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 .
Response to Arguments
In response to the applicant’s arguments filed on 10/09/2025, the applicant amended claims to overcome the previous prior art rejection and the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection. The applicant amended claims 7-8 and 18 to further define the claim, therefore the rejection is overcome by the amendments to claims 7-8 and 18. As to the prior art, upon further search and consideration, a new rejection is formed below with a new base reference. Secondary references Seong and Lee are still utilized but in a different manner to read onto the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 10490702) in view of Hwang et al (US 20120299038 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Park et al teaches,
[claim 1] A light-emitting device, comprising: a substrate (figure 7, col 16 lines 18-28, where the device is a light emitting device and element 170 is the substrate);
a first type semiconductor layer disposed on a surface of said substrate, having a surface that has a first conductive region, said first type semiconductor layer being made of Alx Gai-x N, x ranging from 0 to 1 (figure 7, col 16 lines 35-49, col 5 lines 29-35, where element 122 is the first type semiconductor layer disposed on a surface of the substrate [element 170] where the area confined by element 180 above element 165 is the first conductive region [element 165 is a first conductive layer], where the first semiconductor layer [element 122] is made of Alx Gai-x N, x ranging from 0 to 1),
a protrusion including an active layer and a second type semiconductor layer that are sequentially disposed on said first conductive region of said surface of said first type semiconductor layer in such order (figure 7, where the protrusion is defined by the depth of layers 126 and 124 deposited on the first conductive region [on element 165 confined by element 180], where the element 124 is the active layer and element 126 is the second semiconductive region. Note, per MPEP 2113, Product-By-Process claims are not limited to the specified steps of formation, for example the process of depositing layers in a certain order has is only examined under the final product of such a process which is the two layers disposed on the first conductive region),
and a first reflection structure, and penetrating through said second type semiconductor layer, said active layer of said protrusion and into said first type semiconductor layer (figure 12, col 12 lines 11-20, where element 135 is the reflective structure that penetrates through the second type semiconductor layer [element 126], through the active layer [element 124] and into the first type semiconductor layer [element 122]),
wherein said light-emitting device emits light that has an emission wavelength ranging from 200 nm to 320 nm (col 12 lines 29-34, where the wavelength can range from 280 nm to 320 nm which is in the range of 200 nm to 320 nm),
wherein said protrusion includes a plurality of extending parts each of which extends along a first direction, and a connection part which extends along a second direction transverse to said first direction to connect said extending parts, said extending parts being separated from one another along said second direction, and wherein said first reflection structure is disposed in said extending parts of said protrusion (figures 16 and 17, where distance ds between the end of element 142 and 135 within the distances W1 and D6 is a single extending part, and an ‘extending part’ in the current disclosure is a set of two of these “single extending parts” described, which extends in the first direction [z direction], and is repeated as seen in figure 16 across multiple instances of the combination of element 135 and 142 which makes up the single distance of W1 and D6, and extends in a second direction [x direction] Within this extension portion element 135 [reflective portion] is disposed. Refer to figure 1 below to see the definition of an extending part.).
However, Park et al does not specifically disclose
[claim 1] [a first semiconductor layer] having a surface that has a second conductive region
However, Hwang et al does teach
[claim 1] [a first semiconductor layer] having a surface that has a second conductive region (paragraph 0053, figure 11, where element 115 is the first semiconductor layer and has two portions, a first portion that contains the protrusions which contains the width of elements 117 and 119, and a second portion with a second conductive type which is directly above element 135).
It would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park et al to incorporate the teachings of Hwang et al in order to attach a second conductive unit to the semiconductor layer to further control the transistor and the light emitting portions to allow for adequate electric flow to produce light from the Light Emitting Device.
Regarding claims 2-10, 13, 19-20
Park et al further teaches
[claim 2] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1, wherein said x ranges from 0.5 to 0.8 (col 5 lines 29-35 where the ranges for X is between 0 and 1, thus a ange overlaps a range of 0.5 to 0.8).
[claim 3] wherein said protrusion has an extending part that extends in a first direction is parallel to said surface of said substrate (figures 16 and 17, where the extension portion [where distance ds between the end of element 142 and 135 within the distances W1 and D6] is in a plane parallel to the substrate).
[claim 4] wherein said first reflection structure includes a plurality of first reflection structures that are disposed in said extending parts and in each of said extending parts, said first reflection structures are separated from one another along said first direction (figures 16 and 17, where a single ‘extension portion’ that is replicated in the first direction [z-direction] where a single extension part contains the element 135 in the width ds [in figure 17] and height d6 and w1 [in figure 17] where each said first reflection structure [element 135] in the extension portion is replicated in the first direction [z-direction] as best seen by the replication of element 135 in the z-direction in figure 16. Refer to figure 1 below to see a single extending part, the replication of the extending part is in the z-direction and each extending part contains multiple reflection structures [element 135]).
[claim 5] wherein said first reflection structures are equidistantly separated from one another in each of said extending parts (Figure 1 below, figure 16 where the plurality of reflection parts [element 135] in a single extending part [as shown below] are equidistant apart in the first direction [z-direction]).
[claim 6] wherein said first reflection structures are equidistantly separated from one another in each of said extending parts by a spacing smaller than 110 micro meters (figure 1 below, figure 16 of Park et al, col 21 lines 53-60, where the distance between reflection structures [135] is W1 and between 30 to 60 micro meters, which is less than 110 micro meters).
[claim 7] wherein said first reflection structure includes a plurality of said first reflection structures disposed in said protrusion, an area of a projection of said first reflection structures on said surface of said substrate along a projection direction perpendicular to said surface of said substrate occupying no less than 30% of an area of a projection of said active layer on said surface of said substrate along said projection direction (figure 16, col 21 lines 27-34, where element 135 is the first reflection structure disposed in the protrusion [protrusion is the entire area of element 120], where the projection in the y-direction onto the substrate in the x-z plane [the view of figure 16] shows that element 135 contains roughly 40% of the protrusion area, which is no less than 30%).
[claim 8] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1, wherein said first reflection structure includes a plurality of said first reflection structures disposed in said protrusion, an area of a projection of said first reflection structures on said surface of said substrate along a projection direction perpendicular to said surface of said substrate occupying between 40% to 60% of an area of a projection of said active layer on said surface of said substrate along said projection direction (figure 16, col 21 lines 27-34, where element 135 is the first reflection structure disposed in the protrusion [protrusion is the entire area of element 120], where the projection in the y-direction onto the substrate in the x-z plane [the view of figure 16] shows that element 135 contains roughly 40% of the protrusion area, which is between 40% and 60%. Further, according to MPEP 2144.05 II A – Optimization within Prior Art Conditions, since there are three discrete values of how much area the projection can contain, under 40%, between 40% and 60%, and over 60%, one could conduct routine optimization for best function of the specific device to hit the intended range).
[claim 9] wherein said first reflection structure includes a plurality of said first reflection structures, said protrusion being formed with a plurality of through holes, each of said through holes penetrating through said second type semiconductor layer, said active layer and into said first type semiconductor layer, each of said first reflection structures being a reflective pillar and being filled in a corresponding one of said through holes (note: Per MPEP 2113, Product-by-Process claims, the resultant product of the process is the only thing examined under a product patent. Since a device is claimed in claim 1, regardless of how the reflection structures are formed, the resulting structure is identical to what is claimed in claim 1. Therefore, figure 12, col 12 lines 11-20, where element 135 is the reflective structure that penetrates through the second type semiconductor layer [element 126], through the active layer [element 124] and into the first type semiconductor layer [element 122]).
[claim 10] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1, wherein said first reflection structure includes a plurality of first reflection structures, said protrusion being formed with a plurality of through holes that are respectively defined by a plurality of hole-defining walls, each of said through holes penetrating through said second type semiconductor layer, said active layer, into said first type semiconductor layer, each of said first reflection structures being a reflection layer and being formed on a corresponding one of said hole-defining walls (note: Per MPEP 2113, Product-by-Process claims, the resultant product of the process is the only thing examined under a product patent. Since a device is claimed in claim 1, regardless of how the reflection structures are formed, the resulting structure is examined. Therefore, Figure 1 below and figure 12 of Park et al, col 12 lines 11-20, where element 135 is the reflective structure that penetrates through the second type semiconductor layer [element 126], through the active layer [element 124] and into the first type semiconductor layer [element 122], and there are a plurality of these reflection structures in each extending part all disposed in the protrusion region [region 120 of figure 16]).
[claim 13] wherein said first reflection structure is made of a metallic material selected from the group consisting of rhodium, aluminum, silver, and combinations thereof (col 12 lines 61-67, figure 7, where element 135 is the reflective layer and is made of aluminum).
[claim 18] wherein an area of said second conductive region occupies no less than 20% of an area of said surface of said first type semiconductor layer, and an area of a projection of said first electrode on said surface of said substrate along a projection direction perpendicular to said surface of said substrate occupies no less than 80% of an area of a projection of said second conductive region on said surface of said substrate along said projection direction (figure 16, col 21 lines 27-34, where element 135 is the first reflection structure disposed in the protrusion [protrusion is the entire area of element 120], where the projection in the y-direction onto the substrate in the x-z plane [the view of figure 16] shows that element 135 contains roughly 40% of the protrusion area, which is no less than 20%. Thus, the substrate must contain at least 80% of the projected area).
[claim 19] wherein said light- emitting device emits light that has an emission wavelength ranging from 200 nm to 285 nm (col 12 lines 29-34, where the light emitting device emits a wavelength between 280nm and 320 nm which falls within the range of 200 nm to 285 nm).
[claim 20] wherein each of said extending parts a width (W) that is smaller than 110 mm in a second direction transverse to said first direction (figure 17, col 22 line 64 – col 23 line 17 where elements D5 and D1 combined is the width of the extending part, and is less than 110 micro meters wide, on the order of 11 micro meters wide).
PNG
media_image1.png
406
441
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: From Fig. 16 of Park et al (US 10490702)
Additionally, regarding claim 17, Park et al does not specifically disclose
[claim 17] further comprising a first electrode disposed on and being electrically connected to said second conductive region.
However, Hwang et al does teach
[claim 17] further comprising a first electrode disposed on and being electrically connected to said second conductive region (paragraph 0053, figure 11, where element 115 is the first semiconductor layer and has two portions, a first portion that contains the protrusions which contains the width of elements 117 and 119, and a second portion with a second conductive type which is directly above element 135, where element 135 is an electrode connected to the second conductive region).
It would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park et al to incorporate the teachings of Hwang et al in order to attach a second conductive unit to the semiconductor layer to further control the transistor and the light emitting portions to allow for adequate electric flow to produce light from the Light Emitting Device.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 10490702) and Hwang et al (US 20120299038 A1) in view of Lee (US 9472742 B2).
Park et al as modified teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim, claim 1, but does not specifically teach,
[claim 11] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 10, wherein said reflection layer is a distributed Bragg reflection layer.
[claim 12] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 10, further comprising a plurality of insulation layers respectively disposed between a corresponding one of said hole-defining walls and a corresponding one of said first reflection structures.
However, Lee does teach
[claim 11] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 10, wherein said reflection layer is a distributed Bragg reflection layer (col 6 lines 32-44, the reflective layer is a distributed Bragg reflection layer).
[claim 12] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 10, further comprising a plurality of insulation layers respectively disposed between a corresponding one of said hole-defining walls and a corresponding one of said first reflection structures (figure 1, col 6 lines 32-62, col elements 131 and 132 are the plurality of insulating layers, element 144 is the hole-defining walls and element 141 and 142 are the reflective layers, the insulating layers are situated between the hole-defining walls and the reflective layers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the teachings of Park et al as modified to incorporate the teachings of Lee in order to include and Bragg Reflection layer with insulating layers to maximize the reflection of the structures to maximize the efficiency of the light emitting device.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 10490702) and Hwang et al (US 20120299038 A1) in further view of Lin et al (TW I553911 B).
Park et al as modified teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim, claim 1, but do not specifically disclose
[claim 14] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a second reflection structure that covers a surface of said second type semiconductor layer on said first conductive region.
However, Lin et al does teach
[claim 14] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a second reflection structure that covers a surface of said second type semiconductor layer on said first conductive region (paragraph 0018 and 0019, figure 1, where the second reflection structure covers a second type semiconductor layer in the first conductive region [region spanning the width of element 16 before the trench of element 21]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the teachings of Park et al as modified to incorporate the teachings of Lin et al in order to maximize reflection over the whole device by placing a second reflection structure over the second conductive area so as to not allow light into said area so the device could be more spatially dense in allowing multiple conductive areas to form to create light in the active regions.
Claim(s) 15-16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 10490702), Hwang et al (US 20120299038 A1), and Lin et al (TW I553911 B), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Jeong (US 8686456 B2).
Park et al as modified teaches all of the limitations of the parent claim, claim 14, but do not specifically disclose
[claim 15] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 14, wherein said second reflection structure serves as an electrode to electrically connect to said second type semiconductor layer.
[claim 16] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 14, wherein said second reflection structure serves as an electrode pad to electrically connect to said second type semiconductor layer.
However, Jeong does teach
[claim 15] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 14, wherein said second reflection structure serves as an electrode to electrically connect to said second type semiconductor layer (col 16 lines 1-5, where the second electrode is a reflective electrode and connected to the second type semiconductor layer).
[claim 16] The light-emitting device as claimed in claim 14, wherein said second reflection structure serves as an electrode pad to electrically connect to said second type semiconductor layer (col 16 lines 1-5, where the second electrode is a reflective electrode and connected to the second type semiconductor layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the teachings of Park et al as modified to incorporate the teachings of Jeong in order to utilize the second electrode as both a light reflecting layer and an electrode to save on material so as to not need both as separate layers thus making the device more efficient to create.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW ZABEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4788. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5PM 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, Jeff W Natalini can be reached at 572-272-2266. 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.
/ANDREW ZABEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/JEFF W NATALINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818