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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/21/2026 has been entered.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 23-29 and 31-34, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi et al. (“Accelerated Lifetime Testing of Organic-Inorganic Perovskite Solar Cells Encapsulated by Polyisobutylene”, Cite No. 20 of Other Documents in IDS 04/08/2025) as evidenced by Bullen (US 2021/0036174) and Richter et al. (US 2005/0073507), in view of Kato et al. (US 2012/0204961), and further in view of Horiuchi et al. (WO 2021/010425)
Regarding claim 23, Shi et al. discloses a solar cell comprising:
a photoelectric conversion element comprising a first electrode, a photoelectric conversion layer containing a perovskite compound, and a second electrode in this order (see FTO/Planar perovskite/Au in abstract and fig. 1); and
an exterior body (PIB and glass, see fig. 1) surrounding the entire photoelectric conversion element (FTO/perovskite/Au, see fig. 1), and comprising:
a first sealing portion (PIB) comprising an oxygen concentration adjusting material (PIB), and
a second sealing portion comprising glass (see fig. 1 and abstract);
wherein the first sealing portion (PIB) has a first exposed surface (or the outer surface) exposed to an outside of the exterior body (PIB and glass) and a second exposed surface (or the inner surface) exposed to an inside of the exterior body (glass and PIB), and is continuous between the first exposed surface (or outer surface) and the second exposed surface (or inner surface, see fig. 1 and abstract);
wherein the second sealing portion (or glass) comprises supporting portion (see superstrate glass) supporting the photoelectric conversion element (see abstract and fig. 1);
wherein the exterior body defines a sealed space, at least a part of the photoelectric conversion element is positioned in the sealed space and a portion of the sealed space is free of the photoelectric conversion element (see methods 1 and 2 in Figure 1).
PIB or polyisobutylene has an oxygen permeability coefficient greater than 0 (see table 1 of evidentiary reference to Bullen), glass has an oxygen permeability coefficient of 0 (see [0039] of evidentiary reference to Richter et al.). As such, the second sealing portion (glass) of Shi et al. comprises a material of glass having an oxygen permeability coefficient lower than that of the oxygen concentration adjusting material (PIB – or polyisobutylene).
Shi et al. teaches using the second sealing portion (or glass) having a thickness of 2mm (or 2000mm, see materials in supporting information) and 1mm (or 1000mm) thick cover glass (see Experimental section). Shi et al. also shows the first sealing portion (PIB) occupies about a half of the surface area of the solar cell (see the second row of methods 1 and 2 in Figure 1).
Shi et al. does not disclose a ratio of volume of the first sealing portion to a volume of the exterior body is 0.001% or more and 10% or less.
Kato et al. discloses a first sealing portion (or sealer layer 7, figs. 1-2, [0026]) having a thickness of 5mm or larger and 10mm or smaller from the viewpoints of protective performance by the sealer layer, the production cost, and the like (see [0126]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell of Shi et al. by forming the first sealing portion having a thickness of 5mm or larger and 10mm or smaller from the viewpoints of protective performance by the first sealing portion, the production cost, and the like as taught by Kato et al.
In such modification, the volume ratio of the first sealing portion is found to be 100*[(5-10mm)*1/2A]/[(3005-3010mm)A], where A is the surface area, or 0.0832% - 0.1661% which is right within the claimed range of 0.001% or more and 10% or less.
Modified Shi et al. does not explicitly disclose the characteristic/property of having an oxygen concentration in a region in the sealed space is 100ppm or more and 3000ppm or less.
Horiuchi et al. discloses the oxygen concentration in a sealed space (or hollow part) in to be preferably 0% (or 0ppm) or more but 21% (or 210000ppm) or less to improve the power generation performance and the durability (see [0147]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell of modified Shi et al. by having an oxygen concentration in the sealed space to be preferably 0% to 21% to improve the power generation performance and the durability as taught by Horiuchi et al.. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of 100ppm or more and 3000ppm or less in the range 0% to 21% disclosed by Horiuchi et al., because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Regarding claim 24, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 23 above, wherein Shi et al. shows the first sealing portion (PIB) covers at least a portion of a surface (or the side surface) of the photoelectric conversion element (see methods 1-2 in Figure 1 of Shi et al.).
Regarding claim 25, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 24 above, wherein Shi et al. shows the first sealing portion (PIB) is in contact with the surface (or the side surface) of the photoelectric conversion element (see methods 1-2 in Figure 1 of Shi et al.).
Regarding claim 26, modified Shi et al. solar cell as in claim 25 above, wherein Kato et al. discloses the first sealing portion (12/13) comprising a first layer (12) in contact with said all other surfaces of the photoelectric conversion element (2-6, see fig. 3) and a second layer (13) disposed on the first layer (see fig. 3 of Kato et al.).
Regarding claim 27, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 23 above, wherein both Shi et al. and Kato et al. teach the second sealing portion (see glass of Shi et al. or substrates of Kato et al.) further comprises a cover portion (or cover glass of Shi et al. or substrate 8 of Kato et al.) covering at least a portion of a surface of the photoelectric conversion element (FTO/planar perovskite/Au of Shi et al. or 2-6 of Kato et al.) supported by the supporting portion (or the superstrate/top glass of Shi et al.; 1/10, 1/9 or 1 of Kato et al.; see abstract and fig. 1 of Shi et al., or figs. 1-3 of Kato et al.).
Regarding claim 28, modified Shi et al. disclose a solar cell as in claim 27 above, wherein both Shi et al. and Kato et al. teach the first sealing portion (PIB of Shi et al.; or 7 or 12/13 of Kato et al.) is positioned between the supporting portion (superstrate/top glass of Shi et al. or 1/10, 1/9 or 1 of Kato et al.) and the cover portion (bottom/cover glass of Shi et al. or 8 of Kato et al.; see abstract and fig. 1 of Shi et al. or figs. 1-3 of Kato et al.).
Regarding claim 29, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 23 above, wherein Horiuchi et al. discloses the first sealing portion (see sealing portion 9) is out of contact with the photoelectric conversion element (2-7, see figs. 1-5).
Regarding claims 31-33, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 23 above, wherein Shi et al. and teaches the oxygen concentration adjusting material (PIB) is an organic material of a resin; and Kato et al. taches the oxygen concentration adjusting material (or the sealer) is an inorganic material of silicon nitride, silicon oxynitride, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, zirconium oxide (see [0124] of Kato et al.).
Regarding claim 34, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 34 above; wherein Shi et al. teaches the second sealing portion (glass) is glass (see abstract and fig. 1 of Shi et al.), and Kato et al. discloses the second sealing layer (or substrate) is one of selected from glass and resin (or plastic, see [0038] of Kato et al.).
Claims 30 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Shi et al. as applied to claims 27 and 23 above, and further in view of Bullen et al. (US 2021/0036174)
Regarding claim 30, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 27 above.
Modified Shi et al. does not teach the first sealing portion is provided to penetrate at least one selected from the group consisting of the supporting portion and the cover portion from the outside of the exterior body toward the inside of the exterior body.
Bullen et al. taches providing the first sealing portion (202) to penetrate the cover portion (203) from the outside of the exterior body (201/202/203) toward the inside of the exterior body (see fig. 2) to allow the electrical connection between the photoelectric conversion element (204) to an electrical device (210, [0053]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell of modified Shi et al. by providing the first sealing portion to penetrate the cover portion to allow the electrical connection between the photoelectric conversion element to an electrical device as taught by Bullen et al.
Regarding claim 35, modified Shi et al. discloses a solar cell as in claim 23 above.
Modified Shi et al. does not disclose including at least one selected from the group consisting of a moisture getter material and a filler provided between the exterior body and the photoelectric conversion element.
Bullen discloses including a filler (or upper encapsulant material 202) between the exterior body (or glass top structure 201) and the photoelectric conversion element (204, fig. 2) to provide additional encapsulation of the photoelectric conversion element (204, see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solar cell of modified Shi et al. by further including a filler between the exterior body and the photoelectric conversion element to provide additional encapsulation of the photoelectric conversion element as taught by Bullen.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Shi et al. applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Keite-Telgenbuscher et al. (US 2017/0101556).
Regarding claim 36, modified Shi et al. discloses all the structural and material limitations of the claimed solar cell and using the same material as the oxygen concentration adjusting material as claimed and disclosed (see claim 23 above), and even uses the same material for the oxygen concentrating adjusting material as claimed in claims 31-33. Modified Shi et al. also teaches the oxygen concentration in the area in the vicinity of the photoelectric conversion element, e.g. sealed space, is 100ppm or more and 3000ppm or less (see claim 23 above.
Keite-Telgenbuscher et al. discloses an oxygen concentration (or permeate content determined by gas chromatography according to oxygen permeate rate) in the first sealing portion (or adhesive 5/6, figs. 1-3) to be less than 1000ppm, more preferably of less than 500ppm (see [0144] and [0146-0147]) so that the electronic arrangement is protected reliably against the fluence of permeates to increase lifetime and exhibiting sufficient translucency ([0045] and [0147]). In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of 100ppm-1000ppm or 100-500ppm in the ranges 1000ppm or less or 500ppm or less disclosed by Keite-Telgenbuscher et al., because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 23-36 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.
Applicant argues Bullen in view of Kato or Shi in view of Kato do not teach the claimed invention. However, Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the new ground of rejections. See the rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH-TRUC TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-6594. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 6:00pm.
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 T. Barton can be reached at 5712721307. 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.
THANH-TRUC TRINH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/THANH TRUC TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights