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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 21, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that the amendments put the claims in a state of allowance. Examiner disagrees. Regarding Claim 1 Kuramoto teaches a partition wall that is made of insulating material that is used to contain the light within the optical cavity. By adding this material to the partition wall on the partition wall is formed of insulting material. Regarding Claim 10 applicant merely added the limitations found in Claim 11 to Claim 10 without including the limitation of the partition wall being made of insulating material. As such Claim 10 is not in a state for allowance. For the given reasons Examiner does not find the claims in a state of allowance.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7 are rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Hamaguchi et al. WO 2019124163.in view of Kuramoto et al. US 20170346258.
Regarding Claim 1, Hamaguchi teaches A light emitting element (Fig. 14) comprising:
a stacked structure (Fig. 14, 20) in which a first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14, 21) having a first surface (Fig. 14, 21a) and a second surface opposing the first surface (Fig. 14, 21b which is shown to be opposite of 21a), an active layer (Fig. 14, 23) facing the second surface of the first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows the active layer facing 21b), and a second compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14, 22) having a first surface (Fig. 14, 22a) facing the active layer (Fig. 14 shows the first surface facing the active layer) and a second surface (Fig. 14, 22b) opposing the first surface are stacked (Fig. 14 show the second surface opposing the first surface);
a first light reflecting layer (Fig. 14, 41) formed on a first surface side of the first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows that 41 is on the first surface of the first compound) and having a convex shape in a direction away from the active layer (Fig. 14 shows that 41 has a convex shape that is in a direction away from the active layer); and
a second light reflecting layer (Fig. 14, 42) formed on a second surface side of the second compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows 42 is on the second surface of the second compound semiconductor layer) and having a flat shape (Fig. 14 shows that 42 has a flat shape),
wherein a partition wall (Fig. 14, 131 Page 35 Paragraph 5 “the first electrode 131”) extending in a stacking direction (The stacking direction is the vertical direction of Fig. 14) of the stacked structure is formed (Fig. 14 shows 131 extends in the stacking direction) so as to surround the first light reflecting layer. (Page 35 Paragraph 6 “the first electrode may be formed to surround the first light reflection layer.”)
Hamaguchi does not teach the partition wall is formed of an insulating material.
However,
Kuramoto teaches the partition wall is formed of an insulating material. (Fig. 7B, 28 Paragraph 0161 “A dielectric layer 28 made of SiO2, SiN, AlN, ZrO2 Ta2O5 or the like”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified device as taught by Hamaguchi by adding the insulating material to the partition wall as disclosed by Kuramoto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to prevent light from being scattered out of the resonator. (Kuramoto Paragraph 0161 “A dielectric layer 28 made of SiO2, SiN, AlN, ZrO2 Ta2O5 or the like is formed on a side surface (side wall) 21d of the convex portion 21c, which can more reliably prevent light from being scattered out of the resonator when bouncing between the first optical reflective layer 51 and the second optical reflective layer 52.”)
Regarding Claim 2, Hamaguchi teaches the partition wall extends from the first surface side of the first compound semiconductor layer to a middle of the first compound semiconductor layer in a thickness direction in the first compound semiconductor layer. (Fig. 14 shows 131 extending from the first side surface of the first compound semiconductor layer to a middle of the first compound semiconductor layer in the thickness direction, which is the vertical direction in Fig. 14, in the first compound semiconductor layer)
Regarding Claim 4, Hamaguchi teaches the partition wall is formed using a material that does not transmit light generated in the active layer. (Page 20, Paragraph 2 “The first electrode is made of, for example, gold (Au), silver (Ag), palladium (Pd), platinum (Pt), nickel (Ni), Ti (titanium), vanadium (V), tungsten (W), chromium (Cr) A single layer construction or at least one metal (including an alloy) selected from the group consisting of Al (aluminum), Cu (copper), Zn (zinc), tin (Sn) and indium (In) It is desirable to have a multilayer structure, and specifically, for example, Ti / Au, Ti / Al, Ti / Al / Au, Ti / Pt / Au, Ni / Au, Ni / Au / Pt, Ni / Pt, Pd / Pt, Ag / Pd can be illustrated.” Page 25 Paragraph 4 teaches the wavelength is 450 nm. It is an inherent property that Aluminum is not transparent at 450nm. As such the partition wall is formed using a material that does not transmit light generated in the active layer)
Regarding Claim 5, Hamaguchi teaches the partition wall is formed using a material that reflects light generated in the active layer. (Page 20, Paragraph 2 “The first electrode is made of, for example, gold (Au), silver (Ag), palladium (Pd), platinum (Pt), nickel (Ni), Ti (titanium), vanadium (V), tungsten (W), chromium (Cr) A single layer construction or at least one metal (including an alloy) selected from the group consisting of Al (aluminum), Cu (copper), Zn (zinc), tin (Sn) and indium (In) It is desirable to have a multilayer structure, and specifically, for example, Ti / Au, Ti / Al, Ti / Al / Au, Ti / Pt / Au, Ni / Au, Ni / Au / Pt, Ni / Pt, Pd / Pt, Ag / Pd can be illustrated.” Page 25 Paragraph 4 teaches the wavelength is 450 nm. It is an inherent property that Aluminum is reflective at 450nm. As such the partition wall is formed using a material that does reflects light generated in the active layer)
Regarding Claim 6, Hamaguchi teaches 1 x 10-1 ≤ TC1/TC0 ≤ 1 x 102, where a thermal conductivity of a material forming the first compound semiconductor layer is TC1, and a thermal conductivity of a material forming the partition wall is TCo (Page 25 Paragraph 11 teaches that the first compound semiconductor layer is GaN. Page 20, Paragraph 2 teaches the partition wall is made of Aluminum. The Thermal Conductivity of GaN is 220-270 W/m*K, See pertinent art #1, and the Thermal Conductivity of Aluminum is 237, See pertinent art #2. (220-270)/237 = .928-1.139 which is within the claimed range)
Regarding Claim 7, Hamaguchi teaches | CTE0 – CTE1 | ≤ 1 x 10-4/K, where a linear expansivity of a material forming the first compound semiconductor layer is CTE, and a linear expansivity of a material forming the partition wall is CTEO. (Page 25 Paragraph 11 teaches that the first compound semiconductor layer is GaN. Page 20, Paragraph 2 teaches the partition wall is made of Aluminum. The linear expansivity of GaN is 4.261 x 10-6/K, See pertinent art #3, and the linear expansivity of Aluminum is 23.4 x 10-6/K, See pertinent art #4. |23.4 x 10-6 – 4.261 x 10-6 | = 17.939 x 10-6/K which satisfies the claimed range)
Claims 10, 12-13 are rejected as being unpatentable over 35 U.S.C. 103 over Hamaguchi in view of Hamaguchi et al. WO 2019017044 (Herein referred to as Hamaguchi 2)
Regarding Claim 10, Hamaguchi teaches A light emitting element (Fig. 14), the light emitting element including:
a stacked structure (Fig. 14, 20) in which a first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14, 21) having a first surface (Fig. 14, 21a) and a second surface opposing the first surface (Fig. 14, 21b which is shown to be opposite of 21a), an active layer (Fig. 14, 23) facing the second surface of the first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows the active layer facing 21b), and a second compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14, 22) having a first surface (Fig. 14, 22a) facing the active layer (Fig. 14 shows the first surface facing the active layer) and a second surface (Fig. 14, 22b) opposing the first surface are stacked (Fig. 14 show the second surface opposing the first surface);
a first light reflecting layer (Fig. 14, 41) formed on a first surface side of the first compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows that 41 is on the first surface of the first compound) and having a convex shape in a direction away from the active layer (Fig. 14 shows that 41 has a convex shape that is in a direction away from the active layer); and
a second light reflecting layer (Fig. 14, 42) formed on a second surface side of the second compound semiconductor layer (Fig. 14 shows 42 is on the second surface of the second compound semiconductor layer) and having a flat shape (Fig. 14 shows that 42 has a flat shape), and
a partition wall (Hamaguchi Fig. 14, 131 Page 35 Paragraph 5 “the first electrode 131”) extending in a stacking direction (The stacking direction is the vertical direction of Fig. 14 in Hamaguchi) of the stacked structure is formed (Hamaguchi Fig. 14 shows 131 extends in the stacking direction) so as to surround the first light reflecting layer. (Hamaguchi Page 35 Paragraph 6 “the first electrode may be formed to surround the first light reflection layer.”)
Hamaguchi does not teach a plurality of light emitting elements.
However,
Hamaguchi 2 teaches a plurality of light emitting elements (Title “Light Emitting Device and Light Emitting Device Array”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified device as taught by Hamaguchi by adding multiple light emitting elements as disclosed by Hamaguchi 2. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to emit light a different wavelengths from each element. (Hamaguchi 2 Page 3 Paragraph 14 “In the light emitting element array of the present disclosure, the light emitted from the light emitting element may have different wavelengths.”)
Regarding Claim 12, Modified Hamaguchi teaches wherein in each light emitting element the partition wall extends from the first surface side of the first compound semiconductor layer to a middle of the first compound semiconductor layer in a thickness direction in the first compound semiconductor layer. (Hamaguchi Fig. 14 shows 131 extending from the first side surface of the first compound semiconductor layer to a middle of the first compound semiconductor layer in the thickness direction, which is the vertical direction in Fig. 14, in the first compound semiconductor layer)
Regarding Claim 13, Modified Hamaguchi teaches a relationship between L0, L1, and L3 satisfies a following Formula (1), satisfies a following Formula (2), or satisfies the following Formulas (1) and (2):
x L0 ≤ L0 – L1 (1)
x L3 ≤ L1 (2)
where
L0: a distance from an end portion of a facing surface of the first light reflecting layer that faces the first surface of the first compound semiconductor layer to the active layer, (See annotated Fig. 14 for L0. Hamaguchi teaches the thickness of the substrate to be 0.4 mm or 400 microns Page 26 Paragraph 2. The first compound semiconductor layer has a thickness of 15 microns Page 24 Paragraph 5. The two thicknesses added together are L0 which has a total thickness of 415 microns)
L1: a distance from the active layer to an end portion of the partition wall extending to the middle of the first compound semiconductor layer in the thickness direction in the first compound semiconductor layer, and (See annotated Fig. 14 for L1. The Thickness of 71 is .02 microns Page 34 Paragraph 8. The distance between the active layer and 71 is given by the formula for LHCL found in Page 34 Paragraph 9. This formula leads to the thickness range of 165-202 nanometers (.9*2*450/2*2.45) – (1.1*2*450/2*2.45) where m is 2 as stated in Page 34 Paragraph 10. The wavelength is 450 nm as seen in Page 25 Paragraph 4 and neq is the effective index of refraction between the active layer and the first compound semiconductor layer. The neq is set to 2.45 as this is the index of refraction of GaN compared to air. Examiner has chosen this index of refraction as it is a worst-case scenario due to the fact that an effective index of refraction of the active layer would be extremely complex as it is a five-fold multiple quantum well of In0.04Ga0.96N (barrier layers) In0.16Ga0.84N (well layer). Examiner takes the position that if the calculations work for the extreme example it will work with the materials given due to the fact that InGaN has an index of refraction roughly the same as GaN. L1 a range of .185-.222 microns)
L3: a distance from an axial line of the first light reflecting layer included in the light emitting element to an orthogonal projection image of the partition wall on the stacked structure. (See annotated Fig. 14 for L3 Page 25 Paragraph 2 teaches the radius of the lens is 20 microns which is the distance from the center of the first light reflecting layer to an orthogonal projection image of the partition wall 131 which starts right next to the edge of the radius)
* 415 ≤ 415 - .222 = 4.15 ≤ 414.778 First Equation is True)
(0.01 * 20 ≤ .222 = .2 ≤ .222 Second Equation is True)
PNG
media_image1.png
757
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hiroyuki Shibata et al., High Thermal Conductivity of Gallium Nitride (GaN) Crystals Grown by HVPE Process, MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS, 2007, Volume 48, Issue 10, Pages 2782-2786, Released on J-STAGE September 25, 2007, Advance online publication September 05, 2007, Online ISSN 1347-5320, Print ISSN 1345-9678, https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.MRP2007109, https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/matertrans/48/10/48_MRP2007109/_article/-char/en,
https://web.archive.org/web/20191011073235/https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-metals-d_858.html (Year: 2019)
Wang, Kai & Reeber, Robert. (2011). Thermal expansion of GaN and AlN. MRS Proceedings. 482. 10.1557/PROC-482-863. (Year: 2011)
https://web.archive.org/web/20200807221732/https://dovermotion.com/resources/motion-control-handbook/thermal-expansion/ (Year: 2020)
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).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN SUTTON KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1859. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at 571-272-1835. 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.
/STEPHEN SUTTON KOTTER/Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828