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
`
`16/259,178
`
`01/28/2019
`
`Kenta Matsuyama
`
`P190062US00
`
`2641
`
`WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP
`8500 LEESBURG PIKE
`SUITE 7500
`TYSONS, VA 22182
`
`SUN, MICHAEL ¥
`
`ART UNIT
`1726
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/16/2020
`
`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):
`
`patentmail @ whda.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/259 ,178
`Matsuyama etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`MICHAEL Y SUN
`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 7/2/2020.
`LC} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)l¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J 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.
`
`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.
`OO Claim(s)__is/are objectedto.
`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) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ 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)0) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)X None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)L) All
`1... Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) 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) ([] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`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 20201007
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Response to Amendment
`
`The amendmentsfiled on 7/2/2020 does not put the application in condition for allowance.
`
`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 patentfor 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 ordinaryskill 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 ofthe 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 Ohyama
`
`(WO2013179529, US Pub No. 2015/0047701 as translation) in view of Gloger (US Pub No.
`
`2017/0133538)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 3
`
`Regarding Claim 1, Ohyama etal. teachesa solar cell [100, Fig. 1, 0012] comprising:
`
`in an entire wafer upper surface and a vicinity directly adjacent to the entire upper wafer
`
`surface[Fig. 1],
`
`an n-type crystalline silicon wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0014]
`
`a silicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1, 0016]
`
`an n-type crystalline silicon layer [18, Fig. 1, 0019-0020, layer 18 can be microcrystalline, which
`
`meets limitation of crystalline] formed on thesilicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1, 0016]
`
`a p-type amorphous silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020] formed onarear surface side of the n-type
`
`crystalline silicon wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0019-0020]
`
`The silicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1, 0016] forming an interface with the n-typecrystalline silicon
`
`wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0014];
`
`Ohyama etal. is silent on having an n* layer having a higher concentration of an n-type dopant
`
`than other regions within the n-type crystalline silicon wafer.
`
`Gloger et al. teaches a method of forming anntypesilicon substrate 1, which has concentration
`
`of 1*10414 to 5*10*16/cm‘3 [Fig. 2, 0069], which further comprises an n+ layer 5 [Fig. 2, 0067] where
`
`the concentration is more than 1*10419/cm43 [0067].
`
`Since Ohyama etal. teachesa crystalline silicon substrate [0014] and Gloger et al. teaches a
`
`crystalline silicon substrate [0069], it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before
`
`the filing of the invention to utilize the substrate, which comprises n+ layer 5, of Gloger et al. in place of
`
`the substrate of Ohyama etal. in order to provide an alternative method of producing different
`
`subzonesin a silicon substrate which can beeasily implemented [0011] and in order to generate a
`
`selective emitter in which heavily doped subzones may be contacted by metal contacts with low
`
`resistance and intermediate lightly doped zones may be well surface-passivated [0051].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 4
`
`In addition, the combination would have been merely the selection of a known substrate for
`
`solar cells recognized in the art and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success
`
`in doing so.
`
`The combination of familiar elementsis likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield
`
`predictable results. See KSR InternationalCo. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385,
`
`1395 — 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143,A.).
`
`Within the combination above, modified Ohayama etal. teachesa silicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1,
`
`0016] formed ona light receiving surface of the n-type crystalline silicon wafer [Fig. 1];
`
`an n-type crystalline silicon layer [18, Fig. 1, 0019-0020] formed on the silicon oxide layer [14,
`
`Fig. 1, 0016]; and
`
`a p-type amorphous silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020] formed onarear surface side of the n-type
`
`crystalline silicon wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0014],
`
`wherein the silicon oxide layer contains an n-type dopant [14, Fig. 1, 0014-0016, 5*10418/cm’3
`
`or less, 0016], and a concentration of the n-type dopantin the silicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1, 0014-0016,
`
`5*10418/cm43 or less] is lower than a concentration of n-type dopantsin the n* layer [Gloger: 5,fig. 2,
`
`0067, more than 1*10419/cm4-3] and the n-type crystalline silicon layer [18, Fig. 1, 1*10.sup.21/ cm? or
`
`more, 0020-0021],
`
`and the n+ layer [Gloger: 5, fig. 2, 0067, more than 1*10419/cm4-3] is formed in the interface
`
`between the n-type crystalline silicon wafer [10, Fig. 1,0017] and the silicon oxide layer [14, Fig. 1, 0016]
`
`and directly adjacentto the interface.
`
`The concentrations of the n-type crystalline wafer, silicon oxide layer, n+ layer, and n-type
`
`crystalline silicon layer provides a range which overlaps the limitation of the claim.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 5
`
`In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a
`
`prima facie case of obviousnessexists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re
`
`Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2144.05.
`
`Examiner notes the combination, replaces layer 10 of Ohyama etal. with 1 and 5 of Groger etal.
`
`and the cell in figure 1 of Ohyama etal is a bifacial layer, examiner indicated the combination with the
`
`rectangle shape below:
`
`As a result of the combination, layer 5 is between 10 and 14 of figure 1;therefore, silicon oxide layer
`
`and n-typecrystalline silicon wafer, which is an interface between the twolayers
`
`14 forms an interface with the n-type crystalline silicon wafer 10, and the n+ layer 5 is formed in the
`
`interface (between 10 and 14) between the n-typecrystalline silicon wafer 10 and the silicon oxide
`
`layer 14, and the n+layer is directly adjacent to the interface, since it is between the silicon oxide layer
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`
`
`RegardingClaim 2, within the combination above, modified Ohayama et al. teaches further
`
`comprising a passivation layer [12, Fig. 1, 0016] formed between the n-type crystalline silicon wafer [10,
`
`Fig. 1,0014] and the p-type amorphous silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020],
`
`wherein the passivation layer is made with substantially intrinsic amorphous silicon, or an
`
`amorphous silicon having a lower concentration of a p-type dopant than the p-type amorphous silicon
`
`layer, as a main component [0016-0021].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding Claim 3, within the combination above, modified Ohayama et al. teaches wherein a
`
`concentration of the n-type dopantin the n-typecrystalline silicon layer 18 is 1*10.sup.21/cm? or more,
`
`0020, overlapping the claimed 1*10%21 atoms/cm? or less [See rejection of claim 1].
`
`In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a
`
`prima facie case of obviousnessexists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re
`
`Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2144.05.
`
`Regarding Claim 4, within the combination above, modified Ohayama et al. teaches wherein a
`
`concentration of the n-type dopantin the n* layer is more than 1*1019/cm43 [Gloger: 5, fig. 2, 0067]
`
`overlapping the claimed 1*10“20 atoms/cm? or less [See rejection of claim 1].
`
`In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a
`
`prima facie case of obviousnessexists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re
`
`Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2144.05.
`
`Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohyama
`
`(WO2013179529, US Pub No. 2015/0047701 as translation) in view of Gloger (US Pub No.
`
`2017/0133538) as applied abovein addressingclaim 1, in further view of Meier (US Pub No.
`
`2012/0171806)
`
`RegardingClaim 5, within the combination above, modified Ohyama et al. teachesa first
`
`transparent conductive layer [22, Fig. 1, 0025] formed on the n-typecrystalline silicon layer [18, Fig. 1,
`
`0019-0020);
`
`a second transparent conductive layer [20, Fig. 1, 0025] formed on the p-type amorphous
`
`silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020];
`
`Modified Ohyama etal. is silent on a first and second collector electrode.
`
`Meier et al. teachesa first collector electrode [260, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the first
`
`transparent conductive layer [250, Fig. 3F, 0051];
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 8
`
`a second collector electrode [265, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the second transparent conductive
`
`layer [255, Fig. 3F, 0051]. The first and second collector electrode contacts used to couple to additional
`
`solar cells in series to build up voltage [0053].
`
`Since it is knownin the art to providesolar cells in series to build up voltage [0053], it would
`
`have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the filing of the invention to add the first and
`
`second collector electrodes of Meier et al on the first and second transparent conductive layers of
`
`modified Ohayama etal. as it is merely the selection of a known connection means for delivering
`
`electricity to additional devicesin series.
`
`The combination of familiar elementsis likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield
`
`predictable results. See KSR InternationalCo. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385,
`
`1395 — 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143,A.).
`
`Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohyama
`
`(WO2013179529, US Pub No. 2015/0047701 as translation) in view of Gloger (US Pub No.
`
`2017/0133538) as applied abovein addressingclaim 1, in further view of Meier (US Pub No.
`
`20120171806), Swanson (US Pat No. 7468485), and Arimoto (US Pub No. 2014/0020752)
`
`Regarding Claim 6, within the combination above, modified Ohyama etal. is silent on an n-type
`
`amorphous silicon layer formed onafirst region on a rear surface of the n-type crystalline silicon wafer;
`
`an insulation layer formed in a part on the n-type amorphous silicon layer;
`
`the p-type amorphous silicon layer formed on a second region of the rear surface of the n-type
`
`crystalline silicon wafer, and on the insulation layer;
`
`a first transparent conductive layer formed on the n-type amorphous silicon layer; a first
`
`collector electrode formed on the first transparent conductive layer; a second transparent conductive
`
`layer formed on the p-type amorphous silicon layer; and a second collector electrode formed on the
`
`second transparent conductive layer.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 9
`
`Arimotoet al. teaches an n-type amorphous silicon layer 23 on an n type crystalline substrate 21
`
`[Fig. 2, 0036] used to provide passivation for an underlying layer [0038].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the filing of the invention to
`
`provide the n-type amorphous silicon layer 23 of Arimoto et al. on the substrate of modified Ohyama et
`
`al. in order to provide improved passivation for an underlying layer [0038].
`
`Swanson etal. teaches an insulating layer on the both surfaces of a substrate [Tunnel Oxide,Fig.
`
`1, C1 In 50-55], See layer 82 and 92, [C3 In 35-50, C6 In 1-20] and an insulating layer [502, Fig. 12, C5 In
`
`1-20] used to protect the materials on the back side of the substrate.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the filing of the invention to
`
`apply the insulating layer, both 82 and 92, of Swanson etal. on both surface of the substrate of Ohyama
`
`et al. in order to reduce the recombination of electrons and holesat the front surface [C2 In 50-61] and
`
`to allow for increased probability of electrons directly tunneling across the back surface of the substrate
`
`[C2 In 40-50]
`
`Meier et al. teachesa first collector electrode [260, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the first
`
`transparent conductive layer [250, Fig. 3F, 0051];
`
`a second collector electrode [265, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the second transparent conductive
`
`layer [255, Fig. 3F, 0051]. The first and second collector electrode contacts used to couple to additional
`
`solar cells in series to build up voltage [0053].
`
`Since it is knownin the art to providesolar cells in series to build up voltage [0053], it would
`
`have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art before the filing of the invention to add the first and
`
`second collector electrodes of Meier et al on the first and second transparent conductive layers of
`
`modified Ohayama etal. as it is merely the selection of a known connection means for carrying
`
`electricity to an additional device.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 10
`
`The combination of familiar elementsis likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield
`
`predictable results. See KSR InternationalCo. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385,
`
`1395 — 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143,A.).
`
`Within the combination above, modified Ohyama et al. teaches an n-type amorphous silicon
`
`layer [Arimoto: 23, Fig. 2, 0035] formed onafirst region on a rear surface of the n-typecrystalline silicon
`
`wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0014];
`
`an insulation layer [Swanson 82, Fig. 13, C3 In 35-50, C6 In 1-20] formed in a part on the n-type
`
`amorphous silicon layer [Arimoto: 23, Fig. 2, 0035];
`
`the p-type amorphous silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020] formed on a second region of the rear
`
`surface of the n-type crystalline silicon wafer [10, Fig. 1, 0014], and on the insulation layer [Swanson 82,
`
`Fig. 13, C3 In 35-50, C6 In 1-20];
`
`a first transparent conductive layer [22, Fig. 1,0025] formed on the n-type amorphous silicon
`
`layer [Arimoto: 23, Fig. 2, 0035] ; a first collector electrode [Meier: 260, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the first
`
`transparent conductive layer [22, Fig. 1, 0025]; a second transparent conductive layer [20, Fig. 1, 0025]
`
`formed on the p-type amorphous silicon layer [16, Fig. 1, 0020]; and a second collector electrode
`
`[Meier: 265, Fig. 3F, 0051] formed on the second transparent conductive layer [20, Fig. 1, 0025].
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's argumentsfiled 7/2/2020 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
`
`Examiner respectfully disagrees.
`
`Regarding the arguments about the new limitations, Examiner notes the combination, replaces
`
`layer 10 of Ohyama etal. with 1 and 5 of Groger et al. and the cell in figure 1 of Ohyama et al. whichis a
`
`bifacial cell, examiner indicated the combination with the rectangle shape below:
`
`As a result of the combination, layer 5 is between 10 and 14 of figure 1;therefore, silicon oxide layer
`
`14 forms an interface with the n-type crystalline silicon wafer 10, and the n+ layer 5 is formed in the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 11
`
`interface (between 10 and 14) between the n-typecrystalline silicon wafer 10 and the silicon oxide
`
`layer 14, and the n+layer is directly adjacent to the interface, since it is between the silicon oxide layer
`
`
`
`and n-typecrystalline silicon wafer, which is an interface between the twolayers
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 12
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office
`
`action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the
`
`extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortenedstatutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from
`
`the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the eventa first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS ofthe mailing date
`
`of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH
`
`shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory
`
`action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing
`
`date of the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than
`
`SIX MONTHS from the dateof this final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to MICHAEL Y SUN whose telephone numberis (571)270-0557. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached on 9AM-7PM.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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 Barton can be reached on 571-272-1307. The fax phone numberfor 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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on accessto the Private PAIR system, contact
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/259,178
`Art Unit: 1726
`
`Page 13
`
`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.
`
`/MICHAEL Y SUN/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
`
`