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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 9-10, 12-13, 23-26,28 and 34-36) in the reply filed on 9/5/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 32-33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/5/25.
Claim Objections
Claim 34-36 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claim references “said first luminescent material”, “said precursor thereof”, and “said second luminescent material” with no antecedent basis in the claims. The claims are interpreted as being drawn to simply “the luminescent material” of claim 12. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim contains the phrase “emulsion nu sedimentation”. It is unclear what this expression means. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 12-13, 23-26, 28, 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Song in their publication “Preparation of Y3Al5O12:Ce nanophosphors using salt microemulsion method and their luminescent properties” (IDS).
Regarding Claim 12: Song teaches a method for obtaining a luminescent material. The method of song comprises a step of preparing a mixture comprising a precursor of YAG:Ce and a salt (K2SO4) and heating the mixture to 1000C for 4h (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles). The process of Song uses 1 mmol of YAG:Ce and 10 mL of a 0.5 molar solution of K2SO4. The molar mass of K2SO4 is 174 g/mol. 10 mL of a 0.5 molar solution thus contains 0.87g of K2SO4 (174/2/100). YAG:Ce has a molar mass of 593 g/mol. 1 mmol of YAG:Ce corresponds to 0.593 g of the precursor or phosphor components(593/1000). The weight ratio of salt to precursor or luminescent material is thus more than 1:1. It is further noted that all of the precursors of Song are considered ‘salts’ (e.g. Y(NO3)3 etc). As there are salts in addition to those that are considered precursors, the content of total salts:precursors is always greater than 1.
Regarding Claim 13: The salt of Song comprises K as a cation and SO4 as an anion (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 23: The mixture of Song is sonicated for 20 minutes (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 24: Song teaches the addition of organic ligands such as PEG2000 and CO520 (Igepal), which have the same effect of enhancing mixing with the salt (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 25: Song teaches that the mixture is heating to 1000C (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 26: Song teaches that after the heating, the salt is removed by washing with water (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 28: Song teaches a first heating step wherein the material being heated is interpreted as not being crystalline prior to the first heating. The material may be crystalline in the second high-temperature treated sample step, wherein it is heated again at 800C using a reducing agent. The crystallinity or lack of crystallinity is shown in the XRD of Figure 1.
Regarding Claim 34-35: Song teaches that the salt and luminescent material’s precursor are mixed in a liquid to obtain a dispersion (B; See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles). The initial dispersion is in the 0.5M K2SO4 solution, which is an aqueous solution. Thus Song teaches that the initial dispersion is in water (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Regarding Claim 36: Song teaches that the luminescent material precursor and the salt are provided in water and a microemulsion is made, wherein the water is a dispersed phase in the emulsion and the continuous phase being cyclohexane (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7, 9-10 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petluri in US20170219170 in view of Song in their publication “Preparation of Y3Al5O12:Ce nanophosphors using salt microemulsion method and their luminescent properties” (IDS) as evidenced by Hirosaki in 8409470.
Regarding Claim 1 and 9: Petluri teaches a method for preparing a luminescent composition in the form of a phosphor blend (See Paragraph 30 and Tables 1-2). Petluri teaches that the blend may be created by providing a phosphor C (first luminescent material), CaAlSiN3:Eu (CASN), and providing a phosphor B (second luminescent material), Y3Al5O12:Ce (YAG:Ce; Re: Claim 9). A blend is necessarily a product of mixing the components as set forth.
Petluri does not show the emission and excitation spectra of the various phosphors; however, the emission spectra of the second luminescent material of Petluri necessarily overlaps, at least partly, with the excitation bands of the first luminescent material as is evidenced by Hirosaki. The first luminescent material, CASN, has an excitation band ranging from 350-600 nm and emission at 650 nm (emitting light in a first wavelength range; See Hirosaki Figure 5-6: Example 1 is CaSiAlN3:Eu). The CASN of Petluri would be expected to have the same emission and excitation properties as that of Hirosaki as they are of the same composition. The second luminescent material, YAG:Ce, has an emission spectrum shown in applicant’s Figure 10 (upper spectra). The phosphor absorbs light in a second wavelength range (from 300-525 nm; See Disclosure Figure 10). The emission spectrum of YAG:Ce ranges from about 480 nm to 750 nm and overlaps the excitation bands of the first luminescent material (CASN:Eu) at least from 480-600 nm. Thus the phosphor blend of Petluri necessarily has the properties as set forth in claim 1.
Petluri teaches a method of mixing a first and second luminescent material, but is silent in terms of a method of preparing a mixture of a second luminescent material (YAG:Ce) or its precursor and a salt and firing the mixture.
However, means for creating YAG:Ce by methods that include salts are known in the art and taught by Song. Song teaches that urea precipitated nitrate precursors of YAG:Ce may be disposed in a solution containing the salt K2SO4. The mixture is centrifuged and then heated to 1000C for 4 hours to create YAG:Ce nanoparticles (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles). The YAG:Ce phosphor has a peak emission wavelength around 550 nm (See Figure 4B and 5). Those of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide the YAG:Ce of Petluri using the method of Song as Song teaches a known method for creating YAG:Ce luminescent materials having peak emission at 550 nm (See Figure 5 4% doping) as is required by the phosphor mixture of Petluri. Those of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to provide the phosphors of Petluri by any known method and would have been particularly motivated to use the method of Song based on the fact that the method of Song provides materials of high crystallinity and high dispersibility (See Abstract).
Regarding Claim 3: Petluri teaches mixing phosphor materials. As the heating step of Petluri in view of Song occurs prior to the phosphor’s creation, the heating necessarily occurs prior to said mixing step.
Regarding Claim 4: Song teaches that the materials are provided in the form of nanoparticles (See Abstract).
Regarding Claim 5: The second luminescent material, YAG:Ce, is doped with Ce3+. All of the cations in YAG are trivalent by virtue of the formula Y3Al5O12.
Regarding Claim 7: The second luminescent material YAG:Ce is excitable in the range from 400-500 nm (See Figure 4a Song).
Regarding Claim 10: Song teaches that the second luminescent material or its precursor and said salt are obtained by a method comprising mixing said first luminescent material and said salt in a liquid to obtain a dispersion (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles Section).
Regarding Claim 37: Petluri in view of Song teach the creation of phosphor blends for light emitting devices as is set forth above in terms of claim 1. Petluri teaches that the phosphor blends may be provided in light emitting devices such as the one shown in Figure 1B. The light emitting device of Petluri includes an excitation source for exciting the luminescent composition in the form of a light emitting diode (30, 32 34, 36).
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7, 9-10 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rashmi in their publication “Optical interactions and white light emissions in Eu:Y2O3 / YAG:Ce nanophosphor” in view of Song in their publication “Preparation of Y3Al5O12:Ce nanophosphors using salt microemulsion method and their luminescent properties” (IDS).
Regarding Claim 1: Rashmi teaches a method of creating a luminescent composition. Rashmi teaches that the compositions 3EY and 6EY are created by providing a second luminescent material (YAG:Ce) and providing precursors of a first luminescent material therewith. The precursor of the first luminescent material is mixed with the second luminescent material (See Section 2.2, Paragraph 3). The first luminescent material emits light in a first wavelength range corresponding to 620 nm. The second luminescent material is capable of absorbing light in a second wavelength range (400-500 nm) and has an emission spectrum that overlaps at least partly with one or more excitation bands of the first luminescent material (535, 595 nm excitation overlapping second emission from 455-630 nm; See Figure 5). Rashmi thus teaches a process of mixing phosphors having the properties as claimed.
Rashmi is silent in terms of the creation of YAG:Ce and mixing the precursors of this composition with a salt and heating.
However, means for creating YAG:Ce by methods that include salts are known in the art and taught by Song. Song teaches that urea precipitated nitrate precursors of YAG:Ce may be disposed in a solution containing the salt K2SO4. The mixture is centrifuged and then heated to 1000C for 4 hours to create YAG:Ce nanoparticles (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles). The YAG:Ce phosphor has a peak emission wavelength around 550 nm (See Figure 4B and 5). Those of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide the YAG:Ce of Rashmi using the method of Song, as Song teaches a known method for creating YAG:Ce luminescent materials that are highly dispersible (Rashmi requires dispersion of the material in a solvent). Those of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to provide the phosphors of Rashmi by any known method and would have been particularly motivated to use the method of Song based on the fact that the method of Song provides materials of high crystallinity and high dispersibility (See Abstract).
Regarding Claim 3: The heating in the process of Rashmi in view of Song happens prior to said mixing.
Regarding Claim 4: All of the phosphors of Rashmi in view of Song are in the form of nanoparticles (See Section 2.2 Rashmi and Abstract of Song).
Regarding Claim 5: All of the cations in the material of Rashmi are in the trivalent state based on the stoichiometry Y2O3:Eu and Y3Al5O12:Ce. Thus the first luminescent material contains Eu3+ and the second luminescent material contains Ce3+.
Regarding Claim 7: The second luminescent material is excitable within the range from 380-580 nm (See Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 9: The host lattice of the second luminescent material is Y3Al5O12 (See Section 2.2).
Regarding Claim 10: Song teaches that the second luminescent material or its precursor and said salt are obtained by a method comprising mixing said first luminescent material and said salt in a liquid to obtain a dispersion (See Synthesis of YAG:Ce nanoparticles Section).
Regarding Claim 37: Rashmi in view of Song teach a means for creating light emitting devices by preparing the phosphor blend as set forth above and disposing it with various light emitting devices comprising the excitation sources as set forth in Section 2.2 of Rashmi. Rashmi teaches the use of PL and PLE devices and the use of 405 and 450 nm laser diodes in combination with the phosphors as set forth (See Page 542, First Column).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E HOBAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3585. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/Matthew E. Hoban/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734