Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/183,482

LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 14, 2023
Examiner
ZHANG, YUANDA
Art Unit
2828
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Nichia Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
825 granted / 981 resolved
+16.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1015
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
53.8%
+13.8% vs TC avg
§102
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
§112
13.9%
-26.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 981 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 2, FIGS. 8-15, Claims 1-4 and 7-12 in the reply filed on 11/18/25 is acknowledged. Claims 5-7 and 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 11/18/25. The Examiner notes that claim 7 is withdrawn by the Examiner because claim 7 depends on claim 6 directed to non-elected species. 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)(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. Claim 1-3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by MIYATA (US PG Pub 2023/0035957 A1). Regarding claim 1, MIYATA discloses a light emitting device (100, FIG. 2, [0029]) comprising: a package (FIG. 2) comprising an upper portion (60, FIG. 2, [0030]), a lower portion (10, FIG. 2, [0030]), and one or more lateral portions (50, FIG. 2, [0030]), the package having a closed space (see annotated FIG. 2 below) defined by the upper portion, the lower portion, and the one or more lateral portions; a first light-emitting element (20a, FIG. 2, [0031]) having an upper surface (a light emission face 21, FIG. 2) and configured to have one or more emission points on the upper surface, the first light-emitting element being disposed on a mounting surface (10A, FIG. 2, [0032]) of the lower portion; and a reflecting part (a planar lightwave circuit 40, FIG. 2, [0030]) having a first reflection surface (M, FIG. 2, [0076]) configured to reflect light emitted upward from the one or more emission points (M reflects light emitted upward from 21, FIG. 2), wherein: the first reflection surface is located within the closed space (see annotated FIG. 2 below); the one or more lateral portions include a first lateral portion (see annotated FIG. 2 below) having a light-transmitting portion (“The light laterally exiting the planar lightwave circuit 40 is output through the light transmissive portion of the lateral wall part 50 that has light transmissivity at least in one portion,” [0032]); light reflected from the first reflection surface is transmitted through the light-transmitting portion to be emitted outside ([0032]); and in a direction normal to the mounting surface (Y direction, FIG. 2), a first distance (D1, see annotated FIG. 2 below) between a lower surface of the upper portion and the mounting surface is equal to or greater than 1.5 times a second distance (D2, see annotated FIG. 2 below) between the upper surface of the first light-emitting element and a midpoint of the first reflection surface (D1>1.5 times D2, see annotated FIG. 2 below). PNG media_image1.png 485 615 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, MIYATA discloses the one or more lateral portions include a second lateral portion (see annotated FIG. 2 above) that is located on an opposite side from the first lateral portion with respect to the first light-emitting element; and the reflecting part is disposed in the closed space such that the first reflection surface is spaced apart from the second lateral portion (see annotated FIG. 2 above). Regarding claim 3, MIYATA discloses the reflecting part further has one or more bonding surfaces (a bottom surface of 40, FIG. 2); and the one or more bonding surfaces are bonded to a lower surface of the upper portion and/or the mounting surface (the bottom surface of 40 is indirectly bonded to the mounting surface via the light emitting elements 20a-20c and optical members 30a-30c, FIG. 2). Regarding claim 11, MIYATA discloses a lens member (80, FIG. 6, [0032] and [0075]) configured to collimate light that is emitted from the first light-emitting element and transmitted through the light-transmitting portion. (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. Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by JP 2007094193A (03/14/23 IDS, hereafter “JP’193”). Regarding claim 1, JP’193 discloses a light emitting device (an optical communication module 901, FIG. 1, [0052]) comprising: a package (FIG. 1) comprising an upper portion (a resin 15, FIG. 1, [0067]), a lower portion (a substrate 10, FIG. 1, [0053]), and one or more lateral portions (an optical fiber 300, FIG. 1, [0061]), the package having a closed space (see annotated FIG. 1 below) defined by the upper portion, the lower portion, and the one or more lateral portions; a first light-emitting element (4, FIG. 1, where 4 is a VCSEL, [0054]) having an upper surface (an upper light emitting surface of the VCSEL 4, FIG. 1) and configured to have one or more emission points on the upper surface, the first light-emitting element being disposed on a mounting surface (an upper mounting surface of 10, FIG. 1) of the lower portion; and a reflecting part (13, FIG. 1, where 13 is a reflecting mirror having a reflective surface, [0057]) having a first reflection surface configured to reflect light emitted upward from the one or more emission points (13 reflects light emitted upward from the VCSEL 4, FIG. 1), wherein: the first reflection surface is located within the closed space (see annotated FIG. 1 below); the one or more lateral portions include a first lateral portion (see annotated FIG. 1 below) having a light-transmitting portion (the optical fiber 300 inherently has a light-transmitting portion, FIG. 1); light reflected from the first reflection surface is transmitted through the light-transmitting portion to be emitted outside (“the output light B emitted from the output end 19 propagates to one end of the optical fiber 300,” [0066]); and in a direction normal to the mounting surface (a vertical direction, FIG. 1), a first distance (D1, see annotated FIG. 1 below) between a lower surface of the upper portion and the mounting surface is equal to or greater than 1.5 times a second distance (D2, see annotated FIG. 1 below) between the upper surface of the first light-emitting element and a midpoint of the first reflection surface (D1>1.5 times D2, see annotated FIG. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 484 698 media_image2.png Greyscale 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP’193. Regarding claim 8, JP’193 has disclosed the light emitting device outlined in the rejection to claim 1 above and further discloses the first lateral portion has a light incident surface on which light reflected from the first reflection surface is incident (see annotated FIG. 1 above). JP’193 in this embodiment does not disclose a light-receiving element disposed on the mounting surface, the light-receiving element having a light-receiving surface. JP’193, in a different embodiment, discloses a light-receiving element (124, FIG. 22, [0132]) disposed on the mounting surface, the light-receiving element having a light-receiving surface (a top surface of 124, FIG. 22). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the light emitting device of JP’193 with the light-receiving element as taught by JP’193 in the different embodiment in order to monitor light emitted from the first light emitting element. JP’193 does not explicitly disclose in a direction normal to the light incident surface, a distance between the first light-emitting element and the light-receiving element is smaller than a length of the first light-emitting element. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to re-position the light-receiving element close to the first light emitting element so that the separation distance is smaller than the length of the first light emitting element in order to maximize an amount of light detected by the light receiving element, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Regarding claim 9, JP’193 has disclosed the light emitting device outlined in the rejection to claim 8 above and further discloses in the direction normal to the light incident surface, the first light-emitting element is closer to the light incident surface than the light-receiving element is to the light incident surface (FIG. 22) except the first light-emitting element and the light-receiving element are arrayed along the direction normal to the light incident surface. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to duplicate the first light emitting element and the light receiving element to form respective arrays in order to obtain multiple wavelength outputs and monitor light emitted from respective light emitting elements, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 10 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 4 The cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “the one or more bonding surfaces of the reflecting part are bonded to the lower surface of the upper portion”. In particular, MIYATA merely discloses the PLC 40 being indirectly bonded to the mounting surface via a bottom bonding surface, but fails to disclose or suggest bonding the PLC 40 to a lower surface of the upper portion 60 via a top bonding surface of the PLC 40. Therefore, claim 4 is allowable over the cited prior art if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 10 The cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “the reflecting part further includes a second reflection surface configured to reflect light that is emitted from the first light-emitting element and transmitted through the first reflection surface; in a top view as viewed in a direction normal to the mounting surface, the first reflection surface overlaps the entire upper surface of the first light-emitting element; and the second reflection surface overlaps at least a portion of the light-receiving surface of the light-receiving element”. In particular, JP’193 merely discloses the reflecting part 13 being a reflection mirror which is fully reflective, but fails to disclose or suggest the reflection part being partially reflective and a second reflection surface configured to reflect light transmitted through the first reflection surface. Therefore, claim 10 is allowable over the cited prior art if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 12 The cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest “in the direction normal to the mounting surface, a lens optical axis of the lens member passes through an intersection between the first reflection surface and an optical axis of light that is emitted from the first light-emitting element”. In particular, MIYATA merely discloses the collimating lens 8 for collimating the light from the first light emitting element, but fails to disclose or suggest the lens optical axis aligning/passing through an intersection between the first reflection surface M and the optical axis of light emitted from the VCSEL 20a. Therefore, claim 12 is allowable over the cited prior art if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. YAMAMOTO et al. (US PG Pub 2024/0231077 A1) discloses a light emitting device comprising a package, wherein the package includes a light reflecting part for reflecting light emitted upward from a VCSEL similar to the claimed invention (see FIG. 1B). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUANDA ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1439. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 AM - 6:30 PM. 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, MINSUN HARVEY can be reached at (571)272-1835. 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. /YUANDA ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597761
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SERIES-CONNECTED VCSEL ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597756
TOPOLOGIC INSULATOR SURFACE EMITTING LASER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592542
SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586979
OPTICAL MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580364
SEMICONDUCTOR LASER 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+12.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 981 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month