Appeal No. 1999-2464
Application No. 08/701,292
window effect. (Col. 5, ll. 16 to 31). Thus, the window effect is not the result of light
reflecting from one crystalline grain to another crystalline grain as asserted by the Examiner.
Moreover, Maruyama discloses the silicon film should be formed such that the fibrous
grains are continuous in the main part of the film and the growth of the fibrous grain is
substantially vertical to the barrier plane of the solar cell such that the electrons and positive
holes, upon entering the grains from the amorphous region, to move through the grains to
the barrier layer without returning to the amorphous region. (Col. 5, ll. 40 to 60).
In a preferred embodiment, the columnar structure of the claimed invention is defined
by the polycrystalline center and amorphous periphery. Specifically, the specification states:
“the periphery of the columnar silicon member is amorphous and the center thereof is
polycrystalline.” (Substitute specification, page 3). Figure 6 exhibits the columnar structure
(48) is composed of an amorphous periphery (44) and a polycrystalline center (43). Figure 6
also exhibits the columns are separated by the transparent electrode (45). (Substitute
specification, pages 13 and 14, and figure 6). Thus, the amorphous periphery forms part of
the columnar silicon member and is not a separating medium.
The Examiner has failed to establish that Maruyama anticipates the claimed
invention, either explicitly or inherently. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44
USPQ2d 1429, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007