UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.mptogov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`15/190,186
`
`06/23/20 I 6
`
`MICHIO SUZUKA
`
`PANDP0166US
`
`8028
`
`MARK D. SARALINO (PAN)
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`19TH FLOOR
`
`CLEVELAND, OHIO 44115
`
`HORTON DUIUAN A
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`1754
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/23/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`ipdocket@rennerotto.com
`
`PTOL-QOA (Rev. 0407)
`
`

`

`017709 A0110” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/190,186
`
`Examiner
`DUJUAN A HORTON
`
`Applicant(s)
`SUZUKA etal.
`
`Art Unit
`1754
`
`AIA Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE ofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`- Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 23 June 2016
`.
`D A declaration(s)laffidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`2a)[:| This action is FINAL.
`2b)
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)|:| An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)I:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparfe Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`
`
`Disposition of Claims"
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) E is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above Claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6) El Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`7)
`
`8)
`
`CIaim(s)flis/are rejected.
`
`I] Claim(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`9) El Claim(s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http:llwww.uspto.govlpatents/init_events/pphlindex.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)l:| The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 23 June 2016 is/are: a). accepted or b)|:| objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)—(d) or ( ).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)- All
`
`b)|:l Some**
`
`c)|:l None of the:
`
`1..
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.|:|
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) [3 Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTOISBIOSa andfor PTOISBIOBb)
`2)
`Paper No(s)lMail Date 20150523.
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) |:| Interview Summary (PTO—413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) D Other'
`
`PTOL—325 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper NoJMail Date 20180107
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:15/190,186
`Art Unit:1754
`
`Page2
`
`DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
`
`Notice ofPre-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.
`
`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.
`
`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 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.
`
`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
`
`ofthe 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.
`
`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:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:1S/190,186
`Art Unit:1754
`
`Page3
`
`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 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seok et al. (WO
`
`2014109610), hereinafter referred to as Seok. Furthermore, Seok will be referenced in view of the
`
`equivalent US publication US 20150349282, cited in IDS.
`
`Regarding claims 1-4, Seok disclose a perovskite solar cell (110127-110137, Example 3)
`
`comprising:
`
`-
`
`-
`
`—
`
`—
`
`a first electrode (FTO substrate, 110128);
`
`an electron transport layer on the first electrode, containing a semiconductor (dense Tl02 thin
`
`film, 110129);
`
`a porous layer on the electron transport layer, containing a porous material (Ti02 powder paste
`
`coated onto the Tl02 thin film, 110131);
`
`a light—absorbing layer on the porous layer (light absorber solution coated on the porous metal
`
`oxide layer, 110132), containing a first compound and a second compound different from the
`
`first compound, the first compound having a perovskite structure represented by a
`
`compositional formula ABX3 (methylammonium leadtriiodide, CHgNngblg) where A represents a
`
`monovalent cation (methylammonium ion), B represents a divalent cation (lead ion), and X
`
`represents a halogen anion (Is), the second compound being represented by a compositional
`
`formula BX; (Pblz), where B represents the divalent cation (Pb2+), and X represents the halogen
`
`ion (Pblz, wherein the overall perovskite structure CH3NH3Pb3 is the first compound and the sz
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:15/190,186
`Art Unit:1754
`
`Page4
`
`that is used to make the CH3NH3Pb3 is the claimed second compound which is consistent with
`
`the instant disclosure's interpretation ofthe claimed compounds); and
`
`-
`
`a second electrode (Au deposited on the upper portion of the hole conduction layer, 110134) on
`
`the light—absorbing layer, wherein a ratio of a number of moles of the monovalent cation in the
`
`light-absorbing layer to a number of moles ofthe divalent cation in the light—absorbing layer is
`
`0.5 or more and 0.9 or less (there is more Pblz present in the mixture due to the molar ratio of
`
`0.9:1 which means that the final light absorber layer will contain CH3NGng|3 and some
`
`remaining Pblz, 110137).
`
`Seok discloses a ratio range that overlaps the instant claimed range. Thusly, it would have been
`
`obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have selected the
`
`overlapping portion ofthe ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of
`
`ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.051.
`
`Seok fails to disclose the ratio ofthe peak intensity ofthe diffraction pattern of the first and
`
`second compound. However, as set forth above, the reference teaches that the instant claimed ranges
`
`ofthe ratio of the monovalent and divalent cation in the light absorbing layer. Thusly, the disclosed light
`
`absorbing layer implicitly discloses the peak intensity ratio as required by the instant claims.
`
`Furthermore, Applicant’s published disclosure teach that the composition ofthe claimed first and
`
`second compounds of the light absorbing layer includes the peak intensity ratio ofthe instant claimed
`
`invention. See 110054-0055. Examiner notes that the courts have held that "a compound and all its
`
`properties are mutually inseparable," In re Papesch, 315 F.2d 381 (CCPA 1963). Additionally, as per the
`
`MPEP, the "products of identical chemical compositions cannot have mutually exclusive properties. A
`
`chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical
`
`chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present." See MPEP
`
`2112.01.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:15/190,186
`Art Unit:1754
`
`PageS
`
`Regarding claim 5, modified Seok discloses all of the limitations as set forth above.
`
`Furthermore, Seok teaches that the monovalent cation comprises methylammonium (110084-0085).
`
`Regarding claim 6, modified Seok discloses all of the limitations as set forth above.
`
`Furthermore, Seok teaches that the divalent cation consisting of Pb”, Ge”, and Sn2+ (1)0086).
`
`Regarding claim 7, modified Seok discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Moreover,
`
`Seok teaches that the solar cell comprising a hole transparent layer between the light absorbing layer
`
`and the second electrode (hole conduction layer, Abstract).
`
`Regarding claim 8, modified Seok discloses all of the limitations as set forth above.
`
`Furthermore, Seok teaches that the porous material comprises titanium oxide (110076-0078).
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to DUJUAN A HORTON whose telephone number is (571)270-7585. The examiner
`
`can normally be reached on 8—4z30 EST M—F.
`
`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,
`
`James Lin can be reached on 571—272-8902. The fax phone number for the organization where this
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application
`
`Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained
`
`from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available
`
`through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-
`
`direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:lS/190,186
`Art Unit:1754
`
`Page6
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). Ifyou would like assistance from a USPTO Customer
`
`Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786—9199 (IN USA OR
`
`CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/DUJUAN A HORTON/
`Examiner, Art Unit 1754
`
`IMATFHEW T MARTINI
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758
`
`