DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Summary
This is the initial Office Action based on the 18/828,147 application filed on 09/09/2024.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4 and 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637).
Addressing claim 1, Mascarenhas discloses a tandem photovoltaic module (figs. 3-9) comprising:
a top photovoltaic module 302 including:
a substrate 318;
a first metal grid line used in combination with the back contact layer (paragraph [0049] discloses metal grids are used in addition to the back contact layer and paragraph [0053] discloses metal grids are used to minimize optical shading);
a first transparent electrode material (back contact layer 320 that is made of transparent conducting oxide material or metal grid layer [0015]) formed over the substrate;
a thin-film layer 322 residing over the first transparent electrode material;
a second transparent electrode material (front contact layer 324 made of transparent conducting oxide material or metal grid layer [0015]) residing over the thin-film layer;
a second metal grid line used in combination with the second transparent electrode material (paragraph [0040] disclose metal grids are used in conjunction with the top contact layer 324 to facilitate current collection; paragraph [0049] discloses metal grids are used in addition to the front contact layer and paragraph [0053] discloses metal grids are used to minimize optical shading);
a monolithically serially connected thin-film photovoltaic sub-cell residing within the thin-film layer [0040],
the sub-cell including:
a solar absorbing material including perovskite, CIGS or a combination thereof [0014-0015, 0037];
a PV bottom module (306 in fig.3 or 510 in fig. 5) having a plurality of series connected Si-based PV sub-cells (sub-cell string 510 is comprised of Si-sub-cells [0057]); and
an electrical parallel connection between the top and bottom photovoltaic modules (fig. 2).
Mascarenhas is silent regarding a first metal grid line residing over the substrate, the first transparent electrode material residing over the first metal grid line and a second metal grid line residing over the second transparent electrode material.
Multone discloses in fig. 1 a thin film photovoltaic module comprising a first metal grid line residing over the substrate 110, a first transparent electrode material 130 residing over the first metal grid line 110, a second transparent electrode material residing over the thin film layer 155 and a second metal grid line residing over the second transparent electrode material.
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the thin film PV module of Mascarenhas by providing the metal grid lines on the top and bottom contact layers in the arrangement disclosed by Multone in order to maintain high optical transmission while reducing resistance of the contact layers (Multone, [0026-0027]).
Addressing claim 2, fig. 2 of Mascarenhas shows two output terminals.
Addressing claim 4, the claimed photolithography method for forming the first and second metal grid lines does not structurally differentiate the claimed first and second metal grid lines from those of the prior art (MPEP 2113). Moreover, paragraph [0031] of Multone discloses the grid lines are formed via photolithography method.
Addressing claims 6-8, fig. 1 of Multone discloses the spatial relationship between the first and second metal grid lines that satisfy the claimed limitations.
Addressing claim 9, Mascarenhas implicitly discloses that the thin-film layer is semi-transparent material because the electromagnetic radiation that is not absorbed by the thin-film layer is transmitted to the bottom photovoltaic module.
Addressing claims 10-11, Mascarenhas discloses in paragraph [0040] a passive layer is used on the back side to passivate the bottom sub-cells that corresponds to the claimed protective cover for the bottom photovoltaic module. Alternatively, fig. 3 shows the substrate 318 includes the layer 316 that corresponds to the claimed protective cover for the bottom photovoltaic module that is coated on the inside.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637) as applied to claims 1-2, 4 and 6-11 above, and further in view of Meuris (EP3648173).
Addressing claim 3, Mascarenhas is silent regarding the sub-cell width and the module width in the claimed ranges.
Meuris discloses a thin-film photovoltaic module with CIGS active layer [0050] similarly to that of Mascarenhas; wherein, the sub-cell has a width in a range of 10 – 40 mm ([0061], cell length, which corresponds to the claimed width as shown in fig. 2, between 3 and 50 mm) in order to minimizes losses in active area due to the series interconnection of the cells and to increase energy generation per unit area [0024]. Meuris further discloses the thin-film photovoltaic module has a width in a range of 80 – 120 cm ([0023 and 0061], 60 cm to 160 cm).
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the top thin-film photovoltaic module of Mascarenhas by performing routine experimentations with the sub-cell width and photovoltaic module width in the ranges disclosed by Meuris in order to optimize reduction of losses in active area due to the series interconnection of the cells and increase energy generation per unit area ([0023-0024 and 0061]). Therefore, one would have arrived at the claimed sub-cell width range and photovoltaic module width range when performing routine experimentations with the sub-cell width and photovoltaic module width of Mascarenhas’ top photovoltaic module in the ranges disclosed by Meuris in order to optimize reduction of losses in active area due to the series interconnection of the cells and increase energy generation per unit area.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637) as applied to claims 1-2, 4 and 6-11 above, and further in view of Armstrong et al. (US 2008/0099063).
Addressing claim 5, Mascarenhas discloses in paragraph [0034] that the number of the sub-cells for the top PV module and the number of sub-cells for bottom PV module are chosen so that the output voltage of the top PV module is approximately equal to that of the output voltage of the bottom PV module, which is similar to the inventive concept of current application. Mascarenhas is silent regarding the output voltages of the top photovoltaic module and the bottom photovoltaic module is in a range of 30-50 V.
Armstrong discloses thin film solar cell sub-module 620 comprises series connected solar cells 628 that are monolithically integrated on a common substrate [0047]; wherein, the output voltage of each sub module 620 is 30 V [0047].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention and lacking any criticality associated with the claimed output voltage range, one with ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed output voltage range of the top PV module and the bottom PV module when perform routine experimentation with the number of solar cells in each submodule of Mascarenhas to achieve the output voltage disclosed by Armstrong in order to optimize the output voltage of the submodule.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637) and Meuris (EP3648173).
Addressing claim 12, please see the rejection of claims 1 and 3 above because claim 12 includes the limitations of claims 1 and 3.
Addressing claims 13 and 15-19, see the rejection of claims 2, 6-8 and 10-11 above.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637) and Meuris (EP3648173) as applied to claims 12-13 and 15-19 above, and further in view of Armstrong et al. (US 2008/0099063).
Addressing claim 14, Mascarenhas discloses in paragraph [0034] that the number of the sub-cells for the top PV module and the number of sub-cells for bottom PV module are chosen so that the output voltage of the top PV module is approximately equal to that of the output voltage of the bottom PV module, which is similar to the inventive concept of current application. Mascarenhas is silent regarding the output voltages of the top photovoltaic module and the bottom photovoltaic module is in a range of 30-50 V.
Armstrong discloses thin film solar cell sub-module 620 comprises series connected solar cells 628 that are monolithically integrated on a common substrate [0047]; wherein, the output voltage of each sub module 620 is 30 V [0047].
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention and lacking any criticality associated with the claimed output voltage range, one with ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed output voltage range of the top PV module and the bottom PV module when perform routine experimentation with the number of solar cells in each submodule of Mascarenhas to achieve the output voltage disclosed by Armstrong in order to optimize the output voltage of the submodule.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascarenhas et al. (US 2014/0209149) in view of Multone et al. (WO2015/148637), Meuris (EP3648173) and Armstrong et al. (US 2008/0099063).
Addressing claim 20, please see the rejection of claims 1, 3 and 5 above because current claim consists of the limitations of claims 1, 3 and 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571)-272-1307. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 01/21/2026