DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
This Office Action is in response to Amendments/Remarks filed on April 17, 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-12, 15, 18, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0103095 A1 to Sugimura et al. (“Sugimura”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0376170 A1 to Ivan et al. (“Ivan”). As to claim 1, although Sugimura discloses an optical member (13) having a first surface, a second surface opposite to the first surface, and a lateral surface between the first surface and the second surface, the optical member (13) comprising: a reflective member (11) containing a light-reflective material (additive) and an inorganic binder; a wavelength conversion member (12) disposed in the reflective member (11); and at least one heat dissipation member (14) disposed in the reflective member (11) apart from the wavelength conversion member (12) (See Fig. 1, Fig. 2C, ¶ 0026, ¶ 0030-¶ 0036, ¶ 0040-¶ 0043, ¶ 0045, ¶ 0046) (Notes: a solder material that is metallic or other metal joining material provide thermal conductivity to meet the recited heat dissipation member), Sugimura does not further disclose wherein the light-reflective material contains boron nitride. However, Ivan does disclose wherein the light-reflective material contains boron nitride (See Fig. 1, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0047-¶ 0051). In view of the teaching of Ivan, 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 teaching of Sugimura to have wherein the light-reflective material contains boron nitride because many materials such as aluminum oxide and boron nitride having a high refractive index can serve as the light-reflective material (See ¶ 0047-¶ 0051). As to claim 2, Sugimura further discloses wherein the wavelength conversion member (12) constitutes a portion of the first surface of the optical member (13), and a portion of the second surface or a portion of the lateral surface of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1). As to claim 3, Sugimura further discloses wherein the wavelength conversion member (12) constitutes a portion of the first surface and a portion of the second surface of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1).
As to claim 4, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) surrounds at least a portion of the wavelength conversion member (12) as viewed from a first surface side of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1).
As to claim 5, Sugimura further discloses wherein the at least one heat dissipation member (14) comprises a pair of heat dissipation members (14, FIG. 2C), and wherein the pair of heat dissipation members (14, FIG. 2C) face each other across the wavelength conversion member (12) as viewed from a first surface side of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 2C, ¶ 0036). As to claim 6, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) comprises a portion having a circular arc shape as viewed from a first surface side of the optical member (13) (See ¶ 0032, ¶ 0036) (Notes: the support 11 is circular such that the heat dissipation member is also formed circular to have the circular arc shape).
As to claim 7, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) comprises a portion substantially radially disposed with respect to the wavelength conversion member (12) as viewed from a first surface side of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1).
As to claim 8, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) constitutes a portion of the first surface of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1).
As to claim 9, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) constitutes at least a portion of the lateral surface of the optical member (13) (See Fig. 1). As to claim 11, Sugimura further discloses wherein the optical member (13) has a substantially rectangular parallelepiped shape, wherein the wavelength conversion member (12) is disposed in the reflective member (11) so as to be exposed on the first surface and the second surface and located at a central portion of the reflective member (11) in a plan view, and wherein the heat dissipation member (14) is disposed in the reflective member (11) so as to be exposed on the first surface and the lateral surface and located around the wavelength conversion member (12) (See Fig. 1). As to claim 12, Sugimura further discloses wherein the wavelength conversion member (12) contains a phosphor (See Fig. 1, ¶ 0040). As to claim 15, Sugimura further discloses wherein the heat dissipation member (14) contains a metal member (solder) (See ¶ 0046). As to claim 18, Sugimura in view of Ivan further discloses wherein an average particle diameter of the light-reflective material is 0.6 μm or more and 43 μm or less (See Ivan ¶ 0047). As to claim 22, Sugimura in view of Ivan further discloses wherein the reflective member (11) contains a light-scattering material (See Sugimura ¶ 0031 and Ivan ¶ 0047).
As to claim 23, Sugimura further discloses wherein the light-scattering material contains zirconia or titania (See ¶ 0031).
Claim(s) 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0103095 A1 to Sugimura et al. (“Sugimura”) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0376170 A1 to Ivan et al. (“Ivan”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0198649 A1 to Yamada (“Yamada”). The teachings of Sugimura and Ivan have been discussed above. As to claim 13, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein the wavelength conversion member contains a red phosphor, Sugimura in view of Yamada further discloses wherein the wavelength conversion member (12/20G) contains a red phosphor (20G1) (See Yamada Fig. 10, ¶ 0047) such that a desired color output is obtained relative to the LED. As to claim 14, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein the wavelength conversion member is a layered body comprising a plurality of layers containing at least one phosphor, Sugimura in view of Yamada further discloses wherein the wavelength conversion member (12/20G) is a layered body comprising a plurality of layers (20G1, 20G2) containing at least one phosphor (See Yamada Fig. 10, ¶ 0047) such that a desired color output is obtained relative to the LED by using a single-layer or a multilayer wavelength conversion member .
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0103095 A1 to Sugimura et al. (“Sugimura”) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0376170 A1 to Ivan et al. (“Ivan”) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0018161 A1 to Raring et al. (“Raring”). The teachings of Sugimura and Ivan have been discussed above. As to claim 16, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein the metal member contains Cu, Ag, Pt, Ni, Al, Pd, Au, Fe, Co, W, Mo, or an alloy thereof, Sugimura in view of Raring further discloses wherein the metal member (solder/Ag) contains Cu, Ag, Pt, Ni, Al, Pd, Au, Fe, Co, W, Mo, or an alloy thereof (See Raring ¶ 0312, ¶ 0318) because the thermally conductive solder/Ag materials containing Au, Ag, Cu, etc. provide high thermal and adhering properties.
Claim(s) 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0103095 A1 to Sugimura et al. (“Sugimura”) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0376170 A1 to Ivan et al. (“Ivan”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2013/047874 A1 to Hotta (“Hotta”). The teachings of Sugimura and Ivan have been discussed above.
As to claim 18, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein an average particle diameter of the light-reflective material is 0.6 μm or more and 43 μm or less, Sugimura in view of Hotta further discloses wherein an average particle diameter of the light-reflective material is 0.6 μm or more and 43 μm or less (See Hotta Page 5-Page 7) where the particle diameter is optimized for reflectance and adhesion. As to claim 19, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein an average aspect ratio of the light-reflective material is 10 or more and 70 or less, Sugimura in view of Hotta further discloses wherein an average aspect ratio of the light-reflective material is 10 or more and 70 or less (See Hotta Page 5-Page 7) where the shape is not limited and the average aspect ratio is optimized for reflectance and adhesion. As to claim 20, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein the inorganic binder contains silica and an alkali metal, Sugimura in view of Hotta further discloses wherein the inorganic binder contains silica and an alkali metal (See Hotta Page 5-Page 7) where sodium silicate has a refractive index relative to the light-reflective material to provide high reflectance.
As to claim 21, Sugimura in view of Hotta further discloses wherein the alkali metal contains potassium or sodium (See Hotta Page 5-Page 7).
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0103095 A1 to Sugimura et al. (“Sugimura”) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0376170 A1 to Ivan et al. (“Ivan”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0023188 A1 to Mima et al. (“Mima”). The teachings of Sugimura and Ivan have been discussed above. As to claim 24, although Sugimura does not further disclose wherein a portion of the wavelength conversion member exposed from the reflective member is covered with an anti-reflection layer ,Sugimura in view of Mima further discloses wherein a portion of the wavelength conversion member (12/20) exposed from the reflective member (11/30) is covered with an anti-reflection layer (See Mima Fig. 1, ¶ 0034, ¶ 0039, ¶ 0041) such that reflection incident on the wavelength conversion member is reduced to improve light extraction efficiency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
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 DAVID CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12-6.
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.
/DAVID CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights