DETAILED ACTION
(1)
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 . Applicant’s amendment filed December 10, 2025, is entered. Applicant amended claims 1, 3, 4, 12 and 23, cancelled claims 2, 5, 11, 13 and 14 and added claims 24 and 25. No new matter is added. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-10, 12 and 19-25 are pending before the Office for review.
(2)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(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.
Claim 9 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 depends from claim 1. Claim 1 requires that at the edge of the back surface of the silicon cell main body, the second TCO and the first TCO are spaced apart from each other by the insulating passivation layer. Claim 9 requires the insulating passivation layer covers the first TCO on a side surface of the main body. These two requirements conflict with one another and render the scope of claim 9 insolubly ambiguous. It’s unclear how the same insulating passivation layer both covers the first TCO and spaces the first TCO from the second TCO.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite because its scope is unascertainable to one ordinarily skilled in the art.
(3)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 1 and 9 contain conflicting requirements for the placement of the first TCO layer and the insulating passivation layer, meaning claim 9 is not further limiting of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
(4)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 10, 12 and 19-25 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Adachi et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0308079) teaches a solar cell (100) comprising a silicon main body (50), a first transparent conductive oxide layer (62), a second transparent conductive oxide layer (61) an insulating passivation layer (9) and a second electrode (72), wherein the first transparent conductive oxide is located on a front surface of the silicon solar cell main body and the second transparent conductive oxide and second electrode are located on a back surface of the silicon main body. Figure 1 and Paragraphs 46, 47 and 52.
Adachi fails to teach or fairly suggest that the insulating passivation layer covers an edge of the back surface of the silicon cell main body and the back surface of the silicon cell main body, wherein the second transparent conductive layer covers the insulating passivation layer and, at the edge of the back surface of the silicon cell main body, the second transparent conductive layer and the first transparent conductive layer are spaced apart from each other by the insulating passivation layer, as required by claim 1.
(5)
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 ELI S MEKHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 am to 5:00 pm 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, Duane Smith can be reached at 571-272-1166. 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.
/ELI S MEKHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759