www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/83 1,407
`
`03/26/2020
`
`Shin NANBA
`
`070469-0976
`
`8128
`
`McDermott Will and Emery LLP
`The McDermott Building
`500 North Capitol Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`SCHMIEDEL, EDWARD
`
`1726
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/17/2021
`
`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):
`
`mweipdocket@mwe.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-6 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CC) Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) O Claim(s)___is/are objected to.
`C) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)C The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 26 March 2020 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 (f).
`Certified copies:
`cc) None ofthe:
`b)LJ Some**
`a)Y) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.4) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin 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)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210210
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/831 ,407
`NANBA, Shin
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`EDWARD SCHMIEDEL
`1726
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom 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) MONTHSfrom 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, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 26 March 2020.
`CO) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)(J This action is FINAL. 2b))This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\(Z 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 Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/831,407
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`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 § 102
`
`2.
`
`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 effectivefiling date of the claimed invention.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dalal
`
`(US Patent 4,253,882; hereinafter “Dalal”).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Dalal teaches a solar cell (photovoltaic device; abstract and fig. 1),
`
`comprising:
`
`a semiconductor substrate having a first conductivity type (crystalline cell 14 with
`
`thicker region 26 being n-type; Fig. 1 and Col. 2, lines 22-30);
`
`a first silicon layer (regions 34/36 of element 16 in Fig. 1, taught as being made of
`
`amorphous silicon; Col. 2, lines 45-56) disposed on a principal surface of the semiconductor
`
`substrate (see Fig. 1 showing 34/36 on principal surface of substrate 14), the first silicon layer
`
`including an amorphous silicon-based thin film (see above teaching amorphous silicon); and
`
`a second silicon layer disposed on the first silicon layer (region 38; Col. 2, lines 45-50),
`
`the second silicon layer including a silicon-based thin film having a second conductivity type
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/831,407
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 3
`
`different from the first conductivity type (region 38 is p-type amorphous silicon layer; Col. 2,
`
`lines 42-50), wherein
`
`an impurity concentration of the first conductivity type in the first silicon layer is higher
`
`than an impurity concentration of the first conductivity type in the semiconductor substrate
`
`(see Fig. 1 showingfirst layer, i.e. 36/34, including n+ layer 36, therefore of higher doping
`
`concentration than the n-type layer 14) and lower than an impurity concentration of the second
`
`conductivity type in the second silicon layer (see p+ second layer 38, thus higher than the
`
`combined concentration of 36/34,i.e. n+/n layer as shown in Fig. 1).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Dalal further teaches the first silicon layer has a concentration
`
`gradient in which the impurity concentration of the first conductivity type decreases as a
`
`distance from the principal surface increases (see decreasing concentration of 36/34 moving
`
`away from surface of 14 in Fig. 1 denoted by n+ layer 36 closer to surface of 14, and then lower
`
`concentration n-layer 34 further away from surface of 14).
`
`Regarding claim 4, Dalal further teaches an electrode disposed on the second silicon
`
`layer (electrical contact 18 in Fig. 1; Col. 2, lines 3-14).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Dalal further teaches the first conductivity type is n-type, and the
`
`second conductivity type is p-type (see Fig. 1 showingfirst conductivity type of layers 14 and
`
`36/34 as n-type, and second conductivity type of layer 38 as p-type; Col.2, lines 22-30 and 45-
`
`50).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`4.
`
`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:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/831,407
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 4
`
`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.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal as applied to
`
`claim 1 above, and further in view of Levy et al. (US PG Publication 2016/0268455 A1;
`
`hereinafter “Levy”).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Dalal teaches the solar cell according to claim 1, the limitations of
`
`which are set forth above. However, Dalal is silent to a silicon oxide layer disposed between the
`
`semiconductor substrate and the first silicon layer. The Examiner notes that Dalal teaches the
`
`first silicon layer is taught as forming a tunnel diode (32; Col. 3, lines 1-4)
`
`Levy teaches solar cells (abstract). Levy teaches a tunnel junction formed ona
`
`semiconductor substrate (200) can include a SiOz layer (220) and a doped semiconductor layer
`
`(230) to form the tunnel junction structure (paragraphs 0037 and 0063 and Fig. 2).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Dalal and include the
`
`silicon oxide layer between the semiconductor substrate (14) and the semiconductor layer
`
`forming the tunnel diode (32) to form the desired tunnel junction in the device, taught as an
`
`equivalent tunnel junction structure by Levy above. The simple substitution of one known
`
`tunnel junction structure for another, in the instant case substituting the doped semiconductor
`
`layers of Dalal for a silicon oxide layer and semiconductor layer of Levy, supports a prima facie
`
`obviousness determination since one of ordinary skill in the art has a reasonable expectation of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/831,407
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 5
`
`success the tunnel junction will function as desired based upon the teachings of Levy above
`
`(see MPEP 2143|. B.).
`
`6.
`
`Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal as applied to
`
`claim 1 above, and further in view of Kardauskas (US Patent 5,994,641; hereinafter
`
`“Kardauskas”).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Dalal teaches a solar cell according to claim, the limitations of which
`
`are set forth above. However, Dalal is silent to there being a plurality of solar cells forming a
`
`solar cell module, where the plurality of solar cells are connected in series with a plurality of
`
`wire members to form a solar cell string, as recited in instant claim 6.
`
`Kardauskas teaches solar cells and modules (abstract and figs. 1-2). Kardauskas teaches
`
`solar cells are connected to one another in series to form a solar cell string, which are then
`
`connected in series and/or parallel to form a module that meets the current and voltage
`
`requirements needed. Kardauskas additionally teaches the solar cells are connected into the
`
`strings using a plurality of wiring members(8; Col. 5, lines 34-63).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to include multiple solar cells connected with
`
`wiring members to form solar cell strings and ultimately a solar cell module in order to form a
`
`module meeting the voltage and current requirements of the system whereit is used. The
`
`modification would necessarily result in the solar cell module of claim 6.
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/831,407
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 6
`
`7.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to EDWARD SCHMIEDEL whosetelephone number is (571)272-
`
`5197. The examiner can normally be reached on M, T, Th, F: 10am-Spm 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, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached on 571-272-1307. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization wherethis 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access
`
`to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
`
`free). If you 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.
`
`/EDWARD J. SCHMIEDEL/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
`
`