`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF CONINJERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 223 13-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`14/504,771
`
`10/02/2014
`
`Peter John COUSINS
`
`10031.004211
`
`3342
`
`Okamoto & Benedicto LLP
`PO. BOX 641330
`
`San Jose, CA 95164-1330
`
`PILL/“2 DEVINA
`
`ART UNIT
`
`1757
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`10/02/2017
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`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.
`
`PTOL-QOA (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`017709 A0110” Summary
`
`Application No.
`14/504,771
`
`Examiner
`DEVINA PILLAY
`
`Applicant(s)
`COUSINS, Peter John
`
`Art Unit
`1757
`
`AIA Status
`NO
`
`- 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 09/21/2017
`.
`D A declaration(s)laffidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`2b) III 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) 1-4, 7, 9-12, 14 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above Claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6)I:| Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`7). Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-12, 14 is/are rejected.
`
`8)[:| Claim(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:| 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.usptogovlpatents/init events/pphlindexjsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)l:| The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`is/are: a)[:| accepted or b)|:l objected to by the Examiner.
`11)l:| The drawing(s) filed on
`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)|:l 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)
`
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTOISBIOSa andfor PTOISBIOBb)
`Paper No(s)lMail Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) |:| Interview Summary (PTO—413)
`Paper No(s)fMail Date
`4) D Other'
`
`PTOL-325 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper NoJMail Date 20170928
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`2.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented
`and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the
`time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject
`matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was
`made.
`
`3.
`
`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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-4, 7, 9-12 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Meier (US 6,262,359) in view of Okayasu (J P07-1 0661 1,
`
`Human Translation) in view of Borden (WO 2009/094578 A2) and in further view of
`
`Wenham (6,429,037 B1).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 3
`
`Regarding claims 1-4 and 9-12, Meier discloses a solar cell comprising (see Fig.
`
`3D, C5/L38-06/L55):
`
`a substrate (218 n-type) having a front surface that faces the sun to collect solar
`
`radiation during normal operation and a back surface opposite the front surface;
`
`an emitter (220 p-type) forming a backside junction with the substrate;
`
`a front surface field (216), high doped concentration area (n+), on the front
`
`surface of the substrate;
`
`an anti-reflection (214) coating on the top most surface of the solar cell;
`
`a front electrode disposed over the front surface of the substrate (212);
`
`a back electrode disposed over the back surface of the substrate (222).
`
`However, Meier does not disclose that the emitter is a polysilicon emitter or that
`
`the front surface field is formed of polysilicon and that there is a tunnel dielectric formed
`
`between the emitter and the back surface of the substrate or that there is a tunnel
`
`dielectric formed between the front surface field and the substrate.
`
`Okayasu discloses that instead of forming an emitter or surface field from a
`
`portion of a substrate which is doped, an emitter or surface field can be formed using a
`
`doped polysilicon layer ([0005] [0009], Abstract) and by forming an emitter or surface
`
`field this way the thickness can be more accurately controlled and it prevents generation
`
`of floating foreign matter ([0008] [0009]).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to replace the method of forming the emitter/front surface field from a portion
`
`of a substrate of Meier and instead forming the emitter and front surface field by using a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 4
`
`doped polysilicon layer as disclosed by Okayasu because the thickness can be more
`
`accurately controlled and it prevent generation of floating foreign matter.
`
`However, modified Meier does not discloses a tunneling dielectric oxide between
`
`the emitter/front surface field and the substrate.
`
`Borden discloses that tunnel oxides can be used in solar cells between doped
`
`polysilicon and monocrystalline substrates [0016] and can be formed on both the front
`
`and back surfaces of a monocrystalline substrate.
`
`Furthermore, Borden discloses that by providing the tunneling layer it prevents
`
`epitaxial growth of the emitter layer and further it protects the surface from plasma
`
`damage of the deposited emitter layer [0015].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify the interface between polycrystalline layers and monocrystalline
`
`substrate back and front surfaces of modified Meier by having a tunneling oxide at the
`
`interfaces because it prevents epitaxial growth of the emitter layer and further it protects
`
`the crystalline surface from plasma damage of the deposited emitter layer.
`
`Modified Meier discloses a first tunnel dielectric between the emitter and back
`
`surface and a second tunnel dielectric at the front surface of the substrate.
`
`However, modified Meier does not disclose that doped region in the substrate.
`
`Wenham discloses a solar cell wherein the area beneath point contacts includes
`
`areas of high doping which is important for reducing contact resistance (see Fig. 5,
`
`portions 18 and 23) (C1/L25-41).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify the front surface field formed in the substrate of modified Meier by
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 5
`
`adding in highly doped regions under the metallic contacts as disclosed by Wenham
`
`because doing so reduces the contact resistance and will improve the efficiency of the
`
`solar cell.
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 14, modified Meier discloses all of the claim limitations
`
`as set forth above.
`
`However, Meier does not disclose that the electrode that is in contact with the p-
`
`type polysilicon layer is silver.
`
`Okayasu discloses that the back electrode on the polysilicon emitter is formed of
`
`a silver electrode [0044].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to replace the aluminum electrode of Meier with the silver electrode of
`
`Okayasu because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out such
`
`a substitution, and the results would be reasonably predictable.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-4, 7, 9-12 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Meier (US 6,262,359) in view of Okayasu (J P07-10661 1,
`
`Machine Translation) in view of Foglietti (US 200210142500 A1) in view of Gan
`
`(Polysilicon Emitters for Silicon Concentrator Solar Cells) and in further view of
`
`Wenham (6,429,037 B1).
`
`Regarding claims 1-4 and 9-12, Meier discloses a solar cell comprising (see Fig.
`
`3D, 05/L38-C6/L55):
`
`a substrate (218 n-type) having a front surface that faces the sun to collect solar
`
`radiation during normal operation and a back surface opposite the front surface;
`
`an emitter (220 p-type) forming a backside junction with the substrate;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 6
`
`a front surface field (216), high doped concentration area (n+), on the front
`
`surface of the substrate;
`
`an anti-reflection (214) coating on the top most surface of the solar cell;
`
`a front electrode disposed over the front surface of the substrate (212);
`
`a back electrode disposed over the back surface of the substrate (222).
`
`However, Meier does not disclose that the emitter is a polysilicon emitter or that
`
`the front surface field is formed of polysilicon and that there is a tunnel dielectric formed
`
`between the emitter and the back surface of the substrate or that there is a tunnel
`
`dielectric formed between the front surface field and the substrate.
`
`Okayasu discloses that instead of forming an emitter or surface field from a
`
`portion of a substrate which is doped, an emitter or surface field can be formed using a
`
`doped polysilicon layer ([0005][0009], Abstract) and by forming an emitter or surface
`
`field this way the thickness can be more accurately controlled and it prevents generation
`
`of floating foreign matter ([0008] [0009]).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to replace the method of forming the emitter/front surface field from a portion
`
`of a substrate of Meier and instead forming the emitter and front surface field by using a
`
`doped polysilicon layer as disclosed by Okayasu because the thickness can be more
`
`accurately controlled and it prevent generation of floating foreign matter.
`
`However, modified Meier does not discloses a tunneling dielectric oxide at the
`
`interfaces between the emitter and the substrate and the front surface field and the
`
`substrate.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 7
`
`Foglietti discloses that polycrystalline growth directly on crystalline silicon results
`
`in partial realignment of the polycrystalline grains and to suppress this effect a thin oxide
`
`can be grown ([0046]).
`
`Gan discloses that the presence of a stable thermal oxide between a polysilicon
`
`emitter and a CZ wafer (See pg. 248, first column, and Table 1) results in recombination
`
`occurring primary at the oxide interface and that the presence of this oxide at the
`
`interface can be useful for silicon solar cells with polysilicon emitters (See Conclusion,
`
`pg.249)
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify the interface between the doped polysilicon regions and the
`
`monocrystalline substrate by adding an interfacial oxide as disclosed by Fogiletti and
`
`Gan because it will allow for optimal grown of the polysilicon region and furthermore will
`
`result in recombination primarily occurring at the oxide interface.
`
`Modified Meier discloses a first tunnel dielectric between the emitter and back
`
`surface and a second tunnel dielectric at the front surface of the substrate.
`
`However, modified Meier does not disclose that doped region in the substrate.
`
`Wenham discloses a solar cell wherein the area beneath point contacts includes
`
`areas of high doping which is important for reducing contact resistance (see Fig. 5,
`
`portions 18 and 23) (C1/L25-41).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify the front surface field formed in the substrate of modified Meier by
`
`adding in highly doped regions under the metallic contacts as disclosed by Wenham
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 8
`
`because doing so reduces the contact resistance and will improve the efficiency of the
`
`solar cell.
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 14, modified Meier discloses all of the claim limitations
`
`as set forth above.
`
`However, Meier does not disclose that the electrode that is in contact with the p-
`
`type polysilicon layer is silver.
`
`Okayasu discloses that the back electrode on the polysilicon emitter is formed of
`
`a silver electrode [0044].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to replace the aluminum electrode of Meier with the silver electrode of
`
`Okayasu because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to carry out such
`
`a substitution, and the results would be reasonably predictable.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`6.
`
`In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of
`
`obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that
`
`anyjudgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon
`
`hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was
`
`within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does
`
`not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant‘s disclosure, such a
`
`reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA
`
`1971).
`
`7.
`
`Applicant argues that Okayasu cannot cure the deficiencies of Meier because the
`
`backside junction of Meier is formed integrally with the substrate and therefore there
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 9
`
`can be no interfacial oxide. An interfacial oxide coupled with a polysilicon emitter and
`
`surface field would render the device of Meier unworkable. Applicant further argues that
`
`since Okayasu is concerned with a front side emitter and therefore Okayasu is not
`
`possible because it would require a total redesign of Meier.
`
`8.
`
`Examiner respectfully disagrees. Meier discloses method of forming a junction
`
`which consists of an emitter formed on a substrate which comprises using the electrode
`
`as a dopant material and driving in those dopants through annealing and also forming a
`
`front surface field through driving of dopants into substrate. Okayasu discloses an
`
`alternative method of forming an emitter and surface field which comprises depositing a
`
`doped polysilicon doped layers over back and front surfaces of a single crystalline
`
`substrate. Okayasu also discloses that this method is preferable to that of heating and
`
`driving in dopants because it can be performed at lower temperatures which prevents
`
`damage to the substrate and furthermore the thickness of the emitter can be more
`
`accurately controlled ([0008]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time of the invention to replace the emitter of Meier with the emitter
`
`of Okayasu because of the above advantages.
`
`9.
`
`Applicant further argues that neither Foglietti nor Borden nor Gan disclose that a
`
`thin oxide can be used in a backside junction solar cell.
`
`10.
`
`As disclosed above Gan, Foglietti and Borden disclose that a thin oxide can
`
`be provide advantageous properties between a doped polysilicon emitter and
`
`a monocrystalline substrate.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 10
`
`Conclusion
`
`11.
`
`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 shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the event a first reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the TH REE-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 date of this final action.
`
`12.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-
`
`1180. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
`
`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 517-272-1307. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number:14/504,771
`Art Unit: 1757
`
`Page 11
`
`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
`
`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.
`
`IDEVINA PILLAY/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1757
`
`