Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/054,186

MULTI-JUNCTION BOTTOM EMITTING VERTICAL CAVITY SURFACE EMITTING LASER AND THE FABRICATION METHOD OF THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 10, 2022
Examiner
MANNO, JESSICA S
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Brightlaser Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
142 granted / 197 resolved
+4.1% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
7 currently pending
Career history
204
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
43.1%
+3.1% vs TC avg
§102
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 197 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 of Group 1, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on August 22, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 22, 2025. 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Weichmann et al US 2020/0403376, herein referred to as Weichmann ‘376. Regarding claim 1, Weichmann ‘376 discloses a multi-junction bottom emitting vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) comprising (Figure 2, [0066]): an electrical n-contact layer (105); a semiconductor substrate (110) disposed on the electrical n-contact layer (Figure 2); an etch-stop layer disposed on the semiconductor substrate (intermediate layer described in [0059 and 0067]); a n-type semiconductor distributed Bragg reflector (nDBR) (115) including a first plurality of layers of semiconductor material disposed on the etch-stop layer (Figure 2, [0059-0060, 0066-67]); a laser cavity (120) comprising of a plurality of active region disposed on the nDBR ([0060]); a hybrid metal-semiconductor reflector (125-1, 129, 130, 125-2) disposed on the laser cavity (120); wherein the hybrid metal-semiconductor reflector comprises a p-type semiconductor distributed Bragg reflector (pDBR) (125-1) including a second plurality of layers of semiconductor material ([0068]), a phase matching layer (129) disposed on the pDBR (125-1) and a metallic reflector (125-2, [0064-comprising Al) disposed on the phase matching layer (129); and an electrical p-contact layer (150) formed on the hybrid metal-semiconductor reflector. Regarding claim 3, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein the nDBR (115), the etch-stop layer (intermediate layer, not labeled), the semiconductor substrate (110) and the electrical n-contact layer (105) are configured as a mesa extending out with a circular cross-section (Ring-shaped, Figure 2). Regarding claim 4, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein the hybrid metal-semiconductor reflector is configured as a non-exit mirror and the nDBR is configured as a light-exit mirror (0018, 0033 0070]). Regarding claim 7, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein each layer of the plurality of active region in the laser cavity (120) comprises of a multiple of strained or unstrained quantum well structure ([0020, 0060]). Regarding claim 8, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein each multiple of strained or unstrained quantum well structure (120 comprises a quantum well structure with several sub layers) is spaced apart from one another ([0030]) wherein they are electrically conductively connected by a tunnel junction (130) and confined by a current confinement layer (124). Regarding claim 9, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein the tunnel junction (130) comprises at least two doped semiconductor layers of different conduction types ([0068]). Regarding claim 10, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses a current confinement aperture (gap shown in Figure 2, [0069]) formed on the current confinement layer by wet oxidation ([0062, 103]). Regarding claim 11, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses that the metallic reflector comprises at least one layer of metal or at least one layer of alloy (125-2, [0064-comprising Al). Regarding claim 12, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein the metal comprises gold, silver, copper, aluminum, nickel, titanium, chromium or platinum and the alloy comprises gold, silver, copper, aluminum, nickel, titanium, chromium or platinum (125-2, [0064-comprising Al). 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weichmann ‘376 in view of Yan CN 110829178, herein referred to as Yan ‘178 . Regarding claim 2, Weichmann ‘376 further discloses wherein the electrical n-contact layer (105) and the semiconductor substrate (110) are configured as a ring shape with an emitting window for emitting laser (Figure 2, [0070]) and the electrical p-contact layer (150) is for current injection ([0018, 0033]). Weichmann ‘376 does not specifically discloses that the and the etch-stop layer is configured as a ring shape. In the same field of endeavor of VCSEL, Yan ‘178 teaches of a device wherein a DBR outer surface is exposed (Figures 3-4) to form a ring-shaped structure including an etch stop layer. 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 DBR layers of Weichmann ‘376 at taught by Yan ‘178 for the purpose of improving the radiating effect of the device (Disclosure of the invention (first paragraph)). Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weichmann ‘376 in view of Jiang et al US 5719892, herein referred to as Jiang ‘892. Regarding claims 5-6, Weichmann ‘376 does not discloses wherein each of the first plurality of layers of semiconductor material in the nDBR comprises Indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs) on Gallium Arsenide (GaAs)-based substrate, Indium aluminum gallium nitride (InAlGaN) on Gallium Nitride (GaN)- based substrate, and Indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs) on Indium Phosphide (InP)-based substrate or wherein each of the second plurality of layers of semiconductor material in the pDBR comprises Indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs) on Gallium Arsenide (GaAs)-based substrate, Indium aluminum gallium nitride (InAlGaN) on Gallium Nitride (GaN)-based substrate, and Indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs) on Indium Phosphide (InP)-based substrate. However, in the same field of endeavor of vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL), Jiang ‘892 discloses DBR layers made of (InAlGaAs) on Gallium Arsenide (GaAs)-based substrate, Indium aluminum gallium nitride (InAlGaN) on Gallium Nitride (GaN)- based substrate, and Indium aluminum gallium arsenide (InAlGaAs) on Indium Phosphide (InP) (Column 4, lines 7-36). 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 DBR layers of Weichmann ‘376 at taught by Jiang ‘892 for the purpose of enhancing the reliability of the device and preventing dislocations in the active region (Column 4, lines 7-36). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tatum US 6965,626 and Takeuchi US 2008/0056320 are cited for disclosing VCSEL with ring shaped contacts and similar structure to the claimed invention. Deliwala US 2020/0161502 is cited for disclosing light emitting diode with ring shaped contacts and similar structure to the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA S MANNO whose telephone number is (571)272-2339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday. 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, Kiesha Bryant can be reached at 571-272-3606. 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. /JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 10, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12566287
LIGHT SOURCE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12555980
OPTOELECTRONIC SEMICONDUCTOR LASER COMPONENT AND OPTOELECTRONIC ARRANGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12438338
Auto Flux Timing for Current Resonant Laser Diode Driver
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 07, 2025
Patent 9159876
SURFACE TREATMENT OF A SEMICONDUCTOR LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2015
Patent 8275011
OPTICAL TRANSMISSION MODULE, WAVELENGTH MONITOR, AND WAVELENGTH DRIFT DETECTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 25, 2012
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+24.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 197 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month