DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to amendment filed 1/6/2026.
Claims 1-17 and 20 are pending. Claims 18-19 have been canceled. Claims 1-2, 5-9, 11-12, 14-17 and 20 have been amended.
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 1-17 and 20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 reciting “the second contract electrode does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode” renders the claim indefinite. Firstly, “the projection of the first contact electrode” lacks antecedent basis. Furthermore, claim 1 recites a plurality of light-emitting structures each comprises a first contact electrode and a second contact electrode. As such, the device as a whole include plural first contact electrodes and plural second contact electrodes corresponding to the various light-emitting structures. In the limitation “the second contract electrode does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode”, only singular second contact electrode and singular first contact electrode are referenced. it is unclear what is the intended correspondence. Does the claim intend to require the second contact electrode of each one of the plurality of light-emitting structures to not overlap a projection of the first contact electrode of each one of the plurality of light-emitting structures? Or does the claim intend to require the second contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures to not overlap a projection of the first contact electrode of the one of the plurality of light-emitting structures? Or does the claim intend to require the second contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures to not overlap a projection of the first contact electrode of another one of the plurality of light-emitting structures?
Claim 5 reciting “the first insulating layer is located between the plurality of light-emitting structure and the second insulating layer” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if the first insulating is located between one of the plurality of light-emitting structures and the second insulating layer or is located between each of the plurality of light-emitting structures and the second insulating layer.
Claim 7 reciting “the first pad is electrically connected to the first contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures through first opening and the third opening, and the second pad is electrically connected to the second contact electrode of another one of plurality of the light-emitting structures through the second opening and the fourth opening” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if “one of the plurality of the light-emitting structures” is the same as or a different one from the “one of the plurality of light-emitting structures” recited previously in claim 6. Furthermore, it is unclear if “another one of plurality of the light emitting structures” is the same as or a different one from the “another one of the plurality of the light emitting structures” recited previously in claim 6. Furthermore, the “first opening” and the “second openings” are openings in the first insulating structure through which the bridge electrode connect the first contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures to the second contact electrode of another one of the plurality of light-emitting structures as recited in claim 6. However, these are not the same as the openings of the first insulating structure 41 through which the first pad 51 and the second pad 52 connect to the respective first contact electrode 21 and the second contact electrode 22. It is unclear how does the first pad connect the first contact electrode through the first opening through which the bridge electrode connects. It is also unclear how does the second pad connect the second contact electrode through the second opening through which the bridge electrode connects.
Claim 8 reciting “the second pad is entirely located at an inner side between two adjacent ones of the first contact electrodes” render the claim indefinite. It is unclear how is the second pad is recited “between two adjacent ones of the first contact electrodes”. Applicant’s specification does not clarity how the second pad 52 is between any two adjacent first contact electrodes 21.
Claim 9 reciting “the projection of the first contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures” renders the claims indefinite for lacking proper antecedent basis. It is unclear if “one of the plurality of the light-emitting structures” is the same as or a different one from the “one of the plurality of light-emitting structures” recited previously in claim 6.
Claim 12 reciting “the light-emitting structure itself” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear what constitutes “the light-emitting structure itself” and how does it correspond to “each of the plurality of light-emitting structures” claimed.
Other claims are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OH et al. US 2019/0051805 A1.
PNG
media_image1.png
504
980
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In re claim 1, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1-5) an ultraviolet light-emitting device (¶ 130), comprising:
a substrate 21;
a plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2, disposed on the substrate 21, wherein the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 are electrically connected to each other, each of the plurality of light- emitting structure C1,C2 comprises a first semiconductor layer 23, a light-emitting layer 25, a second semiconductor layer 27, a first contact electrode 35a,35b, and a second contact electrode 31, the light-emitting layer 25 is located between the first semiconductor layer 23 and the second semiconductor layer 27, the first contact electrode 35a,35b is located on the first semiconductor layer 23, and the second contact electrode 31 is located on the second semiconductor layer 27;
wherein viewing from a top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate 21 (see FIGs. 1 or 5), the second contact electrode 31 of each of the plurality of light-emitting structures has four edges (rectangular shaped), and the four edges are sequentially defined as a first (left) edge, a second (top) edge, a third (right) edge, and a fourth (bottom) edge in a clockwise order, and the first contact electrode 35a,35b at least surrounds three edges of the four edges (35a surrounds 31 in C1; 35b surrounds 31 in C2, ¶ 147,149);
wherein viewing from the top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate 21 (FIGs. 1 & 5), “the second contact electrode 31 (of C2) does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode 35a (of C1)”.
Alternatively, the “first contact electrode” may correspond to only the lower portion of layers 35a,35b contacting the first semiconductor layer 23 (e.g. portion of 35a,35b below top surface of mesas M). See FIGs. 2-3 annotated below.
PNG
media_image2.png
782
776
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As such, the second contact electrode 31 of C1 does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode (lower portion of 35a) since the lower portion of 35a has a projection outside the mesa M, while the second contact electrode 31 is projected onto the top surface of the mesa M. Similarly, the second contact electrode 31 of C2 does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode (lower portion of 35b) since the lower portion of 35b has a projection outside the mesa M, while the second contact electrode 31 is projected onto the top surface of the mesa M.
In re claim 2, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1 & 5) wherein each of the plurality of light-emitting structures has a mesa, the mesa refers to an upper surface of the first semiconductor layer 23 that is not shielded by the light-emitting layer 25, a horizontal projection area of the mesa of each of the plurality of light-emitting structures (a select exposed surface area of first semiconductor layer 23) accounts for 30% to 70% of a horizontal projection area of that light-emitting structure (as best understood, a select surface area of respective C1,C2). Claimed “horizontal projection area” can be any select area portion. There exist a select area portion of the exposed surface area of OH’s semiconductor layer 23 that is 30% to 70% of a select area portion of the surface area of each corresponding light-emitting structures C1,C2. E.g. one may choose a surface area of OH’s semiconductor layer 23 such that it is 30% to 70% of a chosen surface area a light-emitting structure C1,C2.
In re claim 3, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1-5) wherein each of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 further comprises a first protection electrode which covers the first contact electrode 35a,35b (¶ 150).
In re claim 4, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1-5) wherein the ultraviolet light-emitting device further comprises a first insulating structure 29+33, the first insulating structure 29+33 covers the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2, and has a first opening 33c and a second opening 33a.
In re claim 5, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 2-4) wherein the first insulating structure 29+33 comprises a first insulating layer 29 and a second insulating layer 33, the first insulating layer 29 is located between “the plurality of light-emitting structure” C1,C2 and the second insulating layer 33, the first insulating layer 29 is a SiO2 film (¶ 140), and the second insulating layer 33 is a DBR reflective layer (SiO2/TiO2 DBR, ¶ 146).
PNG
media_image3.png
566
968
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In re claim 6, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 1, 4 & 5) wherein the ultraviolet light-emitting device further comprises a bridge electrode (portion of 35b that extends from C2 into C1), one end of the bridge electrode (portion of 35b near left edge of C2) is electrically connected to the first contact electrode of one of the plurality of light-emitting structures (portion of 35b inside C2) through the first opening 33c, and the other end of the bridge electrode (portion of 35b in C1) is electrically connected to the second contact electrode 31 of another one of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1 through the second opening 33a.
In re claim 7, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs 1-5) wherein the ultraviolet light-emitting device further comprises a second insulating structure 37, a first pad 39a and a second pad 39b, the second insulating structure 37 covers the first insulating structure 29+33 and the bridge electrode (portion of 35b extending from C2 into C1), and has a third opening 37a and a fourth opening 37b, the first pad 39a is electrically connected to the first contact electrode (lower portion of 35a) of “one of the plurality of the light-emitting structures” C1 through “the first opening” (as best understood, opening 33c in C1 in which upper portion of 35a extends) and third opening 37a (see FIG. 2), and the second pad 39b is electrically connected to the second contact electrode 31 of “another one of the plurality of light-emitting structures” C2 through “the second opening” (as best understood, opening 33b) and fourth opening 37b” (see FIG. 3).
In re claim 8, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 1) wherein viewing from the top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate 21, the second pad 39b is entirely located at an inner side “between two adjacent ones of the first contact electrodes” (as best understood, second pad 39b is between 35a and a right side portion of 35b).
In re claim 9, as best understood, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 1) wherein viewing from the top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate, the projection of the second pad 39b does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode of “one of the plurality of light-emitting structures” (protection of 35a in C1 or projection of peripheral portion of 35b in C2).
In re claim 13, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 2) wherein the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 are connected in series (¶ 80, 128).
In re claim 14, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 1) wherein the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 consists of two light-emitting structures C1,C2, and viewing from the top of the ultraviolet light- emitting device toward the substrate 21, a part of the first contact electrode 35a,35b (in opening 33C) of one of the two light-emitting structures is enclosed by the second semiconductor layer 27 thereof (the portion of the contact electrodes 35a,35b in the opening 33c is enclosed by respective second semiconductor layer 27).
In re claim 15, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1-4) wherein a part of the first contact electrode 35a,35b (in opening 33C) of one of the light-emitting structures is enclosed by the second semiconductor layer 27 thereof (the portion of the contact electrodes 35a,35b in the opening 33c is enclosed by respective second semiconductor layer 27).
In re claim 16, OH discloses (e.g. FIG. 1) wherein the part of the first contact electrode 35a,35b (in opening 33C) enclosed by the second semiconductor layer 27 thereof is strip-shaped (strip shaped opening 33C in which portion of 35a,35b is located).
In re claim 17, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs 1-5) wherein the first semiconductor layer 23 of each of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 is an n-type AlGaN layer (¶ 130), the second semiconductor layer 27 of each of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 is either a p-type AlGaN layer or a p-type GaN layer, or a stacked structure in which a p-type AlGaN layer and a p-type GaN layer are stacked (¶ 130).
In re claim 20, OH discloses a light-emitting apparatus (e.g. FIGs. 9-12), adopting the ultraviolet light-emitting device 1021,2160 as claimed in claim 1 (¶ 178,185,192,196).
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 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH as applied to claim 7 above.
In re claim 10, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1 & 4) there is a first horizontal distance between the first pad 39a and the second pad 39b. OH further discloses distance between the electrode pads is about 80µm or more to prevent short circuit (¶ 336). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the pads 39a,39b such that the first horizontal distance is 80 µm to 300 µm to prevent short circuit as desirable while providing sufficient contact surface. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” See MPEP 2144.05 II. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); see also Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382; In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc. v. Biocraft Lab. Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989); In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929). See also KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007).
In re claim 11, OH discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1-4) wherein of each of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 has a second horizontal distance between the first contact electrode (portion of 35a,35b in contact with 23) and the second contact electrode 31 thereof. OH teaches the first contact electrodes 35a,35b and the second contact electrode 31 are laterally spaced apart by layers 29 and 33 along sidewalls of the light emitting structures. Although OH does not explicitly disclose the horizontal distance is 10 µm to 40 µm, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the contact electrodes such that the horizontal is distance 10 µm to 40 µm through routine optimization to obtain a light emitting device with optimum light emission surface area and current spreading characteristics while preventing short circuit.
In re claim 12, as best understood, OH discloses (FIG. 1) wherein each of the plurality of light-emitting structures C1,C2 has a horizontal projection area of the first contact electrode 35a,35b (select surface area of 35a,35b) thereof accounting for 10% to 40% of a horizontal projection area of “the light-emitting structure itself” (select surface area of C1,C2). Claimed “horizontal projection area” can be any select area portion. There exist a select area portion of the surface area of OH’s first contact electrode 35a,35b that is 10 % to 40 % of a select area portion of the surface area of each corresponding light-emitting structures C1,C2. E.g. one may choose a surface area of OH’s first contact electrodes 35a,35b such that it is 10 % to 40 % of a chosen surface area a light-emitting structure C1,C2.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding § 112b, numerous claims remain indefinite for reasons detailed in the rejections above.
Regarding claims rejected over OH, Applicant argues OH fails to teach “wherein viewing from the top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate, the second contact electrode does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode”.
This is not persuasive. As shown in FIGs. 1 & 5 of OH, depicting views from the top of the ultraviolet light-emitting device toward the substrate 21, the second contact electrode 31 in light-emitting structure C2 does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode 35a in the light emitting structure C1.
Alternatively, the “first contact electrode” may correspond to only the lower portion of layers 35a,35b contacting the first semiconductor layer 23 (e.g. portion of 35a,35b below top surface of mesas M). See annotated drawing below.
PNG
media_image2.png
782
776
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As such, the second contact electrode 31 in C1 does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode (lower portion of 35a) since the lower portion of 35a has a projection outside the mesa M, while the second contact electrode 31 is projected onto the top surface of the mesa M. Similarly, the second contact electrode 31 in C2 does not overlap the projection of the first contact electrode (lower portion of 35b) since the lower portion of 35b has a projection outside the mesa M, while the second contact electrode 31 is projected onto the top surface of the mesa M.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2020/0227588 A1 teaches ring shaped electrodes (FIG. 1A).
US 2014/0353692 A1 teaches (FIG. 17) electrodes 65n surrounding three edges of electrode 61 (FIG. 17)
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 YU CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7881. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM-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, WILLIAM KRAIG can be reached on 5712728660. 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.
/YU CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
YU CHEN
Examiner
Art Unit 2896