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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application No. 18/241,589 filed on May 20, 2026.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Specification
4. The title of the invention has been amended as “LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE INCLUDING MULTIPLE ACTIVE LAYERS AND REFLECTION LAYER AND LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE ARRAY INCLUDING THE SAME”.
Claim Objections
5. The objections on claims 1-2, 5, 12-13, 16, 20 have been withdrawn per the response dated on 05/20/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
6. 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.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
8. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
a. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
b. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
c. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
d. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
9. Claims 1, 3, 6-7, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (US 2017/0256520 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2008/0315179 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Moon et al. teaches a light-emitting device (1210a, para [0091]) comprising (Fig. 18 upside down):
an emission layer (S:1212/1213/1214 light emitting structure, para [0083]) configured to emit white light (this is a functional limitation/ an intended use); and
a reflective layer (1220, para [0083]) at least partially surrounding side surfaces of the emission layer (S); wherein the emission layer (S) comprises:
a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1214, para [0090]);
a second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1212, para [0090]) on the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1214);
a first active layer (1213, para [0090]) between the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1214) and the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1212), the first active layer (1213) configured to emit blue light (this is a functional limitation/ an intended use).
PNG
media_image1.png
592
714
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Moon et al. is silent to explicitly disclose wherein, a second active layer between the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer and the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer, the second active layer configured to emit yellow light;
the first active layer directly contacting the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer;
the second active layer directly contacting the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer.
Kim et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 1), a second active layer (156 upper active layer, para [0026]) between the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (140, para [0022]) and the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (160, para [0033]), the second active layer (156) configured to emit yellow light (this is a functional limitation/ an intended use);
the first active layer (151 lower active layer, para [0025]) directly contacting the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (140);
the second active layer (156) directly contacting the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (160).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the light emitting structure as taught by Kim et al., and modify the light emitting layer of Moon et al. with multi-layered light emitting layer, in order to improve combination probability of electrons and holes within the active layer (para [0004]), and perform high efficient light emission.
Regarding claim 3, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Kim et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 1), the second active layer (156) is on the first active layer (151).
Regarding claim 6, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Moon et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 18 upside down), further comprising:
a first electrode (1216) contacting the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1214); and
a second electrode (1215) contacting the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1212).
Regarding claim 7, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 6 from which this claim depends.
The combination of Moon et al. and Kim et al. discloses wherein, further comprising an opening (see the annotated figure below: Fig. 18 upside down) penetrating each of the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1214), the first active layer (1213), and the second active layer (156, Kim et al., Fig. 1),
wherein the second electrode (1215) is connected to the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (1212) within the opening.
PNG
media_image2.png
592
714
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Moon et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 18 upside down), the reflective layer (1220) surrounds an entire area of the side surfaces of the emission layer (S:1212/1213/1214).
Regarding claim 10, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Moon et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 18 upside down), the reflective layer (1220) is on a lower surface of the emission layer (S:1212/1213/1214).
10. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (US 2017/0256520 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2008/0315179 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sato et al. (US 2012/0205620 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Moon et al. and Kim et al. teach all of the limitations of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Moon et al. discloses wherein (Fig. 18 upside down), a peak wavelength of the blue light is between about 425 nm and about 480 nm (440 nm to 460 nm, para [0111]).
Moon et al. and Kim et al. are silent to explicitly disclose, wherein a peak wavelength of the yellow light is between about 520 nm and about 600 nm.
Sato et al. teaches wherein, a peak wavelength of the yellow light is between about 520 nm and about 600 nm (560nm-580nm, see abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the light emitting material as taught by Moon et al. and Kim et al., and substitute the light emitting material of Moon et al. and Kim et al., in order to eliminate the spontaneous and piezoelectric polarization effects in GaN optoelectronic devices is to grow the devices on nonpolar planes of the crystal. (para [0012]).
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 4-5 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.
Claim 4 recites…. the second active layer comprises a quantum well layer, a quantum barrier layer, and an intermediate lattice layer,
….
the intermediate lattice layer is between the quantum well layer and the quantum barrier layer, and wherein the intermediate lattice layer comprises indium gallium nitride or aluminum gallium nitride.
The prior art, Moon et al. (US 2017/0256520 A1) or Kim et al. (US 2008/0315179 A1) does not disclose that the second active layer comprises the intermediate lattice layer between the quantum well and the quantum barrier. Therefore, none of the prior art of references quoted in PTO-892, discloses the limitation as stated above.
Response to Arguments
12. It has been acknowledged that the applicant has amended claims 1-2, 5, 12-13, 16, 20, per the response dated on 05/20/2026.
Applicant’s arguments in pages 12-14 of the remarks section, were not found persuasive, because a new prior art, Kim et al. (US 2008/0315179 A1) discloses the amended limitation of the claim 1. Therefore, it is suggested to amend the claim (s) that would differentiate the invention from the prior arts.
Conclusion
13. 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.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIDARUL MAZUMDER whose telephone number is (571)272-8823. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
15. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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.
/DIDARUL A MAZUMDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights