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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Specie VIII, claims 1-6 and 14-15, in the reply filed on 11/17/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and/or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/17/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (WO 2021/031500 A1) (cited in IDS dated 11/14/2024) (refer to English translation as provided).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a solar cell (solar cell as shown in fig. 1, see pages 8 and 9 of translation), comprising:
a substrate (p-type silicon substrate 4) (fig. 1 and pages 8-9 of translation),
a doped conductive layer (emitter junction area 9) (fig. 1 and pages 8-9 of translation),
a third passivation film layer (aluminum oxide film 2) (fig. 1 and pages 8-9 of translation), and
a second dielectric layer (silicon nitride film 1) (fig. 1 and pages 8-9 of translation)
PNG
media_image1.png
672
888
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the third passivation film layer (2) being made of a material consisting of AlOx (see pages 8 and 9 of translation);
the second dielectric layer (1) being made of a material consisting SiNx (see pages 8 and 9 of translation);
the doped conductive layer (9) and the second dielectric layer (1) being sequentially stacked on a first surface (top surface) of the substrate (4);
the doped conductive layer (9) and the second dielectric layer (1) both covering the first surface (top surface) of the substrate (4);
the third passivation film layer (2) being stacked on a second surface (bottom surface) of the substrate (4);
the third passivation film layer (2) covering the second surface (bottom surface) of the substrate (4);
the first surface (top surface) and the second surface (bottom surface) of the substrate (4) being arranged opposite to each other (see fig. 1 or annotated fig.),
the substrate (4) further includes a plurality of first side surfaces (left and right-side surfaces) adjacent between the first surface (top surface) and the second surface (bottom surface),
wherein the third passivation film layer (2) further covers at least part of surfaces of the plurality of first side surfaces (left and right-side surfaces) (see annotated figure).
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses that the third passivation film layer (2) completely covers each of the first side surfaces (see annotated fig that shows layer 2 completely covering both left and right-side surfaces of the substrate 4).
Regarding claim 3, Wang further discloses that the third passivation film layer (2) further covers at least an edge of the doped conductive layer (9) on a same side as the first side surface (see annotated fig that shows layer 2 covering both left and right edges of doped conductive layer 9).
Regarding claim 4, Wang further discloses that the third passivation film layer (2) further covers an edge region of the doped conductive layer (9) (see annotated fig. that shows layer 2 covering the both edges of layer 9), and the part of the third passivation film layer (2) covering the edge region is located between the second dielectric layer (1) and the doped conductive layer (9) (see annotated fig in which oval shaped portion has layer 2 between layer 1 and edge surface of layer 9).
Regarding claim 6, Wang further discloses that the second surface (bottom surface) of the substrate (4) is provided with a local metal back surface field (local BSF 8), and the solar cell further comprises: a third electrode (6) and a fourth electrode (electrode pillars 11), the third electrode (6) passing through the second dielectric layer (1) and being in ohmic contact with the doped conductive layer (9), and the fourth electrode (11) passing through the third passivation film layer (2) and being in ohmic contact with the local metal back surface field (8) (see annotated fig.).
Regarding claim 14, Wang discloses a photovoltaic module comprising at least one solar cell string (series connected solar cells, page 3 of translation, paragraph before the “Summary of the invention”), the solar cell string comprising at least two solar cells according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1) (since the solar cells are connected in series, as disclosed in page 3, there must be at least two solar cells that are connected in series).
Regarding claim 15, Wang discloses a photovoltaic system comprising the photovoltaic module of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied above.
Regarding claim 5, Wang further discloses the first passivation film layer (2) covers the edge region in the similar manner as shown in figure 8 of instant application. Although Wang does not explicitly disclose that a coverage area of the third passivation film layer in the edge region of the passivated contact layer ranges from 1 mm2 to 38220 mm2, instant application as original filed fails to disclose whether the claimed coverage area is critical. In absence of evidence of criticality, selection of element’s dimension is considered to be a matter of design choice, depending upon the dimensions and gradient present in the installation site, among other considerations. In the absence of evidence of criticality, selection of dimensions (and thus the area) of the first passivation film layer in the edge region as claimed is considered obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. Also note that in Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Jang et al. (US 2011/0197964 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Wang discloses a photovoltaic module comprising at least one solar cell string (series connected solar cells, page 3 of translation, paragraph before the “Summary of the invention”), the solar cell string comprising at least two solar cells according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1) (since the solar cells are connected in series, as disclosed in page 3, there must be at least two solar cells that are connected in series).
Alternatively, Jang discloses a photovoltaic module (solar cell module 100, fig. 21, [0197-0199]) comprising at least two solar cells (1) connected in series ([0197]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have used multiple series solar cells as taught by Jang to form the photovoltaic module of Wang such that more light can be harvested to electricity.
Regarding claim 15, Wang as modified discloses a photovoltaic system comprising the photovoltaic module of claim 14 (see rejection of claim 14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GOLAM MOWLA whose telephone number is (571)270-5268. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7am - 4pm.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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.
/GOLAM MOWLA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721