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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species II in the reply filed on 09/24/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that at least claims 1 and 7 are generic. This is found persuasive. The restriction filed on 09/24/2025 is withdrawn. Claims 1-17 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
If applicant is aware of any relevant prior art , he/she requested to cite it on form PT)-1449 in accordance with the guidance set forth in MPEP .609.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the reflector with center aperture has a non-uniform thickness” as per claims 6 and 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 8 line 1, recites “ The pixel a of microdisplay of claim 7” should read “ The pixel of a microdisplay of claim 7”.
Re claim 15 line 1, recites “the pixel a of microdisplay of claim 14” should read “ the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 14”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In particular, claim 7 cited “ a light-emitting body for forming light of a first wavelength and light…..” is not clear , because the claim does not clearly specify and define the position/location of the light-emitting body. One ordinary artisan would not know what structure is covered by the limitation. For this reason, the claim is indefinite.
Claims 8-17 are rejected as being dependent on claim 7.
For best understand and examination purpose, the claim will be considered on drawings, disclosure, and /or any applicable prior arts.
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.
Claims 1-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et (US 20210104870A1) in view Kanaya et al (US 20220123171 A1).
Re claim 1 Sato teaches, a pixel of a microdisplay comprising: a light extractor (fig 25) having a compound semiconductor (11, fig 25) [0120] and having a hemispherical protrusion (45A, see fig 25) [0120]; and
a bulk portion (center portion of 11, see fig 25) [0120] having the same material as the protrusion (45A, fig 25) [0120];
a reflector (43, fig 25) [0117] formed on a surface of the protrusion (45A fig 25); and
a light emitting body (20, fig 25) formed on the reflector (45A, fig 25) [0120] and a single crystal grown from the light extractor (11, fig 25) [0103] to form light of a specific wavelength.
Sato does not teach the reflector with a center aperture.
Kanaya does teach the reflector with a center aperture (52, fig 10) [0088].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Kanaya into the structure of Sato to include the reflector with a center aperture as claimed.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Sato based on the teaching of Kanaya in the above manner for the purpose of improving light extraction efficiency [0067].
Re claim 2 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 1, wherein the light extractor is doped n-type [Sato, 0102], and the light-emitting body (20, fig 25) forms visible light (wavelength 450 nm) [Sato,0120]or ultraviolet light.
Re claim 3 Sato in view of Kanaya teach, the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 1, wherein the reflector (52, fig 10) [Kanaya 0058] with a center aperture [Kanaya 0088] has a concave shape [0088] toward the light extractor, and the central portion of the reflector with a center aperture is open (fig 10) [Kanaya, 0088].
Re claim 4 Sato in view of Kanaya teach, the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 3, wherein the reflector (52, fig 10) [0058] with a center aperture has a hemispherical shape (see fig 10) toward the light extractor (30, 40, fig 10) [0054], and light passing through the opening (opening between 52, fig 10) is directed toward the light extractor through reflections at the hemispherical inner surface of the reflector with a center aperture (fig 5, fig 10) [Kanaya 0066].
Re claim 5 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 4, wherein the reflector (52, fig 10) with a center aperture has a uniform thickness (left and right 52, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0088].
Re claim 6 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 3, wherein the reflector with a center aperture has a non-uniform thickness (center of 52, fig 10)[Kanaya 0088] and is formed to fill space between the protrusion (40, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0060] and the light emitting body (LED R, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0088].
Re claim 7 Sato teach the pixel of a microdisplay comprising:
a light extractor (11, fig 25) [0120] having a hemispherical protrusion (45A, fig 25) [0120] made of a GaN material [0120] and a bulk portion (11, fig 25) having the same material as the protrusion [0120];
a reflector (43, fig 25) [0117] formed on a surface of the protrusion (45A, fig 25) [0120], and a light emitting body (20, fig 25) [0120].
Sato does not teach the reflector with a center aperture and the light-emitting body for forming light of a first wavelength and light of a second wavelength longer than the first wavelength.
Kanaya does teach the reflector with a center aperture and the light-emitting body (LED-R, LED-G, LED-B, fig 10) [0052] for forming light of a first wavelength (LED-B) [0052] and light of a second wavelength (LED-R) [0052] longer than the first wavelength (red light has longer wavelengths and blue light has shorter wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Kanaya into the structure of Sato to include the reflector with a center aperture and a light-emitting body for forming light of a first wavelength and light of a second wavelength longer than the first wavelength as claimed.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Sato based on the teaching of Kanaya in the above manner for the purpose of improving light extraction efficiency [0067].
Re claim 8 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel a of microdisplay of claim 7, wherein the light extractor is doped n-type [Sato 0102].
Re claim 9 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 7, wherein the reflector (52, fig 25) [0058] with a center aperture has a concave shape toward the light extractor (see fig 10) [0058], and the central portion of the reflector with a center aperture is open [0088].
Re claim 10 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector (52, fig 25) [0058] with a center aperture has a hemispherical shape toward the light extractor (hemispherical concave, (see fig 10), and light passing through the opening is directed toward the light extractor through reflections at the hemispherical inner surface of the reflector with a center aperture (fig 5 and fig 10) [Kanaya, 0066].
Re claim 11 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector with a center aperture has SiO2 or A12O3 (43 SiO2, fig 25) [Sato, 0109].
Re claim 12 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector with a center aperture has a uniform thickness (52, see fig 10) [Kanaya, 0088].
Re claim 13 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector (43, fig 25) [0109] with a center aperture has a refractive index that is larger than the refractive index of air and smaller than the refractive index of GaN.(based on the same material SiO2 in the application) [Sato, 0109].
Re claim 16 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel a of microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector with a center aperture has a non-uniform thickness (center of 52, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0088] and is formed to fill a space (space between left 52 and right 52) between the surface of the protrusion (40, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0060] and the light-emitting body [Kanaya, 0050].
Re claim 17 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 9, wherein the reflector (52, fig 10) [Kanaya, 0062] with a center aperture [Kanaya, 0088] exposes the central portion of the protrusion (40, fig 10) [0060] and has a hemispherical shape toward the light extractor (see fig 10), and the light passing through the opening is directed toward the light extractor through reflections from the hemispherical inner surface of the reflector with a center aperture (fig 5 and fig 10) [Kanaya 0066].
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Kanaya as applied to claim 7 and further in view of Jang et al (US20200373284A1).
Re claim 14 Sato in view of Kanaya teach, the pixel of a microdisplay of claim 7,
Sato and Kanaya do not teach, the light emitting body includes, a first light-emitting diode formed on the reflector with a center aperture, and generating the light of the first wavelength; and
a second light-emitting diode formed on the first light emitting diode and generating the light of the second wavelength.
Jang teaches the light emitting body includes, a first light-emitting diode (323, fig. 55B) [0314] formed on the reflector (325, fig 55B) [0329] with a center aperture, and generating the light of the first wavelength (wavelength of first light emitting diode-323) [0314]; and
a second light-emitting diode (333, fig 55B) [0314] formed on the first light emitting diode (323) and generating the light of the second wavelength (wavelength of second light emitting diode-333) [0314].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Jang into the structure of Sato and Kanaya to include the light emitting body includes, a first light-emitting diode formed on the reflector with a center aperture, and generating the light of the first wavelength; and
a second light-emitting diode formed on the first light emitting diode and generating the light of the second wavelength as claimed.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Sato and Kanaya based on the teaching of Jang in the above manner for the purpose of improving the contrast of the display apparatus [0163].
Re claim 15 Sato in view of Kanaya teach the pixel a of microdisplay of claim 14
Sato and Kanaya do not teach the light emitting body further includes a third light-emitting diode that is formed on the second light-emitting diode and generates light of a third wavelength that is longer than the second wavelength,
wherein the light of the first wavelength is blue light, the light of the second wavelength is green light, and the light of the third wavelength is red light.
Jang does teach the light emitting body (fig 55B) [0314] further includes a third light-emitting diode (343, fig 55B) [0163] that is formed on the second light-emitting diode (333, fig 55B) [0314] and generates light of a third wavelength (red light) [0314] that is longer than the second wavelength ,
wherein the light of the first wavelength is blue light (323, blue light, fig 55B) [0314], the light of the second wavelength is green light (333, green light, fig 55B) [0314], and the light of the third wavelength is red light (334, red light, fig 55B) [0314].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Jang into the structure of Sato and Kanaya to include the light emitting body further includes a third light-emitting diode that is formed on the second light-emitting diode and generates light of a third wavelength that is longer than the second wavelength,
wherein the light of the first wavelength is blue light, the light of the second wavelength is green light, and the light of the third wavelength is red light as claimed.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Sato and Kanaya based on the teaching of Jang in the above manner for the purpose of improving the contrast of the display apparatus [0163].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRATIKSHA J LOHAKARE whose telephone number is (571)270-1920. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7.30 am-4.30 pm.
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, EVA MONTALVO can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/PRATIKSHA JAYANT LOHAKARE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/DUY T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 1/16/26