Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/083,212

LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE AND LIGHT EMITTING MODULE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 16, 2022
Examiner
KHALIFA, MOATAZ
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
94%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 94% — above average
94%
Career Allow Rate
50 granted / 53 resolved
+26.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-6.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
98
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
70.6%
+30.6% vs TC avg
§102
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 53 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Remarks The 01/05/2026 amendments of claims 1 and 21 have been noted and entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks pages 6-9, filed 01/05/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 8, 10, 21-25 and 27-28 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the newly added amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Leng, US 20220165993 A1 (Leng). With respect to the Applicant’s request for the reconsideration of the Restriction/Election requirements as they pertain to claims 9 and 26, the arguments presented have been fully considered and found not persuasive in light of the newly added amendments. The newly added amendments fail to change the scope of the claims to belong to the elected species. Thus, claims 9 and 26 remain withdrawn. The following is an explanation of the reasons behind the withdrawal of claims 9 and 26: Regarding claim 9; Claim 9 contains the following highlighted limitations: “wherein the first molding layer has a convex or concave upper surface” which are mutually exclusive with the limitation of the upper surface of the molding layer (950) and (130) being flat as can be seen in figures (20) and (23) of the instant application which correspond to the elected Species 9. Convex or concave upper surfaces of the molding layer (450) and (550) can be seen in figures (8) and (9) which correspond to nonelected Species 4 and 5, respectively. Regarding claim 26; Claim 26 contains the following highlighted limitations: “wherein the first molding layer has a convex or concave upper surface” which are mutually exclusive with the limitation of the upper surface of the molding layer (950) and (130) being flat as can be seen in figures (20) and (23) of the instant application which correspond to the elected Species 9. Convex or concave upper surfaces of the molding layer (450) and (550) can be seen in figures (8) and (9) which correspond to nonelected Species 4 and 5, respectively. New Grounds for Rejection New grounds for rejection, prior art reference Leng, US 20220165993 A1 (Leng) appears below. 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. Claims 1-5, 8, 21-25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi et al, US 20220069186 A1 (Iguchi) in view of Leng, US 20220165993 A1 (Leng). Regarding claim 1; Iguchi teaches a light emitting module (220e) comprising: a circuit board (50); a plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) disposed on the circuit board (50); a first molding layer ((24)+(15c)) surrounding side surfaces of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) and a first electrode (30c); wherein each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a first semiconductor layer (13), a second semiconductor layer (11), and an active layer (12) disposed between the first semiconductor layer (13) and the second semiconductor layer (11), wherein a first surface (see Fig (8) of Iguchi reproduced below for convenience) of the first semiconductor layer (13) corresponds to a light exit surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)), wherein the first electrode (30C) covers the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) and a plurality of openings of the first molding layer ((24)+(15c)). PNG media_image1.png 676 963 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 722 1017 media_image2.png Greyscale Iguchi does not teach a second molding layer disposed on the first molding layer, wherein the first molding layer is no higher than a portion of the first electrode covering the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices, and wherein the second molding layer covers the first electrode. However, Leng teaches a second molding layer (160) disposed on the first molding layer (170), wherein the first molding layer (170) is no higher than a portion of the first electrode (123) covering the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices (120), and wherein the second molding layer (160) covers the first electrode (123). Iguchi and Leng are considered analogous art. Thus, it would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the instant application, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify Iguchi by incorporating a second molding layer such as disclosed in Leng to improve the protection of the device against external elements leading to a more reliable device. PNG media_image3.png 603 945 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein each of the light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a second electrode (23N) electrically connected to the second semiconductor layer (11), the first electrode (30C) and the second electrode (23N) being disposed to face the circuit board (50). Regarding claim 3; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 2. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the first electrode (30C) and the second electrode (23N) of each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) are electrically connected to the circuit board (50). Regarding claim 4; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 2. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the first electrode (30C) overlaps with an interface between the side surfaces of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) and the first molding layer ((24)+(15c)). Regarding claim 5; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a second electrode (23N) electrically connected to the second semiconductor layer (11), the second electrode (23N) being disposed to face the circuit board (50). Regarding claim 8; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the first molding layer((24)+(15c)) has an upper surface, having a periphery (upper surface of (15c)) flush with the first surface of the first semiconductor (13). Regarding claim 21; Iguchi teaches a light emitting module (220e) comprising: a circuit board (50); a plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) disposed on the circuit board (50); a first molding layer (24)+(15c)) surrounding side surfaces of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)); and a first electrode (30c); wherein each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a first semiconductor layer (13), a second semiconductor layer (11), and an active layer (12) disposed between the first semiconductor layer (13) and the second semiconductor layer (11), wherein a first surface of the first semiconductor layer (13) corresponds to a light exit surface of the light emitting device (220e), wherein the first electrode (30c) contacts the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) and the molding layer ((24)+(15c)). Iguchi does not teach a second molding layer disposed on the first molding layer, wherein the first molding layer is no higher than a portion of the first electrode covering the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices, and wherein the second molding layer covers the first electrode. However, Leng teaches a second molding layer (160) disposed on the first molding layer (170), wherein the first molding layer (170) is no higher than a portion of the first electrode (123) covering the first surface of each of the plurality of light emitting devices (120), and wherein the second molding layer (160) covers the first electrode (123). Iguchi and Leng are considered analogous art. Thus, it would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the instant application, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify Iguchi by incorporating a second molding layer such as disclosed in Leng to improve the protection of the device against external elements leading to a more reliable device. Regarding claim 22; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 21. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a second electrode (23N) electrically connected to the second semiconductor layer (11), the first electrode (30c) and the second electrode (23N) being disposed to face the circuit board (50). Regarding claim 23; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 22. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the first electrode (30c) and the second electrode (23N) of the light emitting device ((100B), (100R), (100G)) are electrically connected to the circuit board (50). Regarding case 24; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 21. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the first electrode (30c) overlaps with an interface between the side surfaces of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) and the first molding layer (24)+(15c)). Regarding claim 25; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 21. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein each of the plurality of light emitting devices ((100B), (100R), (100G)) comprises a second electrode (23N) electrically connected to the second semiconductor layer (11), the second electrode (23N) being disposed to face the circuit board (50). Regarding claim 27; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 21. Further, Iguchi teaches wherein the upper surface of the first molding layer ((24)+(15c)) includes a periphery (upper surface of (15c)) flush with the first surface of the first semiconductor layer (13). Claims 10 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi et al, US 20220069186 A1 (Iguchi) in view of Leng, US 20220165993 A1 (Leng) in further view of Choe, US 20210074770 A1 (Choe). Regarding claim 10; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 1. However, Iguchi in view of Leng does not teach wherein the second molding layer includes a plurality of openings corresponding to the plurality of openings of the first molding layer. Choe teaches wherein the second molding layer (MB3) includes a plurality of openings corresponding to the plurality of openings of the first molding layer (119). Iguchi in view of Leng and Choe are considered analogous art. Thus, it would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Iguchi in view of Leng by using the openings in the second molding layer that correspond to the openings in the first molding layer as disclosed in Choe to improve the resolution of the device. PNG media_image4.png 780 624 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding claim 28; Iguchi in view of Leng discloses all the limitations of claim 21. However, Iguchi in view of Leng does not teach wherein the second molding layer includes a plurality of openings corresponding to the plurality of openings of the first molding layer. Choe teaches wherein the second molding layer (MB3) includes a plurality of openings corresponding to the plurality of openings of the first molding layer (119). Iguchi in view of Leng and Choe are considered analogous art. Thus, it would have been obvious, prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Iguchi in view of Leng by using the openings in the second molding layer that correspond to the openings in the first molding layer as disclosed in Choe to improve the resolution of the device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moataz Khalifa whose telephone number is (703)756-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 am - 5:00). 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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. /MOATAZ KHALIFA/Examiner, Art Unit 2815 /MONICA D HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 16, 2022
Application Filed
May 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 19, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 19, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604572
THIN-FILM LED ARRAY WITH LOW REFRACTIVE INDEX PATTERNED STRUCTURES AND REFLECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593737
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588514
ELECTRONIC PART AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588332
DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING COLOR CONVERSION AND COLOR REINFORCEMENT PATTERNS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581783
LIGHT SOURCE MODULE AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
94%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (-6.4%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 53 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