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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges the amending of claims 1 and 22-23.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Examiner notes the IDS of 06/12/2026 have been considered.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner notes that the Applicant’s arguments correspond to those arguments filed in the After Final response of 05/11/2026. These arguments were answered in the Advisory action of 05/27/2026. The Examiner responds similarly as before.
It is noted that the current claim amendments are written in a manner which continues to be read on by the Galler reference. Namely, the claim outlines current being injected into the carrier generation region which is shown in figure 3 by #318a/b entering #303/307 from an external connection of an anode and a cathode (necessarily present to account for the electrical pumping [0061] and the depicted flow of carriers #318a/b) and there being no direct electrical contact for injecting current into the carrier recombination which is shown by #305 and the fact that #305 is devoid of any “direct electrical contact” structure (i.e. there are no electrodes disposed directly on #305).
The Examiner again suggests the Applicant consider outlining more structural features associated with the device as shown in Applicant’s figures 2-4 to more clearly distinguish from Galler.
Claim Interpretation
For purposes of examination, “relatively narrow” and “relatively wide” in claim 1 are interpreted as being relative to each other.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous 112 rejections are withdrawn due to the current amendments (and those of 05/11/2026).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galler et al. (WO 2014/048792; see previously included English translation for citations) in view of Furuta et al. (JP 2015-207584).
With respect to claim 1, Galler discloses a device (fig.3), comprising: a Group-III nitride light emitting device ([0057]) comprised of an externally electrically driven ([0061]), relatively narrow band gap carrier generation region (fig.3 #303/307) separated from a relatively wide band gap carrier recombination region (fig.3 #305) that utilizes scattering of hot carriers generated by Auger recombination ([0062]) in the externally electrically-driven ([0061]), relatively narrow band gap carrier generation region (fig.3 #303/307) into the relatively wide band gap carrier recombination region (fig.3 #305), such that currents (fig.3 see #318a/b) are injected into the externally electrically-driven ([0061]), relatively narrow band gap carrier generation region from anode (fig.3 to right of p side #309) and cathode (fig.3 to left of n side #309) electrodes (necessarily present to account for the electrical pumping [0061] and the depicted flow of carriers #318a/b), but there is no direct electrical contact for injecting currents into layers (note [0025, 26, 42, 43] state there can be multiples of #305) of the relatively wide band gap carrier recombination region (no electrical contact, i.e. electrode(s), directly on layer #305), and the relatively wide band gap carrier recombination region is internally electrically injected by the hot carriers generated in the externally electrically-driven relatively narrow band gap carrier generation region ([0061-62]). Galler further teaches the electrons generated by Auger recombination to be injected to the central well (fig.3 #319 into #305) via passing through an intervening layer (fig.3 e.g. left side #315). Galler does not teach the intervening layer to be a scattering layer that scatters the carriers to the central well. Furuta teaches a laser device (abstract) which includes an intervening layer (fig.2 #21) which is used to scatter electrons (“The transport of electrons in the miniband MB of the electron injection layer 21 is determined by processes such as electron-electron scattering, acoustic phonon scattering, and optical phonon scattering.”; “On the other hand, when the level interval in the miniband MB is smaller than the LO phonon energy, it is preferable that the level wave function exists over at least three quantum well layers in the miniband MB. As a result, electrons can immediately exist in the plurality of well layers and can be efficiently transported by electron-electron scattering.”) into the well (fig.2 #20). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the intervening layer of Galler to be of a scattering type as taught by Furuta in order to inject the Auger generated electrons at high speed and high efficiency into the central well (Furuta, “Thereby, electrons can be injected at high speed and high efficiency into the excitation level Le in the active layer 20 through relaxation in the miniband MB.”).
With respect to claim 2, Galler further teaches the Group-III nitride light emitting device generates incoherent or coherent light ([0062] understood to be incoherent).
With respect to claim 8, Galler further teaches the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates a p-type AlGaN layer (fig.3 #311x2) to generate hot carriers via trap-assisted Auger recombination (necessarily provides a means to generate hot carriers via trap-assisted Auger combination due to inherent defects and the interfaces with the other layers).
With respect to claim 16, Galler further teaches the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates low-dimensional Group-III nitride structures for generating the hot carriers, including quantum wells ([0061-62] generated in wells), quantum dots or quantum disks.
With respect to claim 20, Galler, as modified, teaches the light emitter outlined above, but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device further comprises monolithic arrays of Auger-pumped light-emitting diodes or laser diodes operating independently or coherently coupled. The Examiner takes Official notice that use of independently operating light emitter arrays are known and used for producing high power/light output. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the single device of Galler to make use of multiple, independent, duplicate copies of the device to create an array of light emitters to produce more light (see also MPEP 2144.04 VI B).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galler and Furuta in view of Espenlaub et al. (“Auger-generated hot carrier current in photo-excited forward biased single quantum well blue light emitting diodes”; Applicant submitted prior art).
With respect to claim 3, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, including the use of III nitride template layers (fig.3) grown atop each other, but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device is comprised of a bulk Group-III nitride substrate of polar, semipolar or nonpolar orientation, or of Group-III nitride template layers grown on a substrate other than a Group-III nitride substrate. Espenlaub teaches a related III nitride light emitter (fig.2) which makes use of III nitride template layers grown on a substrate other than a group III nitride (fig.2 Sapphire). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to make use of Sapphire for a growth substrate for the layers of Galler as demonstrated by Espenlaub in order to provide a material with sufficiently close lattice constant to that of GaN to create a low defect device (see also MPEP 2144.07).
Claim(s) 4, 13, 15 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galler and Furuta in view of Iwase et al. (US 5173912).
With respect to claim 4, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates graded composition layers to redirect the scattered hot carriers into the relatively wide gap carrier recombination region. Iwase teaches a related semiconductor light emitter (abstract) which makes use of capturing Auger hot carriers which have been generated in a lower bandgap well within a wider bandgap well (col.2 lines 11-24, 59-61; fig.2 Auger generating in #31 with capture in wider bandgap #32, col.4 lines 60-64) and further teaches use of step type composition layers (fig.2 #34/35) with suggestion of continuously varying the composition (col.4 lines 32-34) which is equivalent to grading. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to incorporate graded layers as suggested by Iwase in order to create a GRIN-SCH structure (Iwase, col.4 line 19) to control refractive index and carrier injection.
Note the graded composition layers would redirect the scattered hot carriers into the relatively wide gap carrier recombination region based on the changing composition within the layers.
With respect to claim 13, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, including contacts (necessarily present to enable electrical injection), but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates at least one lateral contact structure to inject at least one carrier type into the carrier generation region. Iwase further teaches an electrical contact structure (fig.1 #80 + electrode, col.5 lines 29-30) for injecting carriers which extends on left/right lateral sides of the upper surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to make use of a at least one lateral contact structure to inject at least one carrier type into the carrier generation region as demonstrated by Iwase in order to enable efficient injection of carriers as needed for the electrical injection operation taught by Galler.
With respect to claim 15, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates defects or multiple interfaces such as superlattices that enhance the scattering of the hot carriers. Iwase further teaches use of step type composition layers (fig.2 #34/35) with multiple interfaces. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to incorporate step type layers as suggested by Iwase in order to create a GRIN-SCH structure (Iwase, col.4 line 19) to control refractive index and carrier injection.
Note the stepped layers would necessarily enhance the scattered hot carriers based on the interfaces between the layers.
With respect to claim 21, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device provides access to one or more lateral contact layers for deposition of anode and/or cathode electrodes, based on selective area growth. Iwase further teaches an electrical contact structure (fig.1 #80 + electrode, col.5 lines 29-30) for injecting carriers which extends on left/right lateral sides of the upper surface. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to make use of a at least one lateral contact structure for depositing an electrode to inject at least one carrier type into the carrier generation region as demonstrated by Iwase in order to enable efficient injection of carriers as needed for the electrical injection operation taught by Galler.
Note that “based on selective are growth” is understood to be a product-by-process term, not found to structurally limit the device (see MPEP 2113).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galler and Furuta in view of Kano et al. (US 8334577).
With respect to claim 10, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above, including cladding layers (fig.3 #309 n/p) and a single active region (fig.3 #303-307), but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates Group-III nitride waveguide and cladding layers to provide transverse optical confinement of a lasing optical mode, using step-index or graded-index layers, wherein the Group-III nitride waveguide and cladding layers operate on a fundamental even-symmetry transverse mode with a single active region or a higher order odd-symmetry transverse mode with a null at the carrier generation region when multiple active regions are disposed on either side of the carrier generation region. Kano teaches a related semiconductor light emitter which includes claddings and waveguides (fig.8 clads #32/36, waveguides #33/35) and used to provide transverse optical confinement of a lasing optical mode, using step-index or graded-index layers, wherein the Group-III nitride waveguide and cladding layers operate on a fundamental even-symmetry transverse mode with a single active region (fig.8 active #34; col.16 line 14-16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to make use of waveguides, along with the existing clads, to realize fundamental even-symmetry transverse mode as demonstrated by Kano in order to control the shape of the output light.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galler and Furuta in view of Kozaki et al. (US 7496124).
With respect to claim 11, Galler, as modified, teaches the device outlined above including an active region (fig.3 #303-307), but does not teach the Group-III nitride light emitting device incorporates Group-III nitride waveguide layers disposed asymmetrically about the active region. Kozaki teaches a semiconductor light emitter (abstract) which includes III-nitride waveguides (fig.17 #107/110) disposed asymmetrically about the active region (fig.17 #108; col.16 lines 63-66). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the instant application to adapt the device of Galler to make use of III nitride waveguides asymmetrically about the active region as demonstrated by Kozaki in order to control the shape/position of the produced light.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please see the pto892 form for a list of related art.
Note US 5173912 and Espenlaub, both outlined above, are found to teach at least claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOD THOMAS VAN ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-8447. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-430PM.
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 unsuccessfull, 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.
/TOD T VAN ROY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights