DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed December 09, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-8, 11-15, and 17-23 remain pending in the application. Claims 3-5, 7, 11-15, and 17 remain withdrawn, as being drawn to nonelected species.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 1, 2, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mi et.
al. (US 20190148583 A1), hereinafter Mi, in view of Auzelle et. al. (“Tuning the orientation of the top-facets of GaN nanowires in molecular beam epitaxy by thermal decomposition,” Phys. Rev. Materials 3, 013402, 2019), hereinafter Auzelle, in further view of NIST (“GaN Nanowires: Knowing Which End Is Up,” https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2015/09/gan-nanowires-knowing-which-end, 2015).
Regarding claim 1, Mi teaches a nanowire (Fig 1 nanowire 100, [0043]) operable for emitting light (description of nanowire photonic structures, [0005])comprising: a nitrogen-polar (N-polar) gallium nitride (GaN) layer (Fig 1 first semiconductor region 110, [0043]) having a first dopant type (n-dope, [0043]) formed by selective area growth (Fig 2 step 210, [0045]); and an axial heterostructure (Fig 1 multiple core structures 120 and 130, [0044]) disposed on top (Fig 1) of the N-polar GaN layer (Fig 1 first semiconductor region, [0043]), wherein the axial heterostructure (Fig 1 multiple core structures 120 and 130, [0044]) includes; a plurality of indium gallium nitride (InGaN) quantum well (Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]) layers formed by the selective area growth (selective area epitaxy, [0046]); and a GaN layer (Fig 1 second semiconductor region 150, [0043]) having a second dopant type (p-dope, [0043]) formed by the selective area growth (selective area epitaxy, [0050]) disposed on top of the axial heterostructure (Fig 1 multiple core structures 120 and 130, [0044]).
With regards to the nitrogen-polar (N-polar) facet, Auzelle teaches a Ga-polar facet nanowire has a pencil-like shape and a N-polar facet nanowire has the shape of a hexagonal prism with a flat facet at top (Introduction). Mi shows the nanowire having the shape of a hexagonal prism with a flat facet at the top (Fig 1). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have known to grow nanowires with a N-polar facet to arrive at a structure similar to Mi. Further, it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that N-polar nanowires grow faster than Ga-polar nanowires (NIST article). This would improve manufacturing time. MPEP 2143(I)(G)
Regarding claim 2, Mi as modified in claim 1 teaches the nanowire (Fig 1 nanowire 100, [0043]) is a light emitting diode (LED) (nanowire photonic structures can be used for LED and laser operations, [0010]).
Regarding claim 6, Mi as modified in claim 1 teaches the nanowire (Fig 1 nanowire 100, [0043]) comprises a lateral dimension less than 1 micrometer (approximately 200nm, [0045]).
It is noted for clarity of the record that the lateral dimension in Mi is for the lower portion of the nanowire (Fig 1 lower portion of the nanowire 110, [0045]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the nanowire would have a lateral dimension of approximately the same size as the lower portion as the nanowire is grown from the bottom up.
Regarding claim 8, Mi as modified in claim 1 teaches the axial heterostructure (Fig 1 multiple core structures 120 and 130, [0044]) further includes a plurality of aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN) barrier layers (Fig 1 first quantum barrier region 130, [0047]) formed by the selective area growth (selective area epitaxy, [0047]).
Claims 18 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mi et. al. (US 20190148583 A1), hereinafter Mi, in view of Mi et. al. (US 20120205613 A1), hereinafter Mi2, in further view of Brick et. al. (US 20210082886 A1), hereinafter Brick, with support from Auzelle et. al. (“Tuning the orientation of the top-facets of GaN nanowires in molecular beam epitaxy by thermal decomposition,” Phys. Rev. Materials 3, 013402, 2019), hereinafter Auzelle and NIST (“GaN Nanowires: Knowing Which End Is Up,” https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2015/09/gan-nanowires-knowing-which-end, 2015).
Regarding claim 18, Mi teaches a light emitting device (Fig 3 nanowire device, [0052]) comprising: a plurality of nanowires (Fig 3 nanowire device 310, [0052]), wherein each of the plurality of nanowires (Fig 3 nanowire device 310, [0052]) comprises; a nitrogen-polar (N-polar) gallium nitride (GaN) layer (Fig 1 first semiconductor region 110, [0043]) having a first dopant type (n-dope, [0043]) formed by selective area growth (Fig 4A the first semiconductor region 110 is formed in openings of the nano-pattern layer, [0058]; additionally, selective area epitaxy is described in the formation of the first semiconductor region 110, [0045]); an axial heterostructure (Fig 1 multiple core structures 120 and 130, [0044]), disposed on top of the N-polar GaN layer (Fig 1 first semiconductor region 110, [0043]), comprising a plurality of polar c-plane indium gallium nitride (InGaN) quantum well layers (Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]) disposed on the N-polar GaN layer (Fig 1 first semiconductor region, [0043]); a plurality of aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN) barrier layers (Fig 1 first quantum barrier region 130, [0047]) disposed on respective ones of the plurality of polar c-plane indium gallium nitride (InGaN) quantum well layers (Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]); a conformal passivation layer (Fig 3 optically transmissive layer 345, [0054]) between the plurality of nanowires (Fig 3 nanowire device 310, [0052]); wherein the light emitting device (Fig 3 nanowire device, [0052]) is operable for emitting light (windows are present for emitting light, [0054]).
Mi fails to teach an AlGaN layer having a second dopant type disposed on a top one of the plurality of aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN) barrier layers; and a conformal passivation layer formed by atomic layer deposition (ALD) between the plurality of nanowires, wherein the LED has an external quantum efficiency (EOE) greater than 5%, and wherein the LED is in the range of 1-10 micrometers in lateral dimension.
Regarding, a AlGaN layer having a second dopant type disposed on a top one of the plurality of aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN) barrier layers. Mi2 teaches a AlGaN layer (Fig 28 AlGaN EBL) having a second dopant type (p-doped,[0161]; Fig 28 bottom of nanowire is n-doped GaN; same structure as in Fig 26,[0160] and [0151]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been able to modify the nanowire of Mi by adding the AlGaN EBL of Mi2 with a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a structure with a AlGaN layer having a second dopant type disposed on a top one of the plurality of aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN) barrier layers. This would aid in controlling electron leakage ([0160]). MPEP 2143(I)(G)
Regarding a conformal passivation layer formed by atomic layer deposition (ALD) between the plurality of nanowires. The limitation formed by atomic layer deposition (ALD) in line 10 is a process, and the claim is directed to a product. It has been held that a product-by-process claim is directed to the product per se, regardless of how the product is actually made. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964 (CAFC, 1985) and the related case law cited therein make it clear that it is the final product which must determine patentability in a product-by-process claim, and not the process by which it is made. Further, an old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in a product-by-process claim or not. As stated in In re Thorpe, even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. In re Brown, 459 F.2d 531, 535, 173 USPQ 685, 688 (CCPA 1972); In re Pilkington, 411 F.2d 1345, 162 USPQ 145 (CCPA 1969); Buono v. Yankee Maid Dress Corp., 77 F.2d 274, 279, 26, USPQ 57, 61 (2d. Cir 1935) Perdue Pharma v. Epic Pharma, App. No. 2014-1294 (Fed. Cir. 2016);
In this claim, the claimed process step “formed by atomic layer deposition (ALD)” has not been given any patentable weight because it is a product–by-process limitation, and the claim as a whole is directed to a product. See In re Hirao, 190 USPQ 15 at 17 (footnote 3). See also In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685; In re Luck, 177 USPQ 523; In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324; In re Avery, 186 USPQ 161; In re Marosi et al., 218 USPQ 289, all of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the final product per se which must be determined in a product-by-process claim, and not the patentability of the process, and that old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in “product-by-process” claim or not.
Regarding the LED has an external quantum efficiency (EOE) greater than 5%. Mi recognizes quantum efficiency is affected by defects and recombination ([0003]). The EQE is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the fabrication of the nanowires to improve the quality of the nanowires, as Mi has identified the defects, recombination, and carrier injection efficiency as a result-effective variable. Further, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at an EQE of greater than 5%. MPEP 2144.05
Further, the Applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed EQE is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the claimed invention would not work without the EQE being over 5%)
Regarding the LED is in the range of 1-10 micrometers in lateral dimension. Mi fails to teach the LED is in the range of 1-10 micrometers in lateral dimension. Brick teaches that µ-LED’s have dimensions in the range of 1-10 µm ([0058]). This size allows for a high density with a small pitch, thus allowing for use in small displays for AR applications ([0058]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have modified the nanowire device of Mi to have the dimensions of a µ-LED taught by Brick to allow for usage in small displays with a reasonable expectation of success. Further, Brick teaches that the active layers, the layer in which charge carriers recombine, can comprise multi-quantum wells ([0015]).
With regards to the nitrogen-polar (N-polar) facet, Auzelle teaches a Ga-polar facet nanowire has a pencil-like shape and a N-polar facet nanowire has the shape of a hexagonal prism with a flat facet at top (Introduction). Mi shows the nanowire having the shape of a hexagonal prism with a flat facet at the top (Fig 1). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have known to grow nanowires with a N-polar facet to arrive at a structure similar to Mi. Further, it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that N-polar nanowires grow faster than Ga-polar nanowires (NIST article). This would improve manufacturing time. MPEP 2143(I)(G)
Regarding claim 22, Mi as modified in claim 18 teaches each of the plurality of nanowires (Mi: Fig 3 nanowire device 310, [0052]) further comprises: a AlGaN shell (Mi: Fig 1 quantum shell structure 140, [0044]) surrounding a plurality of InGaN quantum well layers (Mi: Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]).
Regarding claim 23, Mi as modified in claim 22 teaches, wherein the plurality of InGaN quantum well layers (Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]) comprise polar c-plane InGaN quantum well layers (Fig 1 InGaN, quantum core structure 120, [0044]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mi et. al. (US 20190148583 A1), hereinafter Mi, in view Mi et. al. (US 20120205613 A1), hereinafter Mi2, in further view of Brick et. al. (US 20210082886 A1), hereinafter Brick, in further view of Yang et. al. (“Improvement in Electrical and Optical Performances of GaN-Based LED With SiO2/Al2O3 Double Dielectric Stack Layer,” IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol 33; 4, 2012), hereinafter Yang, with support from Auzelle et. al. (“Tuning the orientation of the top-facets of GaN nanowires in molecular beam epitaxy by thermal decomposition,” Phys. Rev. Materials 3, 013402, 2019), hereinafter Auzelle and NIST (“GaN Nanowires: Knowing Which End Is Up,” https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2015/09/gan-nanowires-knowing-which-end, 2015).
Regarding claim 19, Mi as modified in claim 18 fails to teach the conformal passivation layer comprises Al203.
However, Yang teaches the conformal passivation layer (Al2O3 passivated LED, [Device fabrication] corresponds to Mi: Fig 3 optically transmissive layer 345, [0054]) comprises Al203 ([Device fabrication]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mi, Mi2, and Brick to incorporate the teachings of Yang by having the conformal passivation layer comprising Al203. This would reduce the current leakage ([abstract]).
Regarding claim 20, Mi as modified in claim 18 fails to teach the conformal passivation layer comprises an oxide.
However, Yang teaches the conformal passivation layer (Al2O3 passivated LED, [Device fabrication] corresponds to Mi: Fig 3 optically transmissive layer 345, [0054]) comprises an oxide (Al2O3, [Device fabrication]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mi, Mi2, and Brick to incorporate the teachings of Yang by having the conformal passivation layer comprising an oxide. This would reduce the current leakage ([abstract]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mi et. al. (US 20190148583 A1), hereinafter Mi, in view of Mi et. al. (US 20120205613 A1), hereinafter Mi2, in further view of Brick et. al. (US 20210082886 A1), hereinafter Brick, in further view of Chowdury et. al. (US 20190013440 A1), hereinafter Chowdury, with supporting evidence from Liu et. al. (WO 2021168098 A1), hereinafter Liu.
Mi as modified in claim 18 fails to teach each nanowire further comprises: a first GaN tunnel junction layer having the second dopant type disposed on top of the AIGaN layer; a second GaN tunnel junction layer having the first dopant type disposed on top of the first GaN tunnel junction layer; and a GaN layer having a second dopant type disposed on top of the second GaN tunnel junction layer.
However, Chowdury teaches each nanowire (Fig 9 nanowire 900, [0045] corresponds to Mi: Fig 3 nanowire device 310, [0052]) further comprises: a first GaN tunnel junction layer (Fig 9 layers of tunnel junction 905 not shown, [0045]; first layer heavily doped n-type GaN, [0045]); a second GaN tunnel junction layer (Fig 9 layers of tunnel junction 905 not shown, [0045]; second layer heavily doped p-type GaN, [0045]) disposed on top of the first GaN tunnel junction layer (Fig 9 layers of tunnel junction 905 not shown, [0045]; first layer heavily doped n-type GaN, [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mi, Mi2, and Brick to incorporate the teachings of Chowdury by having a tunnel junction within each nanowire. This would improve the efficiency of the nanowires ([0045]).
Regarding the choice of placing the tunnel junction between the AlGaN layer and a GaN top laeyer, this particular location would have been obvious to try. As stated above, Chowdury shows there was a known need in the display arts to place a tunnel junction in the nanowire, in order to improve efficiency. In pursuing this arrangement in the device of Mi, there are only three locations for the tunnel junction to achieve this result: in the first semiconductor region 110, between the AlGaN from Mi2 and the second semiconductor region 150, or in the second semiconductor region 150. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the improved efficiency would be achieved equally, regardless of which of these three locations is chosen. That is, "a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421.
In pursuing the arrangement, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize the dopants of the first and second tunnel layers would have to change depending on where the tunnel junction layers are placed. That is, the first layer of the tunnel junction is the same charge type as the layer it is disposed on top of and the second layer of the tunnel junction is the same charge type as the layer is it under. In the case of Chowdury, the first layer of the tunnel junction is doped with a n-type dopant and the second layer of the tunnel junction has a p-type dopant. Using Liu as an example, the first layer is doped with a p-type dopant and the second layer of the tunnel junction is doped with a n-type dopant. Examiner notes Liu is being referred to show the level of one of ordinary skill in the art around the effective filing date of the claimed invention and not as prior art. That is, “References which do not qualify as prior art because they postdate the claimed invention may be relied upon to show the level of ordinary skill in the art at or around the relevant time. See Ex parte Erlich, 22 USPQ2d 1463 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992).” MPEP 2144
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section on beginning on page 7, filed August 28, 2025, with respect to Mi not teaching the axial heterostructure in the amended claim 1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendments do not preclude the shell structure in a radial direction. The limitation as amended claims an axial heterostructure disposed on a (N-polar) GaN layer is sufficiently met by the core structure with layers 120 and 130 of Mi. The alternating stacking of InGaN 120 and AlGaN 130 of the core heterostructure are formed/arranged in an axial direction. The shell 140 structure is formed in a radial direction around the core to produce the core-shell structure. The remainder of the arguments with reference to the additional prior art not teaching the axial structure do not detract from Examiner’s position.
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section on beginning on page 10, filed August 28, 2025, with respect to Mi not teaching the axial heterostructure in the amended claim 18, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Similar to claim 1, Applicant’s amendments do not preclude the shell structure in a radial direction. The limitation as amended claims an axial heterostructure disposed on a (N-polar) GaN layer is sufficiently met by the core structure with layers 120 and 130 of Mi. The alternating stacking of InGaN 120 and AlGaN 130 of the core heterostructure are formed/arranged in an axial direction. The shell 140 structure is formed in a radial direction around the core to produce the core-shell structure. The remainder of the arguments with reference to the additional prior art not teaching the axial structure do not detract from Examiner’s position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN L LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm (ET).
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, STEVEN GAUTHIER can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/ALVIN L LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813