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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 2/12/2026, with respect to amended independent claim(s) 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Seo (US publication 2012/0126723 A1), and response to the arguments have been fully incorporated into the claim rejection set forth below in this office action.
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 of this title, 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 1 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US publication 2020/0287080 A1), hereinafter referred to as Kim080, in view of Lee et al. (US publication 2019/0198565 A1), hereinafter referred to as Lee565, and further in view of Seo (US publication 2012/0126723 A1), hereinafter referred to as Seo723.
Regarding claim 1, Kim080 teaches a light emitting diode (LED) array comprising (fig. 10 and related text): a first light emitting stack (structure including layers 22, 23 and 31-33, [0032-0037]) on a second light emitting stack (structure including 21, 62 and 63, [0058], fig. 10), wherein the first light emitting stack comprises a first electrical contact (40, [0039]) on a first n-type layer (31), the first n-type layer on a first tunnel junction (33, [0032]), the first tunnel junction on a first p-type layer (23), the first p-type layer on a first color active region (22, [0037]), and the second light emitting stack comprises a second electrical contact (42, [0041], fig. 10) on a second n-type layer (21) in contact with the first color active region (22) and on a second color active region (62, [0058]), the second color active region on a second p-type layer (63, fig. 10).
Kim080 does not explicitly teach a first light emitting stack on a second light emitting stack on a reflective p-contact electrode bonded to a backplane.
Lee565 teaches a first light emitting stack (20, [0105]) on a second light emitting stack (30) on a reflective p-contact electrode (25p, [0107]) bonded to a backplane (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080 with that of Lee565 so that a first light emitting stack on a second light emitting stack on a reflective p-contact electrode bonded to a backplane so that a plurality of pixels may be formed at the wafer level by wafer bonding, thereby eliminating the need for individual mounting of light emitting diodes ([0011]).
Kim080 and Lee565 do not explicitly teach and a color emitted by one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack is changed from a first color to a second color by varying a voltage at one of the first electrical contact or at the second electrical contact for biasing the one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack.
Seo723 teaches a color emitted by one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack is changed from a first color to a second color by varying a voltage at one of the first electrical contact or at the second electrical contact for biasing the one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack ([0007-0010 and 0078-0080]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080 and Lee565 with that of Seo723 so that a color emitted by one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack is changed from a first color to a second color by varying a voltage at one of the first electrical contact or at the second electrical contact for biasing the one of the first light emitting stack or the second light emitting stack to provide a lighting device in which color mixing and dimming can be performed by a simple method ([0007]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim080 teaches further comprising an electrode grid (fig. 10).
Regarding claim 6, Kim080 teaches wherein the first n-type layer and the second n-type layer independently comprise one or more of gallium nitride (GaN) (fig. 10), aluminum nitride (AlN), indium nitride (InN), gallium aluminum nitride (GaAIN), gallium indium nitride (GalnN), aluminum gallium nitride (AlGaN), aluminum indium nitride (AlInN), indium gallium nitride (InGaN), indium aluminum nitride (InAlN).
Regarding claim 7, Kim080 teaches wherein the first n-type layer and the second n-type layer comprise gallium nitride (GaN) (fig. 10).
Regarding claim 8, Kim080 does not explicitly disclose wherein the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact comprise aluminum.
Lee565 teaches wherein the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact comprise aluminum ([0107-0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080 with that of Lee565 so that wherein the first electrical contact and the second electrical contact comprise aluminum because (a) Al has been commonly employed as an electrical contact material in semiconductor industry due to their well-known electrical characteristics and a low cost of deposition, and (b) it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 9, Lee565 teaches wherein the reflective p-contact electrode comprises one or more of aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), silver (Ag) ([0107-0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080 with that of Lee565 so that wherein the reflective p-contact electrode comprises one or more of aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), silver (Ag) because (a) Al or Ag have been commonly employed as reflective p-contact electrode material in semiconductor industry due to their well-known electrical characteristics and a low cost of deposition, and (b) it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim080, Lee565, and in view of Seo723, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ogihara et al. (US publication 2013/0292711 A1), hereinafter referred to as Ogihara711.
Regarding claim 2, Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 disclose all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Kim080, Lee565, Seo723 do not explicitly disclose further comprising a dielectric layer surrounding the first light emitting stack and the second light emitting stack.
Ogihara711 discloses further comprising a dielectric layer (451, [0078]) surrounding the first light emitting stack and the second light emitting stack (fig. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 with that of Ogihara711 so that further comprising a dielectric layer surrounding the first light emitting stack and the second light emitting stack for insulation among elements.
Regarding claim 3, Ogihara711 teaches further comprising a reflective metal layer (454, [0076]) on the dielectric layer (fig. 13).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim080, Lee565, and in view of Seo723 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lau et al. (US publication 2020/0184884 A1), hereinafter referred to as Lau884.
Regarding claim 10, Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 disclose all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 do not explicitly disclose wherein the reflective p-contact electrode comprises a bilayer comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and one or more of aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), and silver (Ag).
Lau884 discloses wherein the reflective p-contact electrode comprises a bilayer comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and one or more of aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), and silver (Ag) ([0114]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 with that of Lau884 so that wherein the reflective p-contact electrode comprises a bilayer comprising indium tin oxide (ITO) and one or more of aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), and silver (Ag) because (a) indium tin oxide (ITO) and Al have been commonly employed as reflective p-contact electrode material in semiconductor industry due to their well-known electrical and material characteristics, and (b) it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim080, Lee565, and in view of Seo723, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Steinberg et al. (US publication 2016/0309069 A1), hereinafter referred to as Steinberg.
Regarding claim 20, Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 disclose all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 do not explicitly disclose a visualization system, comprising: a battery; a radio; a sensor; a video generation process; a light source comprising the LED array of claim 1; a modulator; a modulation processor; a beam combiner; a projection optic; a screen; and a lens.
Steinberg discloses a visualization system, comprising: a battery; a radio; a sensor; a video generation process; a light source comprising the LED array of claim 1; a modulator; a modulation processor; a beam combiner; a projection optic; a screen; and a lens (abstract and full disclosure, a digital camera comprises all claimed elements and is obvious).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim080, Lee565, and Seo723 with that of Steinberg so that a visualization system, comprising: a battery; a radio; a sensor; a video generation process; a light source comprising the LED array of claim 1; a modulator; a modulation processor; a beam combiner; a projection optic; a screen; and a lens for videos capturing with enhanced audio quality ([0010]).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammed R Alam whose telephone number is 469-295-9205 and can normally be reached between 8:00am-6:00pm (M-F) or by e-mail via Mohammed.Alam1@uspto.gov.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached on 469-295-9060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMED R ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights