Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/276,738

PHOSPHOR POWDER, WAVELENGTH CONVERSION BODY, AND LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 10, 2023
Examiner
KOSLOW, CAROL M
Art Unit
1734
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Denka Company Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1775 granted / 2171 resolved
+16.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
2217
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§102
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§112
35.1%
-4.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2171 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The Office Action from the Chinese Patent Office cited in the information disclosure statement of 19 July 2024 has been considered with respect to the search report therein. CN 104152144 and JP 2015-61009, cited in the information disclosure statement of 19 July 2024, have been considered with respect to relevancy given in the search report found in the provided Office Action from the Chinese Patent Office. 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. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Chuang et al article in view of the Yeh et al article. The Chuang et al articles teaches a phosphor powder having the formula Sr1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu, where x is 0-0.2. The article teaches the taught phosphor can be used in the wavelength conversion body of light emitting diodes, which read up the claimed light emitting devices. The article teaches the phosphor powder having the formula Sr1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu, where x is 0-0.2 has poor thermal stability. The Yeh et al article shows that Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu and Sr2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphors were well known at the time of invention and that both are known to be used in the wavelength conversion body of light emitting diodes. The Yeh et al article teaches Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphors are more thermally stable than Sr2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphors and table 2 shows that the ratio of peak intensity of an emission spectrum of the irradiation Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphor to the peak intensity of an emission spectrum of the irradiation Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphor after the phosphor has been heated at 200oC is 1 and is taught to exhibit reversible thermal behavior. In view of this teaching that barium silicon nitride phosphors have better thermal stability than strontium silicon nitride phosphors, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to replace the strontium in the phosphor taught in the Chung et al article with barium so as to produce a Ba1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu phosphor, where x is 0-0.2, which would be expected to have a better thermal stability than the taught Sr1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu phosphor. This suggested composition has amounts of Al and Eu fall within the claimed ranges and the taught amount of La overlaps the claimed range. Product claims with numerical ranges which overlap prior art ranges were held to have been obvious under 35 USC 103. In re Wertheim 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Malagari 182 USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974); In re Fields 134 USPQ 242 (CCPA 1962); In re Nehrenberg 126 USPQ 383 (CCPA 1960). Also see MPEP 2144.05. In view of the teachings in the Yeh et al articles, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the suggested phosphor to have the property of claim 4, absent any showing to the contrary. Since Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphors, Sr2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphors and the Sr1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu phosphor are known to be used in the wavelength conversion body of light emitting diodes; one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use the suggested phosphor of Ba1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu, where x is 0-0.2 in the wavelength conversion body of light emitting diodes. The combination of the teachings of the articles suggest the claimed phosphor, wavelength conversion body and light emitting device. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 and 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. There is no teaching or suggestion in the cited art of record of a phosphor represented by General Formula (I) wherein the crystal structure of the phosphor has a unit lattice volume of 0.368 nm3 to less than 0.378 nm3. The crystal structure of a Ba2-xSi5N8:xEu phosphor has a unit lattice volume of 0.37886 nm3 and the Chuang articles that substituting in La and Al increases the unit lattice volume. Thus the suggested phosphor of Ba2-x-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:xEu would not be expected to have a unit lattice volume within the claimed range. There is no teaching or suggestion in the cited art of record of a phosphor represented by General Formula (I) wherein the phosphor, when irradiated with light having a wavelength of 450 nm, to emit light having a wavelength of 800 nm or greater. The articles teach the barium silicon nitride phosphors have an emission that is blue shifted from the strontium silicon nitride phosphors. Thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not expect that suggested phosphor of Ba2-x-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:xEu to have an emission range of 800 nm or greater since the taught Sr1.95-yLaySi5-yAlyN3:0.05Eu has a maximum emission value of 850 nm. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to C. MELISSA KOSLOW whose telephone number is (571)272-1371. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tues:7:45-3:45 EST;Thurs-Fri:6:30-2:00EST; and Wed:7:45-2:00EST. 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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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. /C Melissa Koslow/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734 cmk 2/26/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 10, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600907
SEMICONDUCTOR QUANTUM DOT STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595412
CERAMIC COMPOSITION AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING CERAMIC COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593609
Thermoelectric Nanocomposite Materials
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586701
COMPLEX MAGNETIC COMPOSITION, MAGNETIC MEMBER, AND ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577166
Manganese-zinc Ferrite with High Magnetic Permeability at Negative Temperature and Low Loss at High Temperature and Method for Preparing Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+11.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 2171 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month