Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 72 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Claim 72 is a method involving removal of a temporary substrate which is not required for the formation of the device of claim 64.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 72 withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 70 and 71 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 70, it is unclear if the nanopillars are the conductive layer of Claim 64 that penetrate a passivation layer. In the specification and drawings, nanopillars 110 are defined as doped conductive layers penetrate a passivation layer 118 in Fig. 1A and are labeled differently elsewhere. The plurality of active layers having doped layers are 106/108 which are not formed as nanopillars.
Regarding Claim 71, see prior action regarding the word “temporary.” Previous discussion relating to “temporary” was limited to Claim 64.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 64 and 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20150323143 to Raring et al. (Raring).
Regarding Claim 64, Raring teaches in Fig. 2A at least a vertical device comprising:
a substrate 203;
a plurality of planar active layers 207-209, see also [0098-0103] formed on a substrate, wherein the plurality of planar active layers includes a multiple quantum well layer, and wherein the multiple quantum well layer includes a plurality of single quantum layers in a stack [0100];
a thin doped layer 205 formed on a bottom surface of the plurality of planar active layers between the substrate and the plurality of planar active layers;
a conductive layer 211 coupled to the plurality of planar active layers;
a passivation layer 213 formed to cover part of the conductive layer such that at least one area of the conductive layer extends through the passivation layer; and
at least one contact 213 on the at least one area on the conductive layer, wherein the at least one contact comprises one of:
a stack of other doped layers, an ohmic contact (metal layer) and one or more contact pads.
Regarding Claim 66, Raring teaches the vertical device of claim 64, wherein the passivation layer covers exposed defects (epitaxial layers such as the thin doped layer 205 inherently have defects, and any exposed defects will be covered by the passivation of Yu modified by Varghese, for evidence, see U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20030235970 to Hsu etal. (Hsu), Fig. 9, showing passivation 132 covering defects 126 in an epitaxial layer 122).
Examiner’s note:
Examiner recommends this claim to place to application in condition for allowance:
A vertical device comprising:
a substrate;
a plurality of planar active layers formed on a substrate, wherein the plurality of planar active layers includes a multiple quantum well layer, and wherein the multiple quantum well layer includes a plurality of single quantum layers in a stack;
a thin doped layer formed on a bottom surface of the plurality of planar active layers between the substrate and the plurality of planar active layers;
a plurality of doped nanopillars formed on the plurality of planar active layers;
a passivation layer formed on the plurality of planar active layers and in between the plurality of doped nanopillars; and
at least one contact 213 on the plurality of nanopillars, wherein the at least one contact comprises one of:
a stack of other doped layers, an ohmic contact and one or more contact pads.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVREN SEVEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5666. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00- 5:00 Pacific.
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, Christine Kim can be reached on (571) 272-8458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EVREN SEVEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights