Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/356,755

LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND ILLUMINATING APPARATUS COMPRISING THE SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 24, 2021
Examiner
ZHU, SHENG-BAI
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Xiamen San'an Optoelectronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
441 granted / 705 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +5% lift
Without
With
+4.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
764
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
66.2%
+26.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 705 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA 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 Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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 patent for 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 ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3, 6, 7, 9-12 and 14-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0054054) of record, in view of Kim (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0256735) of record, in view of You (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0365743) of record, in view of Zhang (WO 2020073294, machine-translation provided). Regarding Claim 1 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that is disposed on said supporting component (6), and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component, a top chip surface that is situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; and a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm. Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other, and a vertical projection of each of said first metal wire and said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode (323) and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack”. FIG. 1 of Kim discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (11); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion (left 14), and a second wire bonding portion (right 14) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion; wherein said LED chip (20) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (41) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (12b); wherein said second electrode (42) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (12a); wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; wherein a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode (41) and said second electrode (42) are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Kim. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Kim is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”; vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion “onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other”; “a vertical projection of each of said first metal wire and said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other”; and “said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack”. FIG. 1 of You discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (200/300); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (60, FIG. 2) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (350) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall; vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first wire bonding portion (203) and said second wire bonding portion (205) onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; a vertical projection of said first metal wire (205a) and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack (100) are spaced apart from each other, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component (201). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by You. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of emitting light with high output in a closed space (Para. 5 of You). Bauer as modified by Kim and You is silent with respect to a vertical projection of said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other”. FIG. 5 of Zhang discloses a similar light emitting device, wherein a vertical projection of said second metal wire (310) and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack (200) are spaced apart from each other; wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode (620), said second electrode (610), said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Zhang, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of providing a thin film light-emitting diode structure with higher efficiency, higher current density, better electrical performance and reliable performance under high voltage (Para. 3 of Zhang). Regarding Claim 2 FIG. 1 of You discloses said LED chip has a beam angle (approximately 90°) of not greater than 135°. Regarding Claim 3 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses said light-blocking layer (350) has a top surface; and a height difference between said top chip surface and said top surface of said light blocking layer is less than 10 µm. Regarding Claim 6 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses said top chip surface is flush with said top end of said surrounding wall. Regarding Claim 7 FIG. 1 of You discloses said light-emitting device further comprises at least one metal wire (310) connecting one of said first and second electrodes to one of said first and second wire bonding portions; and said light-blocking layer (350) covers said at least one metal wire. Regarding Claim 9 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses said LED chip further includes a wavelength conversion layer (41) disposed in said top light exit port, covering said light-emitting semiconductor stack, and defining said top chip surface, said wavelength conversion layer having a thickness ranging from 50 µm to 150 µm [0043]. Regarding Claim 10 FIG. 2 of You discloses said wavelength conversion layer (90) covers a portion of said light-emitting semiconductor stack (100), said light-blocking layer (350) covering a remaining portion of said light-emitting semiconductor stack not covered by said wavelength conversion layer. Regarding Claim 11 FIG. 2 of You discloses said LED chip further includes a reflecting layer (33) that is disposed between said light-emitting semiconductor stack (30) and said substrate (60). Regarding Claim 12 FIG. 1 of Kim discloses each of said first electrode (41) and said second electrode (42) is located outside of an outer periphery of said light-emitting semiconductor stack below said top chip surface. Regarding Claim 14 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses said light-blocking layer (7) is a light reflecting layer or a light absorptive layer [0067]. Regarding Claim 15 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses said top surface of said light-blocking layer (7) is not lower than said top chip surface. Regarding Claim 16 The claim “said light-emitting device is driven by a current density of greater than 2 A/mm2” containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed. This recitation does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus because the apparatus of Bauer teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987), see MPEP 2114 R-1. Regarding Claim 17 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a supporting component (6) having a bottom wall and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall; a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that has a beam angle of less than 135°, and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said bottom wall, a top chip surface situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) that is formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said bottom wall to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, said light-blocking layer having a top surface not lower than said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that is surrounded by said surrounding wall; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm. Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other”. FIG. 1 of Kim discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (11); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion (left 14), and a second wire bonding portion (right 14) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion; wherein said LED chip (20) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (41) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (12b); wherein said second electrode (42) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (12a); wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; wherein a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode (41) and said second electrode (42) are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Kim. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Kim is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”; vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion “onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other”; “a vertical projection of each of said first metal wire and said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other”; and “said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack”. FIG. 1 of You discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (200/300); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (60, FIG. 2) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (350) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall; vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first wire bonding portion (203) and said second wire bonding portion (205) onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; a vertical projection of said first metal wire (205a) and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack (100) are spaced apart from each other, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component (201). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by You. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of emitting light with high output in a closed space (Para. 5 of You). Bauer as modified by Kim and You is silent with respect to a vertical projection of said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other”. FIG. 5 of Zhang discloses a similar light emitting device, wherein a vertical projection of said second metal wire (310) and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack (200) are spaced apart from each other; wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode (620), said second electrode (610), said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Zhang, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of providing a thin film light-emitting diode structure with higher efficiency, higher current density, better electrical performance and reliable performance under high voltage (Para. 3 of Zhang). Regarding Claim 18 FIG. 2 of You discloses said LED chip further includes a reflecting layer (33) that is disposed between said light-emitting semiconductor stack (30) and said substrate (60). Regarding Claim 19 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses an illuminating apparatus comprising a light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1. Claims 1, 8 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer, in view of Hayashimoto (KR 20040092512) of record, in view of Ishihara (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0001605) of record. Regarding Claim 1 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that is disposed on said supporting component (6), and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component, a top chip surface that is situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; and a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other, and a vertical projection of each of said first metal wire and said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode (323) and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack”. FIG. 5 of Hayashimoto discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (10); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion (middle 10 directly below 13), a first wire bonding portion (left vertical portion of 12), and a second wire bonding portion (right vertical portion of 12) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip (11) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (left horizontal portion of 12 beyond 18) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (left horizontal portion of 12 under 18); wherein said second electrode (right horizontal portion of 12 beyond 18) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (right horizontal portion of 12 under 18); and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Hayashimoto. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Hayashimoto is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”. FIG. 1 of Ishihara discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (80); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (inherent for LED) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (40) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; and wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall (FIG. 1B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Ishihara. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of improving light output (Para. 12 of Ishihara). Regarding Claim 8 FIG. 1 of Ishihara discloses an axis of light emission of said LED chip coincides with an axis of geometry of said light-emitting device. Regarding Claim 17 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a supporting component (6) having a bottom wall and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall; a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that has a beam angle of less than 135°, and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said bottom wall, a top chip surface situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) that is formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said bottom wall to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, said light-blocking layer having a top surface not lower than said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that is surrounded by said surrounding wall; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm. Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other”. FIG. 5 of Hayashimoto discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (10); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion (middle 10 directly below 13), a first wire bonding portion (left vertical portion of 12), and a second wire bonding portion (right vertical portion of 12) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip (11) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (left horizontal portion of 12 beyond 18) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (left horizontal portion of 12 under 18); wherein said second electrode (right horizontal portion of 12 beyond 18) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (right horizontal portion of 12 under 18); and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Hayashimoto. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Hayashimoto is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”. FIG. 1 of Ishihara discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (80); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (inherent for LED) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (40) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; and wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall (FIG. 1B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Ishihara. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of improving light output (Para. 12 of Ishihara). Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer, Kim, You and Zhang, in view of Gao (CN 1558283) of record. Regarding Claim 20 Bauer as modified by Kim, You and Zhang discloses Claim 19. Bauer as modified by Kim, You and Zhang is silent with respect to “is used for backlighting a display” and “has a light mixing distance of below 15 mm”. FIG. 2 of Gao discloses a similar illuminating apparatus, which is used for backlighting a display. Gao further discloses in general, a light mixing distance is equal to two times of distance between two light emitting diodes, and longer light mixing distance increases the thickness and volume of the backlight module of liquid crystal display. Therefore, said distance is considered to be a result effective variable. The claim to a specific distance therefore constitutes an optimization of ranges. In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the parameters as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Gao. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of reducing the thickness of the module with uniformly mixed light of different colors (invention content of Gao). Claims 1 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bauer, in view of Sakamoto (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0241025), in view of Ishihara (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0001605) of record. Regarding Claim 1 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that is disposed on said supporting component (6), and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component, a top chip surface that is situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; and a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other, and a vertical projection of each of said first metal wire and said second metal wire and a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode (323) and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack”. FIG. 1 of Sakamoto discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (8); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion (9c), a first wire bonding portion (left), and a second wire bonding portion (right) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip (7) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (anode10a) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (horizontal portion of 10a); wherein said second electrode (cathode 10b) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (horizontal portion of 10b); and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Sakamoto. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Sakamoto is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”. FIG. 1 of Ishihara discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (80); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (inherent for LED) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (40) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; and wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall (FIG. 1B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Ishihara. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of improving light output (Para. 12 of Ishihara). Regarding Claim 17 FIG. 11 of Bauer discloses a light-emitting device, comprising: a supporting component (6) having a bottom wall and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall; a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (4) that has a beam angle of less than 135°, and that includes a substrate (inherent) having a bottom end connected to said bottom wall, a top chip surface situated above said substrate, a light-emitting semiconductor stack (41-44) that is formed between said substrate and said top chip surface to emit light toward said top chip surface, a lateral side (250, FIG. 2B) extending downward from said top chip surface to said bottom end of said substrate, a first electrode (61), and a second electrode (63); and a light-blocking layer (7) that is formed on said bottom wall to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, said light-blocking layer having a top surface not lower than said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that is surrounded by said surrounding wall; said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm. Bauer is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall” and “said supporting component has an installation portion, a first wire bonding portion, and a second wire bonding portion that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion; wherein said LED chip is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion; wherein said second electrode is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion; and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein a vertical projection of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other”. FIG. 1 of Sakamoto discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (8); wherein said supporting component has an installation portion (9c), a first wire bonding portion (left), and a second wire bonding portion (right) that is electrically insulated from said first wire bonding portion, and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component; wherein said LED chip (7) is disposed on said installation portion; wherein said first electrode (anode10a) is electrically connected to said first wire bonding portion through a first metal wire (horizontal portion of 10a); wherein said second electrode (cathode 10b) is electrically connected to said second wire bonding portion through a second metal wire (horizontal portion of 10b); and wherein said installation portion is spaced apart from each of said first and second wire bonding portions to be electrically and thermally insulated from each of said first and second wire bonding portions; and wherein vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, and said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; and wherein said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Sakamoto. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner, because the claimed configuration was a matter of choice, which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant. In re Dailey 149 USPQ 47, 50 (CCPA 1966). See also Glue Co. v. Upton 97 US 3,24 (USSC 1878). MPEP 2144.04. Bauer as modified by Sakamoto is silent with respect to “a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall”. FIG. 1 of Ishihara discloses a similar light emitting device, comprising a supporting component (80); a light-emitting diode (LED) chip (100) that is disposed on said supporting component, and that includes a substrate (inherent for LED) having a bottom end connected to said supporting component; and a light-blocking layer (40) that is formed on said supporting component to surround said LED chip, and that covers said lateral side and exposes said top chip surface, wherein said light-blocking layer defines a top light exit port that exposes said top chip surface and that has a cross sectional area smaller than or equal to that of said top chip surface; and wherein a cross sectional area of said top light exit port is less than 20% of a cross-section of said top end of said surrounding wall (FIG. 1B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Bauer, as taught by Ishihara. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bauer in the above manner for purpose of improving light output (Para. 12 of Ishihara). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection. Pertinent Art U. S. 2004/0211970 discloses vertical projections of said light-emitting semiconductor stack, said first electrode, said second electrode, said first wire bonding portion, and said second wire bonding portion onto a plane parallel to said bottom end of said substrate are spaced apart from each other; said first electrode and said second electrode are disposed outside an outer lateral surface of said light-emitting semiconductor stack and said first wire bonding portion and said second wire bonding portion penetrate said bottom wall of said supporting component. U. S. 2008/0121911 discloses said supporting component includes a bottom wall supporting said LED chip, and a surrounding wall extending upwardly from said bottom wall and surrounding said LED chip and said light blocking layer; said surrounding wall has a top end opposite to said bottom wall; and a height difference between said top chip surface and said top end of said surrounding wall is less than 10 µm. Other pertinent art includes U. S. 2009/0101897, 2004/0211970, 2004/0041757, 6737681, 6,686,609, 5,298,768 and 5,024,966. Pertinent art also includes TW 201521188. Conclusion 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). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG-BAI ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-3904. The examiner can normally be reached on 11am – 7pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chad Dicke can be reached on (571)270-7996. The fax phone number for 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 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. /SHENG-BAI ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2021
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 23, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 04, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 23, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 29, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 08, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604535
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE HAVING SERIALLY CONNECTED TRANSISTORS WITH DISCONNECTED BODIES, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588294
LOW-LEAKAGE ESD PROTECTION CIRCUIT AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588279
ARRAYED SWITCH CIRCUITRY SYSTEM AND SWITCHING CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12563841
ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE (ESD) PROTECTION CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563715
STACKED RANDOM-ACCESS-MEMORY WITH COMPLEMENTARY ADJACENT CELLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+4.8%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 705 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month