Ex Parte Brabec et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardOct 22, 2018

14262869 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 22, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 14/262,869 04/28/2014 Christoph Brabec 30407 7590 10/22/2018 BOWDITCH & DEWEY, LLP 311 MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 15156 WORCESTER, MA 01615-0156 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 310470.3047-101 P 03/351 1679 EXAMINER TRINH, THANH TRUC ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1726 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 10/22/2018 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-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte CHRISTOPH BRABEC and CHRISTOPH W ALDAUF Appeal2017-009362 Application 14/262,869 Technology Center 1700 Before BRADEY R. GARRIS, TERRY J. OWENS, and CATHERINE Q. TIMM, Administrative Patent Judges. OWENS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134(a) from the Examiner's rejection of claims 1-12. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b). The Invention The Appellants claim an organic photovoltaic cell. Claim 1 is illustrative: 1. An article, comprising: two electrodes, a cathode and an anode; an organic photoactive layer comprising an electron donor comprising a conjugated polymer and an electron acceptor comprising a fullerene; Appeal2017-009362 Application 14/262,869 wherein the organic photoactive layer is disposed between the cathode and an anode; a first intermediate layer having asymmetrical conductivity and disposed between the cathode and the organic photoactive layer; a second intermediate layer having asymmetrical conductivity and disposed between the anode and the organic photoactive layer; wherein the organic photovoltaic cell is configured to be oriented to an incident light source, and wherein the electrode that is disposed between the organic photoactive layer and the incident light source is configured to be transparent or semitransparent, and wherein the article is an organic photovoltaic cell. Sariciftci Scher Shaheen The References us 5,331,183 US 6,878,871 B2 WO 01/84644 Al The Rejections July 19, 1994 Apr. 12, 2005 Nov. 8, 2001 The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103 as follows: claims 1- 11 over Scher in view of Sariciftci and claim 12 over Scher in view of Sariciftci and Shaheen. OPINION We affirm the rejections. Although an additional reference is applied in the rejection of claim 12, the Appellants do not separately argue that claim (Br. 24--25). We therefore limit our discussion to one claim, i.e., claim 1, which is the sole independent claim. Claims 2-12 stand or fall with that claim. See 37 C.F.R. Â§ 4I.37(c)(l)(iv) (2012). 2 Appeal2017-009362 Application 14/262,869 Scher discloses a photovoltaic device (solar cell) comprising, between two electrodes, a photoactive layer including nanocrystals which can be in a polymer matrix, 1 the nanocrystals functioning as electron conductor ( electron donor) and the polymer matrix functioning as hole conductor ( electron acceptor), and to improve charge separation, a blocking layer between the photoactive layer and each electrode, the blocking layers having asymmetrical conductivity, i.e., the blocking layer between the photoactive layer and one electrode blocks electron conduction but not hole conduction and the blocking layer between the photoactive layer and the other electrode blocks hole conduction but not electron conduction (col. 5, 11. 36-37; col. 6, 11. 34--41; col. 14, 11. 40-44; col. 15, 11. 56-61; col. 17, 11. 31-34; col. 22, 11.1-16, 30-34). Sariciftci discloses a photovoltaic device ( solar cell) comprising, between two electrodes, a photoactive layer having a semiconducting conjugated polymer as electron donor and a fullerene as electron acceptor (col. 3, 11. 18-29). The fullerenes are excellent electron acceptors (col. 5, 11. 4--5), and the advantages of the combination of semiconducting conjugated polymers and fullerenes over the prior art organic photovoltaic device materials are (col. 3, 1. 61-col. 4, 1. 6; col. 5, 1. 37- col. 6, 1. 17): (i) Because the semiconducting conjugated polymer ( or its precursor polymer) and the fullerenes are soluble, there is no need for heat treatment at elevated temperatures. This greatly simplifies the fabrication procedure and enables a continuous manufacturing process. 1 The electrode on the side of the photoactive layer exposed to light energy is transparent or translucent (col. 29, 11. 40-44). 3 Appeal2017-009362 Application 14/262,869 (ii) Since the semiconducting polymer layer and the fullerene can be cast onto the substrate directly from solution at room temperature, the device structure may be fabricated on a flexible transparent polymer substrate. Since such polymer films are manufactured as large area continuous films, the use of flexible polymer films as substrate enables the fabrication of large area polymer solar cells using either a batch process or a continuous process. The Appellants acknowledge that one of ordinary skill in the art would have known that Sariciftci' s organic solar cell is more efficient than Scher's hybrid solar cell and that those solar cells share the characteristics of solution processing and roll-to-roll manufacture that enable low cost manufacturing (Br. 16-17, 19-20, 23). The Appellants argue, in reliance upon numerous references, that Scher' s hybrid solar cell's inorganic nanostructures, when used as electron acceptors, have different charge separation and conduction characteristics than Sariciftci' s organic solar cell's fullerene electron acceptors and that, therefore, those solar cells have different principles of operation such that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have substituted Sariciftci's fullerenes for Scher's nanostructures because doing so would change the principle of operation of Scher's solar cell (Br. 8-23). The principle of operation of Scher's solar is not the charge separation and conduction characteristics of the electron acceptor but, rather, is the conversion of photonic energy to electrical energy ( col. 1, 11. 49-50). Sariciftci's solar cell has the same principle of operation (col. 1, 11. 30-37). Scher and Sariciftci would have led one of ordinary skill in the art, through no more than ordinary creativity, to substitute Sariciftci's semiconducting conjugated polymer/fullerene photoactive layer for Scher's 4 Appeal2017-009362 Application 14/262,869 polymer matrix/nanostructure photoactive layer to obtain the improved efficiency at low cost acknowledged by the Appellants (Br. 16-17, 19-20, 23), or to place Scher's blocking layers between Sariciftci's photoactive layer and electrodes to obtain the improved charge separation disclosed by Scher (col. 22, 11. 1-16). See KSR Int'! Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007) (in making an obviousness determination one "can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ"). Accordingly, we are not persuaded of reversible error in the rejections. DECISION The rejections under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103 of claims 1-11 over Scher in view of Sariciftci and claim 12 over Scher in view of Sariciftci and Shaheen are affirmed. The Examiner's decision is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. Â§ 1.136(a). AFFIRMED 5