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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 18. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 12-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Dependent Claims 12-20 recite “A semiconductor device according to claim“ while referring back “A semiconductor device” of independent Claim 11 or precisely recited dependent Claims.
It is not clear is the applicant is trying to introduce a new semiconductor device or refer back to semiconductor device of independent Claim 11 or precisely recited dependent Claim.
For the purposes of examination, the examiner will treat “A semiconductor device according to claim“ as –The semiconductor device according to claim--.
The term “a metal reflective layer with high reflectivity” in claims 18 and 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high reflectivity” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For the purposes of examination the examiner will treat limitation met “a metal reflective layer with high reflectivity” as long as a reflective layer is --a metal layer--.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann et al. (US 2011/0187294 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Bergman (Fig. 2, 4) discloses a light-emitting diode, comprising:
a substrate (10), and a buffer layer (11), an N-type gallium nitride layer (12, 14), a light-emitting region buffer layer (16), a first light-emitting layer (321A), a second light-emitting layer (321B), an electron blocking layer (30), and a P-type gallium nitride layer (32) that are epitaxially grown on the substrate in sequence, wherein
the second light-emitting layer (321 C, D) comprises one or more light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layers (InGaN/ GaN);
(“the first thickness T1 may be about 20 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be about 30 .ANG.. In general, the first thickness T1 may be from about 15 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 35 .ANG. or thicker, although other thickness ranges are possible. In some embodiments, the first thickness T1 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG.. The second thickness T2 may be about 18% to 40% larger or more than the first thickness T1. In further embodiments, the second thickness T2 may be about 18% to 32% larger than the first thickness T1. In some particular embodiments, the second thickness T2 may be about 25% larger than the first thickness T1.” [0091, 0096]
a thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer (16) is a pre-set first multiple of a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”);
(“the thickness of each of the alternating layers of InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG. thick inclusive, and the thickness of each of the alternating layers of GaN is about 5-100 .ANG. thick inclusive. In certain embodiments, the GaN layers are about 50 .ANG. thick and the InGaN layers are about 15 .ANG. thick. The superlattice structure 16 may include from about 5 to about 50 periods (where one period equals one repetition each of the In.sub.XGa.sub.1-XN and In.sub.YGa.sub.1-YN layers that comprise the superlattice). In one embodiment, the superlattice structure 16 includes 25 periods. In another embodiment, the superlattice structure 16 includes 10 periods. The number of periods, however, may be decreased by, for example, increasing the thickness of the respective layers. Thus, for example, doubling the thickness of the layers may be utilized with half the number of periods. Alternatively, the number and thickness of the periods may be independent of one another.”) [0058]
a thickness of the first light-emitting layer (321 A, B) [0091-0096] is a pre-set second multiple of the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (thickness of alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), and
a thickness of the electron blocking layer (30) is a pre-set third multiple of the thickness (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”) of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer.
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0058] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose the second multiple is less than the first multiple and that the third multiple is less than the first multiple.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the second multiple is less than the first multiple and that the third multiple is less than the first multiple in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region 325 depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Further, limitation “epitaxially grown on the substrate in sequence” is considered to be product-by-process.
“Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding Claim 2, Bergman (Fig. 2, 4) discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 1, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 90 Å-160 Å (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), the first multiple is 20-40, the second multiple is 2.5-8 [0090-0096], and the third multiple is 1-6. (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”).
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0090-0096] in order to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose specific ranges being for the first multiple is 20-40the second multiple is 2.5-8 and the third multiple is 1-6.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the first multiple is 20-40the second multiple is 2.5-8 and the third multiple is 1-6 in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 3, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 1, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 110 Å-160 Å (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), the first multiple is 25-40, the second multiple is 2.5-6 [0090-0096], and the third multiple is 2-6. (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”).
Bergman does not explicitly disclose specific ranges being for the first multiple is 25-40 the second multiple is 2.5-6 and the third multiple is 12-6.
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0090-0096] in order toenhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose specific ranges being for the first multiple is 20-40the second multiple is 2.5-8 and the third multiple is 1-6.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the first multiple is 25-40, the second multiple is 2.5-6 and the third multiple is 2-6 in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 4, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 2, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å [0091, 0096], and the thickness of the electron blocking layer is 90 Å-960 Å. (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”)
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer [0058] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing the thickness of the first light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 5, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 2, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2500 Å-6000 Å (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å [0091, 0096], and the thickness of the electron blocking layer is 110 Å-960 Å. (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”)
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer [0058] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing the thickness of the first light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2500 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2500 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 7, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 1, wherein
the light-emitting region buffer layer (13), the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), and the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) are all n-type doped nitride semiconductors containing In (Fig. 2, 4), wherein
an average concentration of In atoms in the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) , an average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), and the average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer (321A, B) and an average concentration of In atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer (13). [“For example, the indium composition in each well may be tailored to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in, for example, well thickness. In some embodiments, the indium concentration can be decreased as the well thickness is increased. Decreasing the indium concentration increases the bandgap of the well layer material, partially or completely offsetting changes to the emission wavelength caused by increasing the thickness of the well layer.” [0088] and [“the bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 exceeds the bandgap of the quantum well layers 120. This may be achieved, for example, by adjusting the average percentage of indium in the superlattice 16. The thickness (or period) of the superlattice layers and the average indium percentage of the layers should be chosen such that the bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 is greater than the bandgap of the wells 120. By keeping the bandgap of the superlattice 16 higher than the bandgap of the wells 120, unwanted absorption in the device may be reduced and luminescent emission may be increased. The bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 may be from about 2.95 eV to about 3.35 eV. In some embodiments,”) [0082].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose relative an average concentration of In atoms between the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer.
However, Bergman discloses varying indium composition in first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in well thickness [0088] and adjusting the average percentage of indium in the superlattice the light-emitting region buffer layer to reduce unwanted absorption in the device and increase luminescent emission. [0082]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer such that an average concentration of In atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of In atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer in order to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in well thickness [0088] and to reduce unwanted absorption in the device and increase luminescent emission. [0082] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 8, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 7, wherein
an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer (“superlattice structure 16 including alternating layers of silicon-doped GaN and/or InGaN”) [0071] and (“the superlattice 16 is doped with an n-type impurity such as silicon at a level of from about 1.times.10.sup.17 cm.sup.-3 to about 5.times.10.sup.19 cm.sup.-3. Such a doping level may be actual doping or average doping of the layers of the superlattice 16. If such doping level is an average doping level, then it may be beneficial to provide doped layers adjacent the superlattice structure 16 that provide the desired average doping which the doping of the adjacent layers is averaged over the adjacent layers and the superlattice structure 16.“) [0059] and an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer and an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the first light-emitting layer. [0072]
Bergman does not explicitly disclose relative an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms between the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer.
However, Bergman discloses varying n-type impurity atoms in first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer to adjust desired emission wavelength. [0072] and adjusting concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the superlattice the light-emitting region buffer layer to influence the operating voltage of the device and reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency improve crystallinity and/or realize conductivity with optimized strain. [0059-0060]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer is greater than an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than or equal to an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the first light-emitting layer in order to desired emission wavelength. [0072] and to influence the operating voltage of the device and reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency improve crystallinity and/or realize conductivity with optimized strain. [0059-0060] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 9, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 7, wherein
the light-emitting region buffer layer (16) comprises one or more sub-layer pairs epitaxially grown in sequence (“a nitride superlattice structure 16 that may include alternating layers of silicon-doped GaN and/or InGaN, “ [0050, 0058, 0082].
Bergman further discloses varying In content in a sub-layer pair from In content in the next sub-layer pair in the light-emitting region buffer layer. 0058, 0082] to influence the operating voltage of the device have superlattice thickness and composition parameters that reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency [0059].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose that an In content in a sub-layer pair is less than the In content in the next sub-layer pair in the light-emitting region buffer layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman In content in a sub-layer pair is less than the In content in the next sub-layer pair in the light-emitting region buffer layer in order to influence the operating voltage of the device have superlattice thickness and composition parameters that reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency [0059] and to reduce unwanted absorption in the device and increase luminescent emission. [0082] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 10, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 1, wherein
the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) comprises:
a first light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C) and a second light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321D), wherein
the first light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C) comprises:
a first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C) and a first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN); and
the second light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer comprises (321D):
a second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D) and a second light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN), and wherein
the first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), the first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C), the second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN), and
the second light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN) is epitaxially grown on the second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D).
Claim(s) 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann et al. (US 2011/0187294 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 2014/0077153 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Bergman discloses a semiconductor device, comprising
a substrate (10), and a buffer layer (11), an N-type gallium nitride layer (12), a light-emitting region buffer layer (16), a first light-emitting layer (321A,B), a second light-emitting layer (321C,D), an electron blocking layer (30), and a P-type gallium nitride layer (32) that are epitaxially grown on the substrate (10) in sequence, wherein
the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) comprises one or more light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layers (321C);
a thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer (16) (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”) [0058] is a pre-set first multiple of a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C);
a thickness of the first light-emitting layer (321A, B) is a pre-set second multiple of the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C),
(“the first thickness T1 may be about 20 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be about 30 .ANG.. In general, the first thickness T1 may be from about 15 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 35 .ANG. or thicker, although other thickness ranges are possible. In some embodiments, the first thickness T1 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG.. The second thickness T2 may be about 18% to 40% larger or more than the first thickness T1. In further embodiments, the second thickness T2 may be about 18% to 32% larger than the first thickness T1. In some particular embodiments, the second thickness T2 may be about 25% larger than the first thickness T1.” [0091, 0096]
and
a thickness of the electron blocking layer (30) is a pre-set third multiple of the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”),
and wherein
the semiconductor device further comprises:
P electrode (24), disposed on and electrically connected to the P-type gallium nitride layer (32), and, N electrode (23), electrically connected to the N-type gallium nitride layer (12).
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0090-0096] in order to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose that the second multiple is less than the first multiple, the third multiple is less than the first multiple and N electrode disposed on the N-type gallium nitride layer.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the second multiple is less than the first multiple and that the third multiple is less than the first multiple in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Bergman does not explicitly disclose that N electrode disposed on the N-type gallium nitride layer.
Li (Fig. 2) discloses N electrode (130) disposed on the N-type gallium nitride layer (60).
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman in view of Li such that N electrode disposed on the N-type gallium nitride layer to allow electrical access to the doped semiconductor layer [0029]
Further, limitation “epitaxially grown on the substrate in sequence” is considered to be product-by-process.
“Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding Claim 12, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 90 Å-160 Å, (“ the first thickness T1 may be about 20 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be about 30 .ANG.. In general, the first thickness T1 may be from about 15 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 35 .ANG. or thicker, although other thickness ranges are possible.”) the first multiple is 20-40, the second multiple is 2.5-8, [0090-0096] and the third multiple is 1-6 (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”).
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0091, 0096] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman in view of Lee does not explicitly disclose specific ranges being for the first multiple is 20-40, the second multiple is 2.5-8 and the third multiple is 1-6.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the first multiple is 20-40the second multiple is 2.5-8 and the third multiple is 1-6 in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 13, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å, (“the superlattice structure 16 includes alternating layers of GaN and InGaN” “InGaN is about 5-40 .ANG” and “GaN is about 5-100 .ANG.”), the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å [0091, 0096], and the thickness of the electron blocking layer is 90 Å-960 Å. (“The layer 30 may be between about 0 and 300 .ANG. thick inclusive and in some cases may be about 150 .ANG. thick”).
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer [0058] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing the thickness of the first light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
Bergman does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the thickness of the light-emitting region buffer layer is 2000 Å-6000 Å and the thickness of the first light-emitting layer is 500 Å-700 Å in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 14, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 12, wherein
the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 110 Å-160 Å (“ the first thickness T1 may be about 20 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be about 30 .ANG.. In general, the first thickness T1 may be from about 15 .ANG. to about 25 .ANG., while the second thickness T2 may be from about 20 .ANG. to about 35 .ANG. or thicker, although other thickness ranges are possible.”), the second multiple is 3-8.
Bergman does not explicitly disclose specific ranges being for the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 110 Å-160 Å and the second multiple is 2.5-6.
The Examiner notes that Bergman discloses optimizing thickness for a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer [0058] in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060] and optimizing a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer for the purpose of enhanced recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman and have a thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer, a thickness of the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer such that the thickness of the light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer is 110 Å-160 Å and the second multiple is 2.5-6 in order to improve crystallinity and/or conductivity with optimized strain may be realized [0060], to enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness and increase efficiency based on operating current [0091, 0093] and enhance recombination of carriers in the active region depending on the current through the device and enhancement of carrier recombination resulting in increased brightness [0092] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 15, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 12, wherein
the light-emitting region buffer layer (13), the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), and the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) are all n-type doped nitride semiconductors containing In (Fig. 2, 4), wherein
an average concentration of In atoms in the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) , an average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), and the average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer (321A, B) and an average concentration of In atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer (13). [“For example, the indium composition in each well may be tailored to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in, for example, well thickness. In some embodiments, the indium concentration can be decreased as the well thickness is increased. Decreasing the indium concentration increases the bandgap of the well layer material, partially or completely offsetting changes to the emission wavelength caused by increasing the thickness of the well layer.” [0088] and [“the bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 exceeds the bandgap of the quantum well layers 120. This may be achieved, for example, by adjusting the average percentage of indium in the superlattice 16. The thickness (or period) of the superlattice layers and the average indium percentage of the layers should be chosen such that the bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 is greater than the bandgap of the wells 120. By keeping the bandgap of the superlattice 16 higher than the bandgap of the wells 120, unwanted absorption in the device may be reduced and luminescent emission may be increased. The bandgap of the superlattice structure 16 may be from about 2.95 eV to about 3.35 eV. In some embodiments,”) [0082].
Bergman in view of Li does not explicitly disclose relative an average concentration of In atoms between the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer.
However, Bergman discloses varying indium composition in first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in well thickness [0088] and adjusting the average percentage of indium in the superlattice the light-emitting region buffer layer to reduce unwanted absorption in the device and increase luminescent emission. [0082]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman in view of Li and have average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer such that an average concentration of In atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of In atoms in the first light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of In atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer in order to maintain a desired emission wavelength, despite differences in well thickness [0088] and to reduce unwanted absorption in the device and increase luminescent emission. [0082] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 16, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 12, wherein
an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer (“superlattice structure 16 including alternating layers of silicon-doped GaN and/or InGaN”) [0071] and (“the superlattice 16 is doped with an n-type impurity such as silicon at a level of from about 1.times.10.sup.17 cm.sup.-3 to about 5.times.10.sup.19 cm.sup.-3. Such a doping level may be actual doping or average doping of the layers of the superlattice 16. If such doping level is an average doping level, then it may be beneficial to provide doped layers adjacent the superlattice structure 16 that provide the desired average doping which the doping of the adjacent layers is averaged over the adjacent layers and the superlattice structure 16.“) [0059] and an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer and an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the first light-emitting layer. [0072]
Bergman in view of Li does not explicitly disclose relative an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms between the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer.
However, Bergman discloses varying n-type impurity atoms in first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer to adjust desired emission wavelength. [0072] and adjusting concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the superlattice the light-emitting region buffer layer to influence the operating voltage of the device and reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency improve crystallinity and/or realize conductivity with optimized strain. [0059-0060]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman in view of Li and have an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer is greater than an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than or equal to an average concentration of n-type impurity atoms in the first light-emitting layer in order to desired emission wavelength. [0072] and to influence the operating voltage of the device and reduce operating voltage and increase optical efficiency improve crystallinity and/or realize conductivity with optimized strain. [0059-0060] and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 17, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein
the second light-emitting layer (321C, D) comprises:
a first light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C) and a second light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321D), wherein
the first light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321C) comprises:
a first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C) and a first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN); and
the second light-emitting well-barrier pair sub-layer (321D) comprises:
a second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D) and a second light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN), and wherein
the first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting layer (321A, B), the first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting well sub-layer (320C), the second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D) is epitaxially grown on the first light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN), and
the second light-emitting barrier sub-layer (GaN) is epitaxially grown on the second light-emitting well sub-layer (320D).
Regarding Claim 18, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein
a reflective layer (23) is generally provided on a back side of the substrate (10),
the reflective layer is a Distributed Bragg Reflector layer or a metal reflective layer with high reflectivity.(23)
Regarding Claim 19, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein a reflective layer (23) is generally provided on a back side of the substrate (10), the reflective layer is a Distributed Bragg Reflector layer or a metal reflective layer with high reflectivity.(23)
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann et al. (US 2011/0187294 A1) in view of Li (US 2021/0074875 A1;hereinafter Li/875).
Regarding Claim 6, Bergman discloses the light-emitting diode according to claim 1, wherein
the light-emitting region buffer layer (16), the first light-emitting layer (321A/B), and the second light-emitting layer (321 C,D) are all n-type doped nitride semiconductors (Fig. 2) containing Al.
Li/875 (Fig. 1-3) discloses varying average concentration of Al atoms through multiple quantum well layers (106) and buffer layer (104) [0039] to realize deep ultraviolet light emitting diode [0055]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman in view of Li/875 and have average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer such that an average concentration of Al atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer in order to realize deep ultraviolet light emitting diode [0055]and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann et al. (US 2011/0187294 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 2014/0077153 A1) and further in view of Li (US 2021/0074875 A1;hereinafter Li/875).
Regarding Claim 20, Bergman in view of Li discloses a semiconductor device according to claim 11, wherein
the light-emitting region buffer layer (16), t (321A/B), and the second light-emitting layer (321 C,D) are all n-type doped nitride semiconductors (Fig. 2) containing Al and In, and wherein
Bergman in view of Li does not explicitly disclose an average concentration of Al atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer.
Li/875 (Fig. 1-3) discloses varying average concentration of Al atoms through multiple quantum well layers (106) and buffer layer (104) [0039] to realize deep ultraviolet light emitting diode [0055]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a light-emitting diode in Bergman in view of Li and Li/875 and have average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, the light-emitting region buffer layer such that an average concentration of Al atoms in the second light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer, and the average concentration of Al atoms in the first light-emitting layer is greater than an average concentration of Al atoms in the light-emitting region buffer layer in order to realize deep ultraviolet light emitting diode [0055]and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DMITRIY YEMELYANOV whose telephone number is (571)270-7920. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a.m.-6p.m.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at (571) 272-1731. 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.
/DMITRIY YEMELYANOV/Examiner, Art Unit 2891