DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits for 19/328,230, which is a continuation of PCT/CN2023/090690, filed 4/25/2023.
Claims 1-20 are pending, and are considered herein.
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 .
Additional Prior Art
The Examiner wishes to apprise the Applicant of the following references, which are not currently applied in a rejection.
Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Energy Materials 2018, 1, 2096-2102): This reference teaches a perovskite solar cell comprising down-shifting YVO4:Eu3+, Bi3+ particles.
Hou, et al. (Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 149 (2016) 121-127): This reference teaches a perovskite solar cell comprising down-shifting ZnGa2O4:Eu3+ particles.
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 20 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 20 recites “An electrical device, comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 19.” The metes and bounds of Claim 20 are indefinite, because Claim 19 recites a power generation system comprising a plurality of interconnected modules. Therefore, it is unclear whether the electrical device of Claim 20 requires any additional features beyond what are recited in Claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 5, 7, 9-14, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2021, 13, 2674-2684), as evidenced by Jiang, et al. (Advanced Materials 2017, 29, 1703852).
In reference to Claim 1, Xu teaches a perovskite cell (Figs. 1 and 5b, described in section 2.3, pages 2675-2676, and column 2, page 2679). The embodiment of Xu that is applied in the rejection corresponds to the embodiment referred to as “perovskite/UCNPs/spiro,” in which the up-converting nanoparticles are incorporated into the perovskite layer.
Xu teaches that the cell comprises a wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (corresponding to the up-converting-nanoparticle-containing perovskite layer, Figs. 1 and 5b) located between a transparent substrate layer (i.e. the ITO layer) and an electrode layer (i.e. the Au electrode layer) (Fig. 1, described in section 2.3, pages 2675-2676).
Xu teaches that the perovskite material and general methods of preparing the solar cell of his invention are the same as those of Jiang (section 2.3, pages 2675-2676).
Evidentiary reference Jiang teaches that the perovskite material is (FAPbI3)1−x(MAPbBr3)x, and has good absorption between 300-850 nm (Jiang, Fig. 4).
Therefore, Xu teaches that the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer comprises a three-dimensional perovskite (i.e. the (FAPbI3)1−x(MAPbBr3)x material).
Xu teaches that the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer comprises a light-conversion material, corresponding to the up-converting nanoparticles doped into the perovskite layer (Figs. 1 and 5b, described in section 2.3, pages 2675-2676, and column 2, page 2679).
Fig,. 5b teaches that at least part of the light-conversion material (i.e. the up-converting nanoparticles) is distributed in intergranular gaps of the three-dimensional perovskite (column 2, page 2679).
Xu teaches that the light-conversion material comprises an up-conversion material (Abstract).
In reference to Claim 5, because Xu does not teach that any down-conversion material is incorporated into the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, Xu teaches the limitations of Claim 5, wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the down- conversion material is less than or equal to 6% (i.e. 0%).
In reference to Claim 7, Xu teaches that the up-conversion nanoparticles of his invention absorb light at 980 nm and emit light in the regions of 500-550 nm and 650-700 nm (Fig. 3a, described in section 2.4, column 1, page 2676).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 7, wherein the up-conversion material is capable of converting light with a wavelength greater than 800 nm into visible light with a wavelength less than 800 nm.
In reference to Claims 9-13, Claims 9-13 merely modify an optional limitation of Claim 1, i.e. the down-conversion material.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that Xu as applied to Claim 1 also teaches the optional (i.e. non-selected) limitations of Claims 9-13.
In reference to Claim 14, Fig. 5b teaches that at least part of the light- conversion material (i.e. the up-conversion nanoparticles) is in a granular form and dispersed in the three-dimensional perovskite while maintaining a granular morphology.
In reference to Claim 16, evidentiary reference Jiang teaches that the perovskite material has an absorption between 300-850 nm (Fig. 4).
Xu further teaches that the materials of the class of MWO3 (to which the UCNPs of his invention below) have wide absorption in the band from 600-200 nm (column 1, paragraph 2, page 2675).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that there is reasonable basis to conclude that the absorption spectrum of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of Xu is 300-1100 nm.
In reference to Claim 17, Xu teaches that the perovskite cell comprises the transparent substrate layer (i.e. the glass/ITO layer), a first carrier transport layer (i.e. the SnO2 layer), the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (i.e. the perovskite/UCNPs layer), a second carrier transport layer (i.e. the Spiro layer) and the electrode layer (i.e. the Au layer) stacked in sequence; and the first carrier transport layer (i.e. the SnO2 layer) is an electron transport layer, and the second transport layer (i.e. the Spiro layer) is a hole transport layer (Fig. 1).
Claims 1, 4, 8-10, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2017, 9, 14518-14524).
In reference to Claim 1, Jin teaches a perovskite cell (Fig. 1, described in section 2.2, page 14519).
The perovskite cell of Jin comprises a wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (corresponding to the mesoporous TiO2 layer comprising down-shifting carbon quantum dots and into which the MAPbClxI1-x perovskite is deposited, along with the overlying MAPbClxI1-x perovskite layer) located between a transparent substrate layer (i.e. the FTO layer) and an electrode layer (i.e. the Au layer) (Fig. 1, section 2.2, page 14519).
Jin teaches that this layer absorbs light with wavelengths from 400-1200 nm (Fig. 5).
This disclosure teaches that the perovskite layer (which comprises the mesoporous TiO2 layer comprising down-shifting carbon quantum dots and into which the MAPbClxI1-x perovskite is deposited, along with the overlying MAPbClxI1-x perovskite layer) is a “wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.”
Paragraphs [0056]-[0059] of the instant specification recognize ABX3-type perovskites in which A is MA, B is Pb, and X is Cl and I as suitable perovskite materials of the device of the instant invention.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the MAPbClxI1-x perovskite material of Jin teaches the limitations of a “three-dimensional perovskite.”
The wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer further comprises a light-conversion material, corresponding to the carbon quantum dots (Fig. 1, section 2.2, page 14519).
Fig. 1b shows that the mesoporous TiO2 layer comprising the carbon quantum dots directly contacts the overlying MAPbClxI1-x perovskite layer. Jin further teaches that the device is prepared by spin coating the MAPbClxI1-x precursor material directly on top of the mesoporous TiO2 layer comprising the carbon quantum dots (section 2.2, page 14519).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that Fig. 1b and the associated text teaches that “at least part of the light-conversion material is distributed in intergranular gaps of the three-dimensional perovskite” (i.e. the gaps at the surface of the MAPbClxI1-x perovskite layer).
Jin teaches that the carbon quantum dots are down-converting materials (Abstract).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 1, wherein the light-conversion material comprises a down-conversion material.
In reference to Claim 4, because Jin does not teach that any up-conversion material is incorporated into the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, Jin teaches the limitations of Claim 4, wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the up-conversion material is less than or equal to 6% (i.e. 0%).
In reference to Claim 8, Claim 8 merely modifies an optional limitation of Claim 1, i.e. the up-conversion material.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that Jin as applied to Claim 1 also teaches the optional (i.e. non-selected) limitations of Claim 8.
In reference to Claim 9, Jin teaches that the down-conversion material is capable of converting light with a wavelength less than 400 nm (i.e. 360 nm) into visible light with a wavelength greater than 400 nm (Fig. 2b and associated text).
In reference to Claim 10, Jin teaches that the down-conversion material comprises a fluorescent material (i.e. fluorescent carbon dots, Abstract).
In reference to Claim 14, Jin teaches that at least part of the light- conversion material is in a granular form (i.e. a carbon quantum dot) and dispersed in the three-dimensional perovskite while maintaining a granular morphology (Fig. 1, section 2.2, page 14519).
In reference to Claim 15, Jin teaches that a thickness of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (i.e. the m-TiO2/CD layer and the perovskite layer) is 200 nm+320 nm = 520 nm (paragraph 1, column 1, page 14521).
This disclosure teaches that a thickness of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer is 400-600 nm (i.e. 520 nm).
In reference to Claim 17, Jin teaches that the perovskite cell comprises the transparent substrate layer (i.e. the glass/FTO layer), a first carrier transport layer (i.e. the c-TiO2 layer), the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (i.e. the m-TiO2/CD layer and the perovskite layer), a second carrier transport layer (i.e. the Spiro-OMeTAD layer) and the electrode layer (i.e. the Au layer) stacked in sequence; and the first carrier transport layer (i.e. the c-TiO2 layer) is an electron transport layer, and the second transport layer (i.e. the Spiro-OMeTAD layer) is a hole transport layer (Fig. 1).
Claims 1, 7, 9-14, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lai, et al. (Journal of Power Sources 372 (2017) 125-133).
In reference to Claim 1, Lai teaches a perovskite cell (Scheme 2, described in section 2.4, page 127).
The perovskite cell of Lai comprises a wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (i.e. the “IR806-UCNCs+ Perovskite layer”) located between a transparent substrate layer (i.e. the ITO layer) and an electrode layer (i.e. the Ag layer, Scheme 2).
Lai teaches that the “IR806-UCNCs+ Perovskite layer” absorbs incident light with wavelengths between ~300-850 nm (Scheme 2), and is therefore “a wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.”
Paragraph [0059] of the instant specification recognizes MAPbI3 as a suitable perovskite material of the device of the instant invention.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that the MAPbI3 perovskite material of Lai teaches the limitations of “a three-dimensional perovskite.”
Lai further teaches that the perovskite layer of his invention additionally comprises a light-conversion material, corresponding to the “IR806-UCNCs” (Scheme 2, described in sections 2.3 and 2.4, page 127).
Lai teaches that the light conversion material is in the form of nanocrystals (Abstract) miscible with the perovskite precursor (column 1, paragraph 2, page 129), and that the IR806-UCNCs+ Perovskite layers having 3 mg/mL or 6 mg/mL IR806-UCNCs (Fig. 3, described in column 1, paragraph 2, page 129).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that there is reasonable basis to conclude that Lai teaches that “at least part of the light-conversion material is distributed in intergranular gaps of the three-dimensional perovskite.”
Lai teaches that the light-conversion material comprises an up-conversion material (Abstract).
In reference to Claim 7, Lai teaches that the IR806-UCNCs absorb light with a wavelength of 980 nm and emit light with a wavelength of ~500-500 nm (Fig. 1d and the associated text).
This disclosure teaches the limitations of Claim 7, wherein the up-conversion material is capable of converting light with a wavelength greater than 800 nm into visible light with a wavelength less than 800 nm.
In reference to Claims 9-13, Claims 9-13 merely modify an optional limitation of Claim 1, i.e. the down-conversion material.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that Lai as applied to Claim 1 also teaches the optional (i.e. non-selected) limitations of Claims 9-13.
In reference to Claim 14, Lai teaches that at least part of the light- conversion material (i.e. the IR806-UCNCs) is in a granular form (i.e. in a nano-crystalline form, Abstract) and dispersed in the three-dimensional perovskite while maintaining a granular morphology (i.e. while maintaining its nanocrystalline form, Abstract, Scheme 2).
In reference to Claim 16, Lai teaches that the absorption spectrum of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer is 300-1100 nm (Scheme 2).
In reference to Claim 17, Lai teaches that the perovskite cell comprises the transparent substrate layer (i.e. the glass/ITO layer), a first carrier transport layer (i.e. the ZnO layer), the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer (i.e. the perovskite/IR806-UCNCs layer), a second carrier transport layer (i.e. the Spiro-OMeTAD layer) and the electrode layer (i.e. the Ag layer) stacked in sequence; and the first carrier transport layer (i.e. the ZnO layer) is an electron transport layer, and the second transport layer (i.e. the Spiro-OMeTAD layer) is a hole transport layer (Scheme 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai, et al. (Journal of Power Sources 372 (2017) 125-133), in view of Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2017, 9, 14518-14524).
In reference to Claim 2, Lai teaches that the light-conversion material comprises an up-conversion material, i.e. IR806-UCNCs.
Lai does not teach that the light-conversion material further comprises a down-conversion material.
To solve the same problem of providing an organohalide perovskite solar cell with a light-conversion material, Jin teaches that incorporating down-converting carbon quantum dots into the transparent, electron-collecting side of a perovskite solar cell provides the benefit of increasing the power conversion efficiency of the device by converting ultra-violet light to light of a wavelength that can be utilized by the organohalide perovskite layer to produce power (Abstract).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have modified the perovskite layer of Lai to comprise the down-converting carbon quantum dots taught by Jin, disposed at the interface between the perovskite layer and the transparent electrode of Lai, to achieve the taught benefit of increasing the power conversion efficiency of the device.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 2, wherein the light-conversion material further comprises a down-conversion material.
In reference to Claim 3, Lai does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the up-converting IR806-UCNCs in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Jin (used to modify Lai in the rejection of Claim 2 above) does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the down-converting carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Therefore, modified Lai does not explicitly teach the limitations of Claim 3.
However, Lai teaches that the concentration of IR806-UCNCs in the precursor material of his invention (and, therefore, the concentration of IR806-UCNCs in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of the solar cell of his invention) controls the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE of the device of his invention (Table 1, and associated text).
Specifically, Lai teaches that incorporating IR806-UCNCs into the device provides the benefit of increasing light utilization and improved electron transfer at the perovskite/ZnO interface (column 1, page 131).
Lai further teaches that, when too many IR806-UCNCs are present in the device, voids and aggregation are present within the perovskite film (bottom 5 lines of column 1, page 129).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have been motivated to have optimized the amount of IR806-UCNCs within the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of modified Lai, in order to optimize the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE, while minimizing voids and aggregation within the perovskite film.
Similarly, Jin teaches that the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the precursor material of his invention (and, therefore, the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of the solar cell of his invention) controls the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE of the device of his invention (Table 1, and associated text).
Specifically, Jin teaches that incorporating carbon quantum dots into the device provides the benefit of increasing light utilization and improved interfacial contact between the layers of the device (bottom 10 lines of column 2, page 14521, and the first paragraph of column 1, page 14522).
Jin further teaches that, when too many carbon quantum dots are present in the device, luminescence quenching occurs, due to aggregation of the carbon quantum dots (bottom 5 lines of column 1, page 14521).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have been motivated to have optimized the amount of carbon quantum dots within the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, in order to optimize the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE, while minimizing carbon quantum dot aggregation and quenching.
It is the Examiner’s position that the routine optimizations of the amounts of carbon quantum dots and IR806-UCNCs in the perovskite layer of modified Lai would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at a composition meeting the range recited in Claim 3, wherein a mass ratio of the up- conversion material to the down-conversion material is 1:6-6:1, without undue experimentation.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2021, 13, 2674-2684), as evidenced by Jiang, et al. (Advanced Materials 2017, 29, 1703852), in view of Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2017, 9, 14518-14524).
In reference to Claim 2, Xu teaches that the light-conversion material comprises an up-conversion material (Figs. 1 and 5b, described in section 2.3, pages 2675-2676, and column 2, page 2679).
Xu does not teach that the light-conversion material comprises a down-conversion material.
To solve the same problem of providing an organohalide perovskite solar cell with a light-conversion material, Jin teaches that incorporating down-converting carbon quantum dots into the transparent, electron-collecting side of a perovskite solar cell provides the benefit of increasing the power conversion efficiency of the device by converting ultra-violet light to light of a wavelength that can be utilized by the organohalide perovskite layer to produce power (Abstract).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have modified the perovskite layer of Xu to comprise the down-converting carbon quantum dots taught by Jin, disposed at the interface between the perovskite layer and the transparent electrode of Xu, to achieve the taught benefit of increasing the power conversion efficiency of the device.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 2, wherein the light-conversion material further comprises a down-conversion material.
In reference to Claim 3, Xu does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the up-converting nanoparticles in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Jin (used to modify Xu in the rejection of Claim 2 above) does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the down-converting carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Therefore, modified Xu does not explicitly teach the limitations of Claim 3.
However, Jin teaches that the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the precursor material of his invention (and, therefore, the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of the solar cell of his invention) controls the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE of the device of his invention (Table 1, and associated text).
Specifically, Jin teaches that incorporating carbon quantum dots into the device provides the benefit of increasing light utilization and improved interfacial contact between the layers of the device (bottom 10 lines of column 2, page 14521, and the first paragraph of column 1, page 14522).
Jin further teaches that, when too many carbon quantum dots are present in the device, luminescence quenching occurs, due to aggregation of the carbon quantum dots (bottom 5 lines of column 1, page 14521).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have been motivated to have optimized the amount of carbon quantum dots within the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, in order to optimize the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE, while minimizing carbon quantum dot aggregation and quenching.
It is the Examiner’s position that the routine optimizations of the amounts of carbon quantum dots in the perovskite layer of modified Xu would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at a composition meeting the range recited in Claim 3, wherein a mass ratio of the up- conversion material to the down-conversion material is 1:6-6:1, without undue experimentation.
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai, et al. (Journal of Power Sources 372 (2017) 125-133).
In reference to Claims 4 and 6, Lai does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the up-converting IR806-UCNCs in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Therefore, he does not explicitly teach the limitations of Claim 4.
However, he teaches that the concentration of IR806-UCNCs in the precursor material of his invention (and, therefore, the concentration of IR806-UCNCs in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of the solar cell of his invention) controls the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE of the device of his invention (Table 1, and associated text).
Specifically, Lai teaches that incorporating IR806-UCNCs into the device provides the benefit of increasing light utilization and improved electron transfer at the perovskite/ZnO interface (column 1, page 131).
Lai further teaches that, when too many IR806-UCNCs are present in the device, voids and aggregation are present within the perovskite film (bottom 5 lines of column 1, page 129).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have been motivated to have optimized the amount of IR806-UCNCs within the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, in order to optimize the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE, while minimizing voids and aggregation within the perovskite film.
It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at the range recited in Claim 4 (wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the up- conversion material is less than or equal to 6%), without undue experimentation.
It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at the range recited in Claim 6 (wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the up- conversion material is 1%-6%), without undue experimentation.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2017, 9, 14518-14524).
In reference to Claims 5-6, Jin does not explicitly report the mass percentage of the down-converting carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer.
Therefore, he does not explicitly teach the limitations of Claims 5 or 6.
However, he teaches that the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the precursor material of his invention (and, therefore, the concentration of carbon quantum dots in the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer of the solar cell of his invention) controls the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE of the device of his invention (Table 1, and associated text).
Specifically, Jin teaches that incorporating carbon quantum dots into the device provides the benefit of increasing light utilization and improved interfacial contact between the layers of the device (bottom 10 lines of column 2, page 14521, and the first paragraph of column 1, page 14522).
Jin further teaches that, when too many carbon quantum dots are present in the device, luminescence quenching occurs, due to aggregation of the carbon quantum dots (bottom 5 lines of column 1, page 14521).
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have been motivated to have optimized the amount of carbon quantum dots within the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, in order to optimize the Jsc, Voc, FF, and PCE, while minimizing carbon quantum dot aggregation and quenching.
It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at the range recited in Claim 5 (wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the down- conversion material is less than or equal to 6%), without undue experimentation.
It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at the range recited in Claim 6 (wherein, based on a mass of the wide absorption spectrum perovskite layer, a percentage mass content of the down- conversion material is 1%-6%), without undue experimentation.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2021, 13, 2674-2684), as evidenced by Jiang, et al. (Advanced Materials 2017, 29, 1703852), in view of March, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0119125 A1).
In reference to Claim 18, Xu does not teach a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
To solve the same problem of providing a photovoltaic device comprising an organohalide perovskite active layer (March, paragraph [0026]), March teaches a photovoltaic module comprising a plurality of connected perovskite solar cells within a flexible module (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0025]-[0029]).
March teaches that electrically connecting perovskite solar cells in series and/or parallel within a flexible module reduces the series resistance of the cells, and increases the deformability of the modules, which allow them to be placed on contoured surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Further, March teaches that the flexible modules of his invention increase the feasibility of solar vehicles, by creating modules that can flexibly cover more of the vehicles’ surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have connected a plurality of cells of Xu in series and/or parallel and to have sealed the connected cells within a flexible module, as taught by March, in order to create a flexible module with improved resistance and ability to be incorporated onto the surface of an EV.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 18, of a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
In reference to Claim 19, March teaches that the modules of his invention are applied to power an electric car (paragraph [0006], Fig. 9B).
March does not explicitly teach an embodiment in which a plurality of modules are connected into a power generation system for the car.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have instantly envisioned the use of a plurality of connected modules of modified Xu applied to the surface of an electric powered vehicle, according to the power needs of the vehicle.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that modified Xu renders obvious the limitations of Claim 19, of a photovoltaic power generation system (corresponding to the car with a plurality of connected modules on its surface, as described above) comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 18.
This modification further teaches the limitations of Claim 20, of an electrical device (i.e. the electric car), comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 19.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin, et al. (ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 2017, 9, 14518-14524), in view of March, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0119125 A1).
In reference to Claim 18, Jin does not teach a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
To solve the same problem of providing a photovoltaic device comprising an organohalide perovskite active layer (March, paragraph [0026]), March teaches a photovoltaic module comprising a plurality of connected perovskite solar cells within a flexible module (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0025]-[0029]).
March teaches that electrically connecting perovskite solar cells in series and/or parallel within a flexible module reduces the series resistance of the cells, and increases the deformability of the modules, which allow them to be placed on contoured surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Further, March teaches that the flexible modules of his invention increase the feasibility of solar vehicles, by creating modules that can flexibly cover more of the vehicles’ surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have connected a plurality of cells of Jin in series and/or parallel and to have sealed the connected cells within a flexible module, as taught by March, in order to create a flexible module with improved resistance and ability to be incorporated onto the surface of an EV.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 18, of a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
In reference to Claim 19, March teaches that the modules of his invention are applied to power an electric car (paragraph [0006], Fig. 9B).
March does not explicitly teach an embodiment in which a plurality of modules are connected into a power generation system for the car.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have instantly envisioned the use of a plurality of connected modules of modified Jin applied to the surface of an electric powered vehicle, according to the power needs of the vehicle.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that modified Jin renders obvious the limitations of Claim 19, of a photovoltaic power generation system (corresponding to the car with a plurality of connected modules on its surface, as described above) comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 18.
This modification further teaches the limitations of Claim 20, of an electrical device (i.e. the electric car), comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 19.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai, et al. (Journal of Power Sources 372 (2017) 125-133), in view of March, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0119125 A1).
In reference to Claim 18, Lai does not teach a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
To solve the same problem of providing a photovoltaic device comprising an organohalide perovskite active layer (March, paragraph [0026]), March teaches a photovoltaic module comprising a plurality of connected perovskite solar cells within a flexible module (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0025]-[0029]).
March teaches that electrically connecting perovskite solar cells in series and/or parallel within a flexible module reduces the series resistance of the cells, and increases the deformability of the modules, which allow them to be placed on contoured surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Further, March teaches that the flexible modules of his invention increase the feasibility of solar vehicles, by creating modules that can flexibly cover more of the vehicles’ surfaces (paragraph [0025]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have connected a plurality of cells of Lai in series and/or parallel and to have sealed the connected cells within a flexible module, as taught by March, in order to create a flexible module with improved resistance and ability to be incorporated onto the surface of an EV.
This modification teaches the limitations of Claim 18, of a module comprising the perovskite cell according to claim 1.
In reference to Claim 19, March teaches that the modules of his invention are applied to power an electric car (paragraph [0006], Fig. 9B).
March does not explicitly teach an embodiment in which a plurality of modules are connected into a power generation system for the car.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed would have instantly envisioned the use of a plurality of connected modules of modified Lai applied to the surface of an electric powered vehicle, according to the power needs of the vehicle.
Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position that modified Lai renders obvious the limitations of Claim 19, of a photovoltaic power generation system (corresponding to the car with a plurality of connected modules on its surface, as described above) comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 18.
This modification further teaches the limitations of Claim 20, of an electrical device (i.e. the electric car), comprising several electrically connected photovoltaic modules according to claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADIE WHITE whose telephone number is (571)272-3245. The examiner can normally be reached 6am-2:30pm ET.
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.
/SADIE WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721