DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office Action regarding application number 19/273,065, filed on 07/17/2025, which claims foreign priority to CN 202423210159.4, filed on 12/25/2024, and which claims foreign priority to CN 202422184121.8, filed on 09/06/2024.
This action is in response to the Applicant’s Response received 08/12/2026.
Election of Restricted Inventions
The Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A1 (claims 1-6 and 9-11) in the reply is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11 are pending.
Claims 7 and 8 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-6 and 9-11 are examined.
No claim is allowed.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU (CN 214411227 U, English machine translation provided by the applicant) in view of LU (CN 104979417 A, English machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, ZHOU teaches a profiled solder ribbon, comprising a plurality of solder ribbon units connected in sequence, each of the solder ribbon units comprising a profiled segment (positive connection area 1), a first transition segment (transition surface 3), a flat segment (flat back-to-back area 2), and a second transition segment connected in sequence (transition surface 3 on the opposite side of the profiled segment 1). , wherein a section of the profiled segment is in a shape formed by superimposing a triangle above with a rectangle below, and a section of the flat segment is in a shape of a rectangle.
PNG
media_image1.png
201
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
ZHOU teaches that the top section is triangular and the bottom section is an isosceles trapezoidal cross-section (para. 23). ZHOU does not disclose expressly that this isosceles trapezoid is a rectangle.
The examiner first asserts that selecting the flat segment to have the shape of a rectangle is prima facie obvious because it is only a routine change in shape, and a matter of choice which a skilled artisan would have found obvious, because there is no evidence that the particular shape claimed is in any way significant or would produce unexpected results. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B).
Very similar to ZHOU and the claimed invention, LU teaches a solder ribbon having a rectangular shaped copper strip core 1 and a top portion that may include a triangular shape (bulge structure 3 is triangular, Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
278
405
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify ZHOU and employ a rectangular shape for the lower flat segment as taught by LU because this is only a simple substitution of known elements to obtain predictable results, that is, a basic rectangle shape of a common copper ribbon that is conductive and connects solar cells together. MPEP 2143(I)(B). LU also reports that one benefit is that the use of the copper rectangle base body is more stable and reduces waste products.
Regarding claim 2, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 1, wherein the profiled segment comprises an internal copper core and an external plating (LU teaches a tin plating layer 2 external to the interior copper core 1, Fig. 1), and the internal copper core comprises a triangular portion located above and a rectangular portion located below (LU, Fig. 1). LU teaches that the external tin plating is generally required for light diffusion (para. 5), and this would be obvious to add to facilitate full utilization of light as taught by LU (paras. 7 and 35).
Regarding claim 3, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 2, wherein the top corner of the triangular portion is an arc with a radian of pi/36 to 5pi/9 (equal to 5-100 degrees). ZHOU teaches the vertex angle is 100 degrees and is a rounded arc in order to prevent damage or scratches during welding (para. 20).
Regarding claim 9, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 1, wherein the rectangle of the profiled segment has the same shape and size as the section of the flat segment, and for the rectangle of the profiled segment and the rectangle of the section of the flat segment, a corner between a bottom and each side is rounded (the examiner asserts that the ribbon illustrated in ZHOU, Fig. 1 possesses the recited shape relationship, as this appears to be the fairest interpretation of this illustration, because there is no horizontal line connecting the top side edges of portions 2 on either side of the triangular section 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
201
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The examiner additionally contends that selection of the recited shape relationships is prima facie obvious because it is only a routine change in shape, and a matter of choice which a skilled artisan would have found obvious, because there is no evidence that the particular shape claimed is in any way significant or would produce unexpected results. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B).
Regarding claim 10, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 1, wherein a height of the first transition segment and a height of the second transition segment gradually decrease from the profiled segment to the flat segment (ZHOU, Fig. 1 illustrates the gradual decrease in height).
Regarding claim 11, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 1, wherein a section of the first transition segment and a section of the second transition segment are each in a shape formed by an isosceles trapezoid located above and a rectangle located below (the shapes of modified ZHOU match the required shape recited and disclosed by the applicant; and the change is shape is also prima facie obvious as a simple matter of design choice with no unexpected results).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU (CN 214411227 U, English machine translation provided by the applicant) in view of LU (CN 104979417 A, English machine translation provided) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of GREENSTEIN (“Optical absorption aspects of laser soldering for high density interconnects”).
Regarding claim 4, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 2, wherein two side surfaces of the triangular portion are planes, and the external plating comprises a first plating disposed outside the two side surfaces of the triangular portion (see LU, Fig. 1); but does not disclose expressly that the reflectivity of the first plating is 70-100%.
GREENSTEIN teaches that tin containing platings have reflectivity greater than 70% (Figs. 2 and 5).
PNG
media_image3.png
397
426
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify ZHOU and construct the first plating to have a reflectivity within the claimed range because these values are known to be characteristic of tin-containing solder plating compounds as taught by GREENSTEIN. Both ZHOU and LU each also strongly suggest the importance of designing the ribbons to be highly reflective to improve light collecting and device performance, and would lead skilled artisans to understand the importance of pursuing maximally reflective surfaces of the profile solder ribbons.
Regarding claim 5, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 4, wherein a material of the first plating is selected from one or more of aluminum, aluminum alloy, silver, silver alloy, tin, and lead (LU teaches tin).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU (CN 214411227 U, English machine translation provided by the applicant) in view of LU (CN 104979417 A, English machine translation provided) and GREENSTEIN (“Optical absorption aspects of laser soldering for high density interconnects”) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of ZARMAI (“Impact of inter-metallic compound thickness on thermo-mechanical reliability of solder joints in solar cell assembly”).
Regarding claim 6, modified ZHOU teaches the profiled solder ribbon according to claim 4, but does not disclose expressly that the thickness of the first plating is 1-6 um.
ZARMAI teaches that a solder layer external plating thickness may be between 1-4 micrometers, and this produces a solder joint having decreased fatigue and premature failure to ensure high desired functional lifetime of the interconnector (abstract).
Skilled artisans would have found it obvious to modify ZHOU and select a plating thickness within the claimed range because values within this range were already well-known to produce a solder joint having decreased fatigue and premature failure to ensure high desired functional lifetime of the interconnector as taught by ZARMAI. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELO TRIVISONNO whose telephone number is (571) 272-5201 or by email at <angelo.trivisonno@uspto.gov>. The examiner can normally be reached on MONDAY-FRIDAY, 9:00a-5:00pm EST. The examiner's supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI, can be reached at (571) 272-3433.
/ANGELO TRIVISONNO/
Primary Examiner
Prosecution Insights