DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the RCE filed 7 April 2026. Claims 1-20 are currently pending; claims 11 and 14-16 stand withdrawn.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive; the rejections of the claims have been modified in response to Applicant’s amendments to the claims. The amended limitations, and Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended limitations, are addressed by the modified rejections below.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0242371 A1 to Baek et al. (hereinafter “Baek”) in view of KR 20080085057 A to Windisch et al. (citations refer to the English machine translation attached herewith; hereinafter “Windisch”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Baek (Figs. 1-2) discloses a light emitting diode, comprising:
a first conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer 27 (¶ 0056) having a first refraction index n1 (¶ 0056 - e.g., GaN layer doped with Si);
a V-pit generation layer 29 (¶ 0057) disposed on the first conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer having a second refraction index n2 (¶ 0057 - e.g., GaN) and having a V-pit 29v (¶ 0058);
an active layer 30 (¶ 0064) disposed on the V-pit generation layer having a region that has a third refraction index n3 (¶ 0065 - In.sub.xAlyGa.sub.1-x-yN (0<x<1, 0≤y<1));
a second conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer 33 (¶ 0071) disposed on the active layer (Fig. 1), and
wherein n1 < n2 < n3 (refraction index is a property of the material used; Baek discloses the same materials as recited in the claim and as disclosed in the instant specification, and thus would meet this limitation).
Baek fails to expressly disclose: an upper active layer disposed on the lower active layer; an intermediate layer disposed between the lower active layer and the upper active layer; wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other. In the same field of endeavor, Windisch (Fig. 1) discloses a light emitting diode including an upper active layer 2 disposed on a lower active layer 3 (Abstract; p. 5, Mode-For-Invention, ¶ 2); an intermediate layer 4 (p. 5, Mode-For-Invention, ¶ 2) disposed between the lower active layer 3 and the upper active layer 2 (Fig. 1); wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other (p. 3, ¶ 4 – “first and second active layers generate radiation with different wavelengths”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light emitting diode of Baek to include an upper active layer and intermediate layer, wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other, as disclosed by Windisch, for the purpose of generating white light and increasing light output without increasing device footprint (p. 3, ¶ 4; p. 2, Disclosure, ¶¶ 8-9).
Regarding claim 2, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, however fail to expressly disclose: wherein the intermediate layer includes a semiconductor layer having a composition formula of In.sub.xAl.sub.yGa.sub.1-x-yN (0≤x≤1, 0≤y≤1, 0≤x y<1). Windisch does disclose various materials including In.sub.xAl.sub.yGa.sub.1-x-yN (0≤x≤1, 0≤y≤1, 0≤x y<1) as suitable for use in light emitting diode semiconductor layers (p. 5, ¶¶ 1-2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the material of Windisch in the light emitting diode of Baek for the purpose of utilizing an art recognized material known to be suitable for use in light emitting diode semiconductor layers.
Regarding claim 3, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, however fail to expressly disclose wherein the intermediate layer has a thickness of greater than 12 nm and less than or equal to 26 nm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the recited layer thickness range, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Here, the layer thickness is considered a result effective variable because it affects the performance and device dimensions of the light emitting diode. Thus the ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify the layer thickness for the purpose of adjusting the performance characteristics of the light emitting diode while conforming to sizing constraints.
Regarding claim 4, Baek (Figs. 1-2) and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, Baek discloses further wherein the upper active layer 30 includes a first well region (¶ 0065 – “first well layer portion”) disposed over a flat surface of the V-pit generation layer and a second well region (¶ 0065 – “second well layer portion) formed along an inclined surface of the V-pit 29v, and a well layer of the first well region includes a higher indium content than that of a well layer of the second well region (¶ 0065).
Windisch fails to expressly disclose: wherein the lower active layer includes a first well region disposed over a flat surface of the V-pit generation layer and a second well region formed along an inclined surface of the V-pit, and a well layer of the first well region includes a higher indium content than that of a well layer of the second well region. However, Baek discloses active layer 30 includes a first well region (¶ 0065 – “first well layer portion”) disposed over a flat surface of the V-pit generation layer and a second well region (¶ 0065 – “second well layer portion) formed along an inclined surface of the V-pit 29v, and a well layer of the first well region includes a higher indium content than that of a well layer of the second well region (¶ 0065). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the recited configuration in the lower active layer for the purpose of emitting light having at least two bands without the use of phosphor (Baek, ¶ 0066).
Regarding claim 5, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1. Windisch discloses the lower active layer emits light of a different wavelength than the upper active layer (p. 3, ¶ 4 – “first and second active layers generate radiation with different wavelengths”) however does not expressly disclose: wherein the lower active layer emits light having a wavelength shorter than that of the upper active layer, and a thickness of the intermediate layer causes an intensity of light emitted from the lower active layer to be greater than that of light emitted from the upper active layer. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide a lower active layer that emits light having a wavelength shorter than that of the upper active layer, an intensity of light emitted from the lower active layer is greater than that of light emitted from the upper active layer, since to do so is one of a finite number of configurations to provide light of differing wavelengths from multiple active layers (i.e., lower active layer emits light of either shorter or longer wavelength than upper active layer, lower active layer emits at an intensity greater or lower than that of the upper active layer) for the purpose of producing a light emitting diode emitting a desired wavelength of light (e.g., wavelength in the white color range) with a reasonable expectation of success. MPEP § 2143 (I)(E). The limitation “intermediate layer thickness causing an intensity of light emitted from the lower active layer to be greater” is met since at a given thickness, a greater thickness would impede the intensity of light emitted from the lower active layer, thus, the given (i.e., lesser) thickness would “cause” the intensity of light emitted to be greater.
Regarding claim 6, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, wherein the light emitting diode emits light having at least two peak wavelengths in a visible light region (Baek ¶¶ 0036-37), however fail to expressly disclose an intensity at a longest peak wavelength is less than an intensity at at least one other peak wavelength. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the recited intensity and wavelength relationship, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Here, the intensity of the longest peak wavelength and the relationship (i.e., less than) with the intensity of the other peak wavelength is considered a result effective variable because it affects the color of the light emitted by the light emitting diode and the overall output of the light emitting diode. Thus the ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify the intensity and wavelength relationship for the purpose of producing a light emitting diode with the desired light output and color.
Regarding claim 7, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, however fail to expressly disclose wherein a thickness of the intermediate layer causes the light emitting diode to emit light disposed within a region with color coordinates (x, y) surrounded by coordinates of four points: (0.012, 0.494), (0.2, 0.4), (0.2, 0.32), (0.04, 0.32) on a CIE 1931 color space chromaticity diagram.
Baek and Windisch each discuss modifying the color of light emitted from the light emitting diode as desired (Baek, e.g., ¶¶ 0074-75, 85; Windisch, e.g., p. 3, ¶¶ 3-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize known techniques in material choice and concentration to modify the light emitting diode of Baek and Windisch to emit light in the recited color range because said techniques would have yielded predictable results and are recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the intermediate layer of the light emitting diode of Baek and Windisch for the purpose of reducing effective resistance of the layer and increasing efficiency of the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate modification or tuning of the thickness of the intermediate layer to affect light emission of the device, thus “caus[ing] the light emitting diode to emit light” within the range as recited in the claim.
Regarding claim 8, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 1, Baek discloses further comprising: an upper step coverage layer 31 (¶ 0052) disposed between the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 33 and the upper active layer 30, wherein the upper step coverage layer includes a nitride semiconductor layer including Al (¶ 0052).
Regarding claim 9, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 8, Baek discloses further wherein the upper step coverage layer 31 (¶ 0052 - AlGaN) has a wider band gap than that of a barrier layer 30b (¶ 0067 – disclosing materials having a narrower band gap than AlGaN) of the upper active layer 30.
Regarding claim 10, Baek (Figs. 1-2) and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 8, Baek discloses further wherein the upper active layer 30 includes a first well region (¶ 0065 – “first well layer portion”) disposed over a flat surface of the V-pit generation layer and a second well region (¶ 0065 – “second well layer portion) formed along an inclined surface of the V-pit 29v, and a well layer of the first well region includes a higher indium content than that of a well layer of the second well region (¶ 0065), and indium content of the second well region causes the second well region not to emit light (this limitation is considered functional language; Baek and Windisch disclose the structure as recited in the claim as currently drafted, thus the structure of the prior art is presumed to possess the functionally defined limitation of the claimed device). MPEP § 2114 (I).
Regarding claim 12, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 8, Baek (Fig. 1) discloses further wherein the upper step coverage layer 31 includes a region disposed over the flat surface of the V-pit generation layer and an inclined region formed on the inclined surface of the V-pit 29v along the V-pit (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Baek and Windisch disclose the light emitting diode of claim 8, however fail to expressly disclose wherein the light emitting diode emits light disposed within the region with color coordinates (x, y) surrounded by coordinates of four points: (0.012, 0.494), (0.2, 0.4), (0.2, 0.32), (0.04, 0.32) on the CIE 1931 color space chromaticity diagram.
Baek and Windisch each discuss modifying the color of light emitted from the light emitting diode as desired (Baek, e.g., ¶¶ 0074-75, 85; Windisch, e.g., p. 3, ¶¶ 3-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize known techniques in material choice and concentration to modify the light emitting diode of Baek and Windisch to emit light in the recited color range because said techniques would have yielded predictable results and are recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the intermediate layer of the light emitting diode of Baek and Windisch for the purpose of reducing effective resistance of the layer and increasing efficiency of the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate modification or tuning of the thickness of the intermediate layer to affect light emission of the device, thus “caus[ing] the light emitting diode to emit light” within the range as recited in the claim.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0348567 A1 to Na et al. (hereinafter “Na”) in view of Baek and Windisch.
Regarding independent claim 17, Na (Fig. 22) discloses a light emitting device, comprising: a first lead 4 (¶ 0231) and a second lead 3 (¶ 0231); a housing 1a/5 (¶ 0228) covering the first lead and the second lead and defining a cavity (Fig. 22); and a light emitting diode 101 (¶ 0234) disposed in the cavity of the housing and electrically connected to the first and second leads (¶0232). Na does not expressly disclose the remaining limitations of the claim.
In the same field of endeavor, Baek (Figs. 1-2) discloses a light emitting diode, comprising:
a first conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer 27 (¶ 0056) having a first refraction index n1 (¶ 0056 - e.g., GaN layer doped with Si);
a V-pit generation layer 29 (¶ 0057) disposed on the first conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer having a second refraction index n2 (¶ 0057 - e.g., GaN) that has a flat surface (flat surface of 29) and having a V-pit 29v (¶ 0058) that has an inclined surface (Fig. 1 - angled surface of 29);
an active layer 30 (¶ 0064) disposed on the V-pit generation layer having a first active layer region (region of 30 disposed on flat surface of 29) disposed on the flat surface that has a third refraction index n3 (¶ 0065 - In.sub.xAlyGa.sub.1-x-yN (0<x<1, 0≤y<1) and having a second active layer region disposed on the inclined surface (region of 30 disposed on angled surface of 29);
a second conductivity type nitride semiconductor layer 33 (¶ 0071) disposed on the active layer (Fig. 1); and
wherein n1 < n2 < n3 (refraction index is a property of the material used; Baek discloses the same materials as recited in the claim and as disclosed in the instant specification, and thus would meet this limitation).
Baek and Na fail to expressly disclose: an upper active layer disposed on the lower active layer having a first upper active layer region disposed on the flat surface and a second upper active layer region disposed on the inclined surface; an intermediate layer disposed between the lower active layer and the upper active layer; wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other. In the same field of endeavor, Windisch (Fig. 1) discloses a light emitting diode including an upper active layer 2 disposed on a lower active layer 3 (Abstract; p. 5, Mode-For-Invention, ¶ 2); an intermediate layer 4 (p. 5, Mode-For-Invention, ¶ 2) disposed between the lower active layer 3 and the upper active layer 2 (Fig. 1); wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other (p. 3, ¶ 4 – “first and second active layers generate radiation with different wavelengths”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light emitting device of Na and Baek to include an upper active layer having a first upper active layer region disposed on the flat surface and a second upper active layer region disposed on the inclined surface (as disclosed by Baek, Figs. 1-2) and intermediate layer, wherein the lower active layer and the upper active layer emit light having different peak wavelengths from each other, as disclosed by Windisch, for the purpose of generating white light and increasing light output without increasing device footprint (p. 3, ¶ 4; p. 2, Disclosure, ¶¶ 8-9).
Regarding claim 18, Na, Baek, and Windisch disclose the light emitting device of claim 17, Baek discloses further comprising: an upper step coverage layer 31 (¶ 0052) disposed between the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 33 and the upper active layer 30, wherein the upper step coverage layer includes a nitride semiconductor layer including Al (¶ 0052).
Regarding claim 19, Na, Baek, and Windisch disclose the light emitting device of claim 17, however fail to expressly disclose wherein a thickness of the intermediate layer causes the light emitting device to emit light located within a region with color coordinates (x, y) surrounded by coordinates of four points: (0.012, 0.494), (0.2, 0.4), (0.2, 0.32), (0.04, 0.32) on the CIE 1931 color space chromaticity diagram.
Baek and Windisch each discuss modifying the color of light emitted from the light emitting diode as desired (Baek, e.g., ¶¶ 0074-75, 85; Windisch, e.g., p. 3, ¶¶ 3-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize known techniques in material choice and concentration to modify the light emitting diode of Na, Baek, and Windisch to emit light in the recited color range because said techniques would have yielded predictable results and are recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the intermediate layer of the light emitting diode of Na, Baek, and Windisch for the purpose of reducing effective resistance of the layer and increasing efficiency of the device. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate modification or tuning of the thickness of the intermediate layer to affect light emission of the device, thus “caus[ing] the light emitting diode to emit light” within the range as recited in the claim.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Na, Baek, and Windisch as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of US 2018/0219125 A1 to Wicke et al. (hereinafter “Wicke”).
Regarding claim 20, Na, Baek, and Windisch disclose the light emitting device of claim 17, however fail to expressly disclose further comprising: a reflector disposed on an inner wall of the housing, wherein the reflector includes white silicone. In the same field of endeavor, Wicke discloses a light emitting device including a reflector disposed on an inner wall of the housing, wherein the reflector includes white silicone (¶ 0189). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the reflector of Wicke in the device of Na, Baek, and Windisch for the purpose of increasing light output (Wicke, ¶ 0192).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Candice Y. Chan whose telephone number is (571)272-9013. The examiner can normally be reached 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 B. 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.
CANDICE Y. CHAN
Examiner
Art Unit 2813
12 June 2026
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights