ([0408], Figs. 1-2 see: selecting or providing a solar cell layer 2-2 such as a polycrystalline silicon solar cell sheet); and producing a decor layer in a third processing step ([0399]-[0407] Figs. 1-2 see: molding and processing an optical adjustment layer (decorative surface) as an artificial light-transmitting resin sheet) followed by arranging the core construction, the photovoltaic element, and the decor layer to form a stack wherein the photovoltaic element is positioned between the core construction and the decor layer ([0408]-[0409] Figs. 1-2 see: the substrate was covered with EVA layer which was then covered with the polycrystalline silicon solar cell sheet which was then covered with the prepared decorative protective layer optical adjustment layer); and laminating the stack in a fourth processing step to form an integral lamination ([0409] see: The power-generating layer of the solar cell assembly and the protective layer were adhered by the EVA and sealed by lamination). The above steps are also recited in paras [0087]-[0097].
The solar cell in Zhang is separately produced, as in the substrate before they are glued or laminated together, and the optical adjustment layer (decorative surface) is produced as a separate element as recited above before being arranged onto the stacked solar cell and substrate to then undergo vacuum lamination and produce the final solar module in a final processing step.
Applicant’s arguments that lamination in Zhang being used to seal, package, or encapsulate layers that are already functionally integrated during fabrication is materially different from the claimed method are not found persuasive as they are not commensurate in scope with the limitations of the claims, in particular claim 43. The lamination step claimed in claim 43 simply recites laminating the stack in a fourth processing step to form an integral lamination which is performed in Zhang (paras ([0409] and paras [0087]-[0097] also describe more detailed vacuum lamination). The final lamination in Zhang flows and cures the encapsulant material to seal and thus integrally laminate the stacked layers. If applicant means to claim a different or more specific lamination process, the claim language should explicitly recite such features to distinguish over the prior art of record. Applicant’s further arguments and remarks to Zhang are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection in view of Capps or KRAJEWSKI.
Applicant’s further arguments with respect to claims 43-60 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference 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 ANDREW J GOLDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7935. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm.
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.
ANDREW J. GOLDEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/ANDREW J GOLDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726