DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In response to a final Office action mailed on 11/05/2025 (“11/05/2025 FOA”), the Applicant have amended independent claim 11 in a submission filed on 02/03/2026 (“02/03/2026 Submission”). The amendments to the independent claim 11 substantively changed the scope of claim 1 as well as the scope of its dependent claims. Claims 1-10 and 14 are cancelled.
Currently, claims 11-13 and 15-23 are examined as below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to independent claim 11 have overcome the prior-art rejections as set forth under line item numbers 1-3 in the 02/03/2026 Submission.
Applicant requests the finality of the 11/05/2025 FOA to be withdrawn, because the Applicant’s claim amendments were not made to overcome the 102 or 103 rejections, and the grounds of rejections within the final Office action are neither necessitated by the Applicant’s amendment of claims nor based on information submitted in an information disclosure statement. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
In the non-final Office action mailed on 06/25/2025 (“06/25/2025 OA”), the examiner rejected independent claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because the limitation “regular change” is too broad and therefore indefinite, and rejected claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. In response, the Applicant canceled claim 14 and amended independent claim 11 to include the limitation “a regular change according to positions of the semiconductor chips in the one or the rows or column,” according to the claim amendment filed on 09/17/2025. However, the examiner did not propose the claims to be amended in such manner in the 06/25/2025 OA to overcome the 112 rejections, and the limitation “a regular change according to positions of the semiconductor chips in the one or the rows or column” of independent claim 11 in the 09/17/2025 claim amendment substantively changed the scope of claim 11. The examiner therefore made the 11/05/2025 FOA final, consistent with MPEP 706.07(a), which instructs examiners as follows: “Due to the change in practice as affecting final rejections, older decisions on questions of prematureness of final rejection or admission of subsequent amendments do not necessarily reflect present practice. Under present practice, second or any subsequent actions on the merits shall be final, except where the examiner introduces a new ground of rejection that is neither necessitated by applicant’s amendment of the claims, nor based on information submitted in an information disclosure statement filed during the period set forth in 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p).”
Furthermore, 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 02/03/2026 Submission has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 11, in line 10, “light of the same color” should read “a light of the same color.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11, 15-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0044040 A1 to Andrews et al. (“Andrews”).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
798
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
535
572
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
355
388
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 11, Andrews in Figs. 1, 4A and 8A teaches a structure of semiconductor devices (Figs. 4A & 8A), comprising:
a carrier 15 (Figs. 1, 4A, 8A & ¶ 171, ¶ 173, ¶ 177-¶ 178 & ¶ 186, single transparent or light-transmissive substrate 15); and
a plurality of semiconductor chips 10, 110 (Figs. 1, 4A, 8A, ¶ 172, ¶ 186 & ¶ 200-¶ 201, LED chips 10 or emitters 110, and each emitter 110 is an LED chip) on the carrier 15 and is arranged in an array with rows and columns (Figs. 4A & 8A);
wherein each of the plurality of semiconductor chips 10, 110 has a peak wavelength (¶ 198-¶ 199 & ¶ 200, each emitter 110 emit a color of light and has a peak wavelengths), and, in one of the rows or one of the columns (Figs. 4A & 8A), a distribution of the peak wavelengths of the semiconductor chips 110 has a regular change according to positions of the semiconductor chips 110 in the one row or the one column (Fig. 8A & ¶ 199-¶ 200, the LEDs 110 in a row and in a column emit lights of two different colors (i.e., red and green in row 1, or red and white in column A , etc.) that are disposed alternately, which would result in a regular change in peak wavelength distribution according to positions of these LEDs 110); and
wherein the semiconductor chips 110 in the one row or the one column constituting the distribution emit light of the same color (Fig. 8A & ¶ 200, in row 1, two LED emitters 110 emit the same color of light which is red, and the other two LED emitters 110 emit the same color of light which is green; in column A, two LED emitters 110 emit the same color of light which is red, and the other two LED emitters 110 emit the same color light which is white; in column B, two LED emitters 110 emit the same color of light which is green, and the other two LED emitters 110 emit the same color of light which is blue).
Regarding claim 15, Andrews in Figs. 4A and 8A further teaches the carrier 15 comprises silicon, glass, sapphire, or silicon carbide (Figs. 4A, 8A, ¶ 171-¶ 173, ¶ 177-¶ 178, ¶ 186, ¶ 199, the transparent substrate 15 being the light-transmissive substrate includes glass, sapphire or silicon carbide).
Regarding claim 16, Andrews in Fig. 1 further teaches each of the plurality of semiconductor chips 10 comprises a first semiconductor layer 21 (Fig. 1 & ¶ 181, first semiconductor layer 21), an active layer (Fig. 1 & ¶ 178, light emitting active region 25), a second semiconductor layer 22 (Fig. 1 & ¶ 181, second semiconductor 22), and two electrodes 61, 62 (Fig. 1 & ¶ 181, first electrical contact 61 and second electrical contact 62) electrically connecting the first semiconductor layer 21 and the second semiconductor layer 22 respectively (Fig. 1 & ¶ 181).
Regarding claim 17, Andrews in Figs. 1 and 4A further teaches the two electrodes 61, 62 of each of the plurality of semiconductor chips 10 face the carrier 15 (Figs. 1 & 4A, upper surface of each electrode 61, 62 faces the carrier 15).
Regarding claim 18, Andrews in Figs. 1 and 4A further teaches the two electrodes 61, 62 of each of the plurality of semiconductor chips 10 face away from the carrier 15 (Figs. 1 & 4A, lower surface of each electrode 61, 62 faces away from the carrier 15).
Regarding claim 19, Andrews in Figs. 1 and 4A further teaches one of the plurality of semiconductor chips 10 further comprises a growth substrate 15 (Figs. 1, 4A, ¶ 172-¶ 173, ¶ 178 & ¶ 186, light-transmissive/transparent substrate 15 embodies or includes a LED growth substrate).
Regarding claim 20, Andrews in Fig. 1 further teaches the growth substrate 15 contacts the carrier 15 (Figs. 1, 4A, ¶ 172-¶ 173 & ¶ 178, light-transmissive/transparent substrate 15 embodies or includes a LED growth substrate. That is, the portion in the substrate 15 serves as the growth substrate would be in contact with the rest of the portion of the substrate 15).
Regarding claim 23, Andrews in Fig. 8A further teaches the light of the same color comprises one of blue light, green light and red light (Fig. 8A & ¶ 200).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 12-13 and 21-22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if (i) rewritten in independent form to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or (ii) the objected claim and any intervening claims are fully incorporated into the base claim.
Claim 12 would be allowable, because the prior art of record, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or suggest, in combination with the other claimed elements in claim 12, wherein the regular change comprises a plurality of stair-like pattern units.
Claims 13 and 21-22 would be allowable, because they depend from the allowable claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIKKA LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-2568. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5AM EST M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached on 571-272-7925. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/RATISHA MEHTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817