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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/17/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 02/17/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 2 and 4-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1:
The amendment to this claim removes the limitation requiring, “a projection…on said substrate is rectangular-like in shape”, which is supported the specification as originally filed; However, amended claim 1 now recites, “a projection…on said substrate is elliptical-like in shape”, which is not disclosed in the current specification. Furthermore, the word “ellipse” is disclosed in two paragraphs, [0055] and [0088], of the printed publication US2023/0033196A1. Specifically, the current specification discloses in paragraph [0055], “One of the first arc side L1 and the second arc side L3 may be a portion of a circumference of a circle or an ellipse…”, and in paragraph [0088], “…the projection of one of the first contact electrode 510 and the second contact electrode 520 on the substrate 100 has the shape of a circle or an ellipse…” Therefore, the specification as originally filed does not disclose, or support, “wherein a projection…on said substrate is elliptical-like in shape…”
The specification discloses that a projection of one of the first and second contact electrodes (510, 520) may have the shape of an ellipse, which is very different from a shape that is elliptical-like, especially because subsequent limitations in amended claim 1 require first and second linear sides, a midpoint and two endpoints of the “elliptical-like” shape. In other words, the specification discloses the projection on the substrate may be an ellipse, and it is well known that an ellipse does not have linear sides, a midpoint or any endpoints, i.e., an ellipse comprises a center, vertices, co-vertices, etc. Furthermore, in paragraph [0091], a brief description of Fig. 7B is disclosed, wherein each of the first linear side and the second linear side of the projection of the second contact electrode 520 is slightly curved, and there are no further descriptions, e.g., there is no disclosure of a midpoint, two endpoints, or linear sides with projection(s) being arcs, wherein such disclosure is a critical requirement to provide proper support for the amended claim language.
In sum, claim 1 contains new matter not supported by the specification as originally filed. Furthermore, because an ellipse does not have linear sides, a midpoint, or endpoints, for the purpose of examination, the currently claimed “elliptical-like” shape is considered to be no different from a shape that is “rectangular-like”, and the claimed linear sides having projections that are “arcs” with a “midpoint” and “two endpoints” are considered to be no different from the linear sides of a “rectangular-like” projection, wherein the linear sides are slightly “curved” and any two points on a linear side can be chosen as endpoints with a midpoint between the chosen endpoints.
Regarding claims 2 and 4-27:
These claims depend from independent claim 1; accordingly, they contain new matter.
PNG
media_image1.png
928
839
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
753
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-13 and 23-27 (all as interpreted/understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cha et al. (US 2022/0093825 A1; hereinafter, “Cha”, prior art of record).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 14-13 and 23-27 (all as interpreted/understood):
re claim 1, Cha discloses a light-emitting diode (Figs. 3B, 4A and 4B), comprising:
a substrate 121 (Fig. 3b and [0068]);
light-emitting unit 21/23/25 (Figs. 3B, 4A, 4B and [0097]) including a. first conductivity type semiconductor layer 21 [0097], a light- emitting layer 23 [0097], and a second conductivity type semiconductor layer 25 [0097] that are disposed on said substrate 121 (Fig. 3B) in such order, a part of said first conductivity type semiconductor layer 21 (Fig. 4B) being exposed from said light-emitting layer 23 and said second conductivity type semiconductor layer 25;
an insulating layer 59 (Fig. 4B [0097]) disposed on said light-emitting unit 21/23/25, and having a first through hole (see “first through hole” in Exhibit A above) and a second through hole (see “second through hole” in Exhibit A above) that penetrate said insulating layer 59;
a first contact electrode 61 (see “first contact electrode” in Exhibit A and [0097]) passing through said first through hole to be electrically connected to said exposed first conductivity type semiconductor layer 21 (Exhibit A); and
a second contact electrode 63 (see “second contact electrode” in Exhibit A and [0097]) passing through said second through hole to be electrically connected to said second conductivity type semiconductor layer 25 (Exhibit A),
wherein a projection of one of said first contact electrode and said second contact electrode (see projection of “second contact electrode” in Exhibit A) on said substrate 121 (Fig. 3B) is elliptical-like in shape, and has a first arc side L1 (see “L1” in Exhibit A) and a second arc side L3 (see “L3” in Exhibit A) that are opposite to each other,
wherein the projection of the one of said first contact electrode and said second contact electrode on said substrate further has a first linear side L2 (see “L2” in Exhibit A) and a second linear side L4 (see “L4” in Exhibit A) that are opposite to each other, said first arc side L1, said first linear side L2, said second arc side L3, and said second linear side L4 being connected in such order in a clockwise direction so as to form a closed curved shape;
wherein each of said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 of the projection of the one of said first contact electrode and said second contact electrode on said substrate is slightly curved (see “slightly curved” portion of the first linear side “L2” in Exhibit A),
wherein, for the one of said first contact electrode and said second contact electrode, said first linear side L2 (Exhibit A) and said second linear side L4 (Exhibit A) of the projection are arcs which respectively extend from a midpoint (e.g., see “midpoint of arcs” and “x1” in Exhibit A) of said first linear side L2 to two endpoints (see “endpoints of arcs” in Exhibit A) of said first linear side L2 and a midpoint (e.g., see “midpoint of arcs” and “x2” in Exhibit A) of said second linear side L4 to two endpoints (e.g., see “endpoints of arcs” in Exhibit A) of said second linear side L4, the two endpoints of the each of said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 of the projection being directly connected to said first arc side L1 and said second arc side L3, respectively, and
wherein, for the one of said first contact electrode and said second electrode, a distance between said first linear side L2 (see Exhibit B) and said second linear side L4 of the projection gradually decreases from a distance between the midpoint x1 (Exhibit B) of said first linear side L2 and the midpoint x2 (Exhibit B) of said second linear side L4 to distances respectively between endpoints of said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 (see Exhibit B, “a distance between L2 and L4 gradually decreases…”).
re claim 2, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, further comprising a metal layer 27 (Fig. Fig. 4B and [0112]) that is disposed between said insulating layer 59 (Fig. 4B) and said light-emitting unit 21/23/25;
re claim 4, the light-emitting diode of claim 3, wherein said first arc side L1 (Exhibit A) and said second arc side L3 are symmetrical with each other, and said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L3 are symmetrical with each other (i.e., in Fig. 4A and Exhibit A, the “second contact electrode” is symmetrical with respect to its horizontal and vertical centers);
re claim 5, the light-emitting diode of claim 4, wherein a distance (a) (see “a” in Exhibit A) between said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 is no greater than a length (b) (see “b” in Exhibit A) of each of said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 (i.e., Exhibit A, “the second contact electrode” is longer in a vertical direction than in a horizontal direction);
re claim 6, the light-emitting diode of claim 5, wherein each of said first arc side L1 (Exhibit A) and said second are side L3 is a portion of a circumference of a circle having a radius (r) (see “r” in Exhibit A), a:b ranging from 1:1 to 1:5, a:r ranging from 1:0.5 to 1:2 (i.e., relative dimensions shown in Exhibit A disclose the claimed ratios, i.e., side “b” is greater than side “a” but not more than 5 times greater; and radius “r” is at least half of length “a” but not more than 2 times greater, i.e., “Circle with radius (r)” has a diameter at least equal to length “a”);
re claim 7, the light-emitting diode of claim 3, wherein one of said first contact electrode 61 (Exhibit A) and said second contact electrode 63 (Exhibit A) includes an elliptical body portion having two opposite side faces that respectively correspond to said first linear side L2 and said second linear side L4 of said projection, one of said side faces (e.g. the left, vertical side of “63”) of said elliptical body portion being located proximate to and facing the other one of said first contact electrode 61 (Exhibit A) and said second contact electrode (see projection of “second contact electrode” in Exhibit A);
re claim 8, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, further comprising a current spreading layer 27 (Exhibit A and [0112]) that is disposed between said second conductivity type semiconductor layer 25 and said insulating layer 29, said second contact electrode (“second contact electrode” in Exhibit A) being electrically connected to said second conductivity type semiconductor layer 25 through said current spreading layer 27 (Exhibit A and [0112], wherein layer 27 may be ITO, which is a common material for a current spreading layer; and layer 27 covers most of the second semiconductor layer 25; accordingly, layer 27 would spread current evenly from the second contact electrode 33);
re claim 9, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a ratio of an area of the projection to an area of a projection of said light-emitting layer on said substrate ranges from 9% to 30% (see Exhibit A, ““an area” of the projection” and ““an area” of a projection of the light-emitting area “23””, wherein an area of the projection is 25% of an area of a projection of the light-emitting layer 23);
re claim 10, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein projections of said first contact electrode (see “first contact electrode” in Exhibit A) and said second contact electrode (see “second contact electrode” in Exhibit A) are both elliptical-like in shape (i.e., projections of outermost edges of 61 and 63 are both elliptical-like in shape), and a ratio of an area of each of the projections of said first contact electrode 61 and said second contact electrode 63 on said substrate to an area of a projection of said light-emitting layer 23 on said substrate ranges from 9% to 30% (i.e., with respect to this claim, in Exhibit A, the areas chosen for ““an area” of the projection” and ““an area” of a projection of the light-emitting area “23”” would be reversed such that the single rectangle is “an area” of electrode 31 and the combination of four rectangles is “an area” of electrode 63);
re claims 11-13, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a shape of said first contact electrode (see “first contact electrode” in Exhibit A) is in correspondence with that of said first through hole (see “first through hole” in Exhibit A), and a shape of said second contact electrode (see “second contact electrode” in Exhibit A) is in correspondence with that of said second through hole (see “first through hole” in Exhibit A, i.e., each of the first and second contact electrodes has a shape that corresponds to each of the first and second through holes, respectively);
re claims 23-24, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein said insulating layer 59 (Fig. 4B and [0115]) comprising multiple insulating layers having different refractive indices to provide a DBR; and layer 59 comprises at least two types of insulating layers such as silicon oxide, silicon nitride, titanium oxide, etc. [0115]. Furthermore, Cha discloses tapered through holes in the multilayer insulating layer 59; accordingly, the at least two types of insulating layers are readily stacked having etching rates that decrease in a direction from the substrate to the insulating layer 59 in order to obtain a desired taper for the openings;
re claims 25 and 26, A light-emitting module 1000 (Fig. 2A and [0019]) comprising the light-emitting diode as claimed in claim 1; and a display device 10000 (Fig. 1A and [0053]), comprising the light-emitting module 1000 as claimed in claim 25; and
re claim 27, the light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein each of said first linear side L2 (Exhibit A and Exhibit B) and said second linear side L4 of the projection of the one of said first contact electrode and said second contact electrode on said substrate is slightly convex (i.e., each projection is slightly convex because convex/concave depends on some chosen point of reference).
Therefore, Cha anticipates claims 1, 2, 4-13 and 23-27,
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.
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 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha in view of Ma (US 2018/0069062 A, prior art of record).
Regarding claims 14-16:
Cha anticipates claim 1 and discloses each of said first through hole (Exhibit A) and said second through hole (Exhibit A) has a top opening away from said light-emitting unit, and a bottom opening opposite to said top opening and adjacent to said light-emitting unit, for said first through hole, a ratio of a width of said top opening to a width of said bottom opening [is tapered] opening of said second through hole to a width of said bottom opening of said second through hole [is tapered]
Cha does not disclose a ratio ranging from 1.3 to 1.7, however, Cha discloses (in Fig. 4B and [0115]) an insulating layer 59 have a tapered sidewall, wherein the insulating layer 59 comprises multiple insulating layers having different refractive indices to provide a distributed Bragg reflector. Cha’s Fig. 4B shows the multilayered insulating layer 59 with tapered openings having a ratio slightly under 1.3.
Ma teaches (in Fig. 5 and [0041 and 0045]) an insulating layer 40 having multiple tapers such that an optical waveguide-like effect can be achieved in order to allow obliquely angled light to exit from a side surface of the opening. Ma’s Fig. 5 shows the insulating layer 40 having an angle (θ1) such that a ratio of about 1.7 is acquired.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Cha by incorporating tapered sidewalls for each of the first and second through holes, wherein a ratio for the tapered holes ranges from 1.3 to 1.7 because Ma teaches that such a modification could provide an insulating layer that provides a waveguide-like effect.
Regarding claims 17-19:
Cha anticipates claim 1 and discloses each of said first through hole and said second through hole has tapered sidewalls (Exhibit A); however, Cha does not disclose an included angle ranging from 10° to 45°.
Ma teaches (in Fig. 5 and [0041 and 0045]) an insulating layer 40 having multiple tapers such that an optical waveguide-like effect can be achieved in order to allow obliquely angled light to exit from a side surface of the opening. Ma’s Fig. 5 shows the insulating layer 40 having an angle (θ1) with an included angle in a range from 10° to 45°.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Cha by incorporating tapered sidewalls with an included angle in a range from 10° to 45°, as taught by Ma, because such a modification would provide an insulating layer having a waveguide-like effect.
Claims 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha in view of Sakamoto (US 2018/0301665 A1, prior art of record).
Regarding claims 20-22:
Cha anticipates claim 1 and discloses each of said first through hole and said second through hole has tapered sidewalls; however, Char does not disclose each of the first and second through holes has an included angle decreasing in a direction from said substrate to said insulating layer and ranging from 20° to 70°.
Sakamoto teaches an insulating layer 109 (Fig. 4 and [0069]) for a light-emitting layer having an included angle decreasing in a direction from a substrate to the insulating layer. Sakamoto shows (in Fig. 4) an included angle of a hole-defining wall in a range from at least 20° to 70°; and Sakamoto discloses the included angle allows obliquely emitted light to exit close to a perpendicular direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Cha by incorporating through holes having decreasing included angles because Sakamoto teaches such a structure could allow obliquely emitted light to exit close to a perpendicular direction, thus increasing an amount of light emitted in a front direction and improving light utilization efficiency [0069].
Remarks
Applicant’s remarks have been carefully reviewed and considered, however, the amendment to the claims are considered to introduce new matter not supported by the specification as originally filed. As stated hereinbefore, the specification does not disclose a projection of one of the first and second contact electrodes on the substrate being elliptical-like in shape, but rather, the specification discloses the projection may be an ellipse. The difference(s) between a projection that is an ellipse and one that is elliptical-like is(are) crucial to the claim limitations and to determining the patentability of the claims. Because the specification, as originally filed, does not disclose or explain what would be linear sides of an elliptical-like shape, wherein such linear sides have two end points and a midpoint, the amended claims contain new matter, especially because it does not appear that an ellipse or elliptical-like projection would have linear sides comprising endpoints and a midpoint. In sum, applicant’s remarks are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEX H MALSAWMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (4-12 Hours, between 5:30AM-10PM).
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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.
/LEX H MALSAWMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892