DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (FIGs. 6A-6B) and Subspecies A (FIGs. 12A-12C), encompassing claims 1-4 and 8-20, in the reply filed on 12/15/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/15/2025.
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 1-4 and 8-20 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.
Claims 1 and 18 reciting “at least one barrier layer … includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer” render the claims indefinite. The “at least one barrier layer” can refer to multiple ones of the plurality of barrier layers. As such, it is unclear if limitation is intended to specify “a first barrier layer” as one of the “at least one barrier layer” and “a second barrier layer” as another one of the “at least one barrier layer”. Or does the claim intend to recite “each one” of the at least one barrier layer “includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer”.
Claims 1 and 18 reciting “a peak of an n-type impurity doping concentration in the at least one barrier layer is spaced apart from a valley of an In concentration in the at least one barrier” render the claims indefinite. The limitation seemingly describes physical spacing between doping concentration and In concentration without specifying respective location. The peak concentrations are just numerical values that do not have physical locations. It is unclear how can the values of the peak doping concentration and the peak In concentration be “spaced apart”. Furthermore, since “at least one barrier layer” can refer to multiple ones of the plurality of barrier layers, it is unclear which one of the multiple barrier layers does the peak “in the at least one barrier layer” refer to. Similarly, it is unclear which one of the multiple barrier layers does the valley “in the at least one barrier layer” refer to. And furthermore, it is unclear the peak and valley are intended to refer to the same barrier layer or different ones of the multiple barrier layers.
Claim 4 reciting “all of the plurality of barrier layers include the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if the claimed limitation is intended to recite the totally of “all of the plurality of barrier layers” include the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer, i.e. only the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer are required in “all of the plurality of barrier layers”. This would not be further limiting claim 1 which already requires a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer in the “at least one barrier layer”. Or is the limitation intended to recite each of the plurality of barrier layer includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer?
Claim 8 reciting “at least two barrier layers among the plurality of barrier layers include the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer” renders the claim indefinite for similar reason as claim 4. It is unclear if the “at least two barrier layers” include the first barrier layer and the second barrier in total, requiring only one first barrier layer and one second barrier layer in the “at least two barrier layers”. Or is the limitation intended to recite each of the at least two barrier layers includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer?
Claim 9 reciting “the at least two barrier layers are arranged in an order of high or low doping concentration” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear what constitutes “an order of high doping concentration” or “an order of low doping concentration”. And how are the barrier layers arranged “in an order of high or low doping concentration”?
Claim 10 reciting “the barrier layers” renders the claim indefinite for improper antecedent basis. It is unclear if “the barrier layers” is referring to the “at least two barrier layers” or the “plurality of barrier layers”. Furthermore, the recitation “disposed close to the second conductivity type semiconductor layer” renders the claim indefinite. Relative to what is “close to” being defined?
Claims 11 and 19 reciting “the n-type impurity in the upper active layer” lacks antecedent basis. While claims 1 and 18 previously recite “n-type impurity doping concentration in the at least one barrier layer”, there is no antecedent basis for “the n-type impurity” in the upper active layer overall. Furthermore, the recitation “the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity are disposed away from the valley points of the In content profile” renders the claims indefinite. Firstly, it is unclear what constitutes “disposed away”. In the instance that it refers to separate physical disposition, it is unclear how do the peak points and valley points, referring to concentration values, are considered to be physically separate in disposition. Furthermore, it is unclear if the claim intend for the entirety of the “peak points” to be “disposed away” from the “entirety of the valley points” in a non-interweaving manner. Or do the peak points “each” need to be “disposed away” from “each” of the valley points? Or does the claim intend some of the peak points to be “disposed away” from some of the valley points?
Claim 12 reciting “the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity are disposed between the peak point and the valley point of the In content profile” renders the claim indefinite. Plural peaks points and valley points of the In content profile are previously recited in claim 11. It is unclear what is referred to by “the peak point” and “the valley point” of the In content profile.
Claim 14 reciting “the peak point” lacks adequate antecedent basis. Claim 11 previously seemingly recite a plurality of “peak points”. It is unclear if “the peak point” is intended to refer to all of the previously recited “peak points” or one of the previously recited “peak points”.
Other claims are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
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 1-4 and 8-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US 2007/0007541 A1 (Kim) in view of Yoo et al. US 2019/0296187 A1 (Yoo).
PNG
media_image1.png
498
664
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In re claim 1, as best understood, Kim discloses a light emitting diode (FIGs. 3-4), comprising:
a first conductivity type semiconductor layer 33;
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38;
a lower active layer 35 disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer 33 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38; and
an upper active layer 36 disposed between the lower active layer 35 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38, wherein:
the lower active layer 35 emits light having a wavelength different from that of the upper active layer 36 (active region 35 emitting blue, active region 36 emitting green, ¶ 35-36),
the upper active layer 36 includes a plurality of well layers and a plurality of barrier layers (¶ 36).
Kim does not explicitly disclose “at least one barrier layer among the plurality of barrier layers includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer having an n-type impurity doping concentration different from that of the first barrier layer, and a peak of an n-type impurity dopinq concentration in the at least one barrier layer is spaced apart from a valley of an In concentration in the at least one barrier layer”.
PNG
media_image2.png
390
816
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Yoo discloses a light emitting diode (FIGs. 4-5), comprising:
a first conductivity type semiconductor layer 130;
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160;
an active layer 140 disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer 130 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160; wherein
the active layer 140 emits light having a relatively long wavelength (e.g. green, ¶ 51),
the active layer 140 includes a plurality of well layers 143 and a plurality of barrier layers 141+145,
“at least one barrier layer 141+145 among the plurality of barrier layers includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer having an n-type impurity doping concentration different from that of the first barrier layer” (¶ 68-69, the first barrier layer 141 closer to layer 130 is being doped with higher n-type impurity concentration than the second barrier 141 closer to 160; in an alternative interpretation, the first barrier layer may be 141 which is n-type doped and is different from un-doped barrier layer 145), and
“a peak of an n-type impurity doping concentration in the at least one barrier layer (doping concentration peak being in the doped barrier layer 141, ¶ 68) is spaced apart from a valley of an In concentration in the at least one barrier layer” (In concentration valley being in the AlGaN layer 145 containing less In than InGaN layer 141, ¶ 59-60).
Yoo discloses the active layer 140 having the MQW structure shown in FIG. 5A-5B prevent shift into short wavelength and ensures light emission in the long wavelength, e.g. green (¶ 51,63-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Kim’s green light emitting active layer 36 to have the MQW structure taught by Yoo to prevent emission wavelength from changing and ensure emission of green light.
In re claim 2, Kim discloses (e.g. FIGs. 3-4) wherein:
the lower active layer 35 emits light having a first peak intensity at less than 500nm (blue light at 450-475 nm, ¶ 36), and
the upper active layer 36 emits light having a second peak intensity at 500nm or more (green light at 510-535 nm, ¶ 36).
In re claim 3, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein the second barrier layer is doped with a lower doping concentration than that of the first barrier layer or formed without intentional doping (¶ 68-69, the second barrier layer 141 closer to layer 160 is being doped with lower n-type impurity concentration or un-doped; in an alternative interpretation, the second barrier layer may be 145 which is un-doped).
In re claim 4, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein “all of the plurality of barrier layers include the first barrier layer and the second barrier layer”. In one interpretation, “all of the plurality of barrier layers” in totality includes the (one) first barrier layer (141 closer to 130) and the (one) second barrier layer (141 closer to 160). In another interpretation, each one set of the barrier layer 141+145 includes a first barrier layer 141 and a second barrier layer 145.
In re claim 8, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein “at least two barrier layers among the plurality of barrier layers include the first barrier layer (layer 141 relatively closer to 130) and the second barrier layer (layer 141 relatively closer to 160)”, and the second barrier layers (two of layers 141 closest to 160) of the at least two barrier layers have different doping concentrations from each other (gradually decrease in doping concentration away from layer 130, ¶ 69).
In re claim 9, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein the at least two barrier layers (e.g. layers 141) are “arranged in an order of high or low doping concentration” (gradually decrease in doping concentration away from layer 130, ¶ 69).
In re claim 10, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein “the barrier layers” including the first barrier layer (e.g. the second closest layer 141 to 160) and the second barrier layer (e.g. the closest layer 141 to 160) are disposed “close to the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160” (“close” relative a farthest layer 141 from 160).
In re claim 11, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein:
each of the plurality of well layers 143 includes In (¶ 59),
an In content profile in the upper active layer 140 has peak points (in layer 143, ¶ 59) and valley points (in 145, ¶ 60), a doping profile of “the n-type impurity in the upper active layer” 140 has peak points (in layers 141, at least ones closer to 130) and valley points (in layers 143 or 145 or in layers of 141 closest to 160, ¶ 59,60,68), and
the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity (in layers 141, at least ones closer to 130) are “disposed away” from the valley points of the In content profile (in layer 145, ¶ 60).
In re claim 12, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein “the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity (e.g. in layers 141 toward middle of 140) are disposed between the peak point (e.g. in leftmost 143, ¶ 59) and the valley point (e.g. in rightmost layer 145, ¶ 60) of the In content profile”.
In re claim 13, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity (e.g. in layers 141 toward middle of 140) are disposed between two peak points of the In content profile (between a left 143 and a right 143 sandwiching the layers of 141 in between).
In re claim 14, as best understood, Yoo discloses wherein the doping profile of the n-type impurity is left and right asymmetric (higher concentration in layers 141 closer to 130 than to 160, ¶ 68-69) with respect to “the peak point” of the doping profile of the n-type impurity (as best understood, “the peak point” may be that of the middle layer 141 in 140).
In re claim 15, Kim does not explicitly discloses a V-pit generation layer disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer and the lower active layer; and a superlattice layer disposed between the V-pit generation layer and the lower active layer.
However, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIG. 7, ¶ 76) a V-pit generation layer 137a disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer 133 and the active layer 140; and a superlattice layer 137b disposed between the V-pit generation layer 137a and the active layer 140. Yoo discloses the presence of V-pits protects against electrostatic discharge and prevents breakdown of the active region (¶ 81).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form a V-pit generation and a superlattice layer between Kim’s the n-type contact layer 33 and the lower active layer 35 to prevent breakdown as taught by Yoo.
In re claim 16, Kim does not explicitly discloses an electron blocking layer disposed between the second conductivity type semiconductor layer (p-side contact layer) and the upper active layer 36.
However, Yoo discloses (FIG. 4) an electron blocking layer 150 disposed between the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160 and the upper active layer 140 to prevent electrons from moving toward the p-side contact layer 160 (¶ 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form an electron blocking layer between a p-side contact layer and the upper active layer 36 in Kim’s device to block electrons from moving toward the p-side contact layer as taught by Yoo.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kim and Yoo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of El-Ghoroury et al. US 2016/0359300 A1 (El-Ghoroury).
In re claim 17, Kim teaches the claimed white light emitting diode including multiple active layers 35,36,37 emitting different color.
Kim does not explicitly disclose an intensity of light emitted from the lower active layer is greater than that of light emitted from the upper active layer.
However, El-Ghoroury discloses (e.g. FIG. 3) a white LED structure comprising active layers 331 emitting different colors (¶ 43). El-Ghoroury further discloses light intensities from the different active layers can be set to obtain desired color temperature of the emitted white light (¶ 27). For example, higher level of blue light intensity would results in high color temperature (¶ 72).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Kim’s LED with multi-colored active layer to have a greater emission intensity in the lower blue active layer than the upper green or red active layers to obtain emitted white light of desired color temperature as taught by El-Ghoroury.
Claims 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US 2007/0007541 A1 (Kim) and Yoo et al. US 2019/0296187 A1 (Yoo) in view of Han KR-20120045120-A (Han).
In re claim 18, as best understood, Kim discloses a light emitting diode (FIGs. 3-4), comprising:
a first conductivity type semiconductor layer 33;
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38;
a lower active layer 35 disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer 33 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38; and
an upper active layer 36 disposed between the lower active layer 35 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 38, wherein:
the lower active layer 35 emits light having a wavelength different from that of the upper active layer 36 (active region 35 emitting blue, active region 36 emitting green, ¶ 35-36),
the upper active layer 36 includes a plurality of well layers and a plurality of barrier layers (¶ 36).
Kim does not explicitly disclose “at least one barrier layer among the plurality of barrier layers includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer having an n-type impurity doping concentration different from that of the first barrier layer, and a peak of an n-type impurity dopinq concentration in the at least one barrier layer is spaced apart from a valley of an In concentration in the at least one barrier layer”.
However, Yoo discloses a light emitting diode (FIGs. 4-5), comprising:
a first conductivity type semiconductor layer 130;
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160;
an active layer 140 disposed between the first conductivity type semiconductor layer 130 and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer 160; wherein
the active layer 140 emits light having a relatively long wavelength (e.g. green, ¶ 51),
the active layer 140 includes a plurality of well layers 143 and a plurality of barrier layers 141+145,
“at least one barrier layer 141+145 among the plurality of barrier layers includes a first barrier layer and a second barrier layer having an n-type impurity doping concentration different from that of the first barrier layer” (¶ 68-69, the first barrier layer 141 closer to layer 130 is being doped with higher n-type impurity concentration than the second barrier 141 closer to 160; in an alternative interpretation, the first barrier layer may be 141 which is n-type doped and is different from un-doped barrier layer 145), and
“a peak of an n-type impurity doping concentration in the at least one barrier layer (doping concentration peak being in the doped barrier layer 141, ¶ 68) is spaced apart from a valley of an In concentration in the at least one barrier layer” (In concentration valley being in the AlGaN layer 145 containing less In than InGaN layer 141, ¶ 59-60).
Yoo discloses the active layer 140 having the MQW structure shown in FIG. 5A-5B prevent shift into short wavelength and ensures light emission in the long wavelength, e.g. green (¶ 51,63-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Kim’s green light emitting active layer 36 to have the MQW structure taught by Yoo to prevent emission wavelength from changing and ensure emission of green light.
Kim and Yoo do not explicitly disclose a light emitting device, comprising:
a first lead and a second lead;
a housing covering the first lead and the second lead and defining a cavity; and
the light emitting diode is disposed in the cavity of the housing and electrically connected to the first and second leads.
However, Han discloses (e.g. FIG. 8) a light emitting device, comprising:
a first lead 512 and a second lead 514;
a housing 510 covering the first lead 512 and the second lead 514 and defining a cavity; and
a light emitting diode 520 is disposed in the cavity of the housing 510 and electrically connected to the first and second leads 512,514.
Han discloses the light emitting diode 520 being mounted in a package housing as shown in FIG. 8 for providing electrical connection and protection to the diode.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Kim’s light emitting diode 30 in the cavity of a housing having leads as taught by Han to provide electrical connection and device protection.
In re claim 19, as best understood, Yoo discloses (e.g. FIGs. 5A-5B) wherein:
each of the plurality of well layers 143 includes In (¶ 59),
an In content profile in the upper active layer 140 has peak points (in layer 143, ¶ 59) and valley points (in 145, ¶ 60), a doping profile of “the n-type impurity in the upper active layer” 140 has peak points (in layers 141, at least ones closer to 130) and valley points (in layers 143 or 145 or in layers of 141 closest to 160, ¶ 59,60,68), and
the peak points of the doping profile of the n-type impurity (in layers 141, at least ones closer to 130) are “disposed away” from the valley points of the In content profile (in layer 145, ¶ 60).
In re claim 20, Kim discloses (FIG. 3) the light emitting diode 30 emits white light without a phosphor (¶ 35). Han discloses wherein the light emitting device emits white light without a phosphor (see FIGs. 1 and 8).
Conclusion
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