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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/9/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1 (and dependent claims 2-10 dependent therefrom) and 4 (and dependent claim 5 dependent therefrom) 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.
Regarding claim 1, “an emission peak wavelength of at least 600 nm” in lines 2 (the preamble) and “the In content in the fourth sub-layer is set such that the fourth sub-layer emits light having a peak emission wavelength of 600 nm or less, and the Al content in the third sub-layer and the Al content in the fifth sub-layer are set such that the fourth sub-layer emits red light having a peak emission wavelength of at least 600 nm” in lines 12-17 is indefinite because it is inconsistent with the specification. More specifically, line 2 (the preamble) and lines 15-17 describe the fourth sub-layer having an emission peak wavelength “of at least 600 nm” while lines 12-14 describe the fourth sub-layer having an emission peak wavelength “of 600 nm or less”. The claim is clear on its face because the two ranges of the fourth sub-layer have the peak wavelength of the fourth sub-layer overlapping exactly and only at 600 nm. However, this is indefinite because it is inconsistent with the specification which shows a peak substantially different from exactly 600 nm (Fig. 10: the peak is 630 nm). This inconsistency renders the scope of the claim uncertain because it is unclear whether a single exact peak wavelength is claimed or if a multi-spectral peak wavelength is claimed.
For the sake of compact prosecution, the claim is interpreted as follows:
encompassing an emission spectrum with a single peak wavelength, based on Fig. 10 of the disclosure;
the endpoints of the claimed ranges (i.e., 600 nm) include a degree of precision that enable 600 nm to encompass the peak of Fig. 10 (i.e., a 100 nm degree of precision).
MPEP 2173.03: Correspondence Between Specification and Claims: “A claim, although clear on its face, may also be indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty.”.
MPEP 2173.02: Threshold Requirements of Clarity and Precision: “If the language of the claim is such that a person of ordinary skill in the art could not interpret the metes and bounds of the claim so as to understand how to avoid infringement, a rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate.”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the uppermost side” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the sake of compact prosecution, claim 4 is interpreted in the instant Office action as follows: “the uppermost side” is equivalent to “an uppermost side”. This interpretation is to be confirmed by applicant in the next office action.
Regarding claim 4, “an active region” in line 2 is unclear whether it is referring to the same active region recited in claim 1, line 6 or some other active region. For the sake of compact prosecution, claim 4 is interpreted in the instant Office action as follows: “an active region” in line 2 is referring to the same active layer and is equivalent to “the active region”. This interpretation is to be confirmed by applicant in next office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reason for the allowable subject matter of claims 1-10 is the inclusion of the limitation “the active region including a third sub-layer made of an Al-containing Group III nitride semiconductor and having a first bandgap energy, a fourth sub-layer made of an In-containing Group III nitride semiconductor and having a second bandgap energy smaller than the first bandgap energy and a fifth sub-layer made of an Al-containing Group III nitride semiconductor and having a third bandgap energy smaller than the second bandgap energy” in combination with the other limitations in the claim. For example, prior art of record fails to teach or be reasonably combined to render obvious the claimed limitations “Al-containing” and “bandgap energy” as these characteristics are collectively related among the third, fourth, and fifth sub-layers, in combination with all other limitations in claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yeh (US 20170104128 A1) discloses Al-containing sub-layers (Fig. 1: layer 4C) but fails to teach the particularly claimed bandgap configuration among other sub-layers.
Edmond (US RE46589 E) discloses Al-containing sub-layers arranged in the same way claimed (Fig. 14: layers 76a, 76b) but fails to teach the claimed bandgap relation to each other or to the intervening fourth sub-layer (layer 90).
Bergmann (US 20110187294 A1) discloses Al-containing sub-layers (Fig. 3B: layers 218a, 218b) but fails to teach the claimed bandgap configuration or any material/composition variation that would imply the claimed relation.
Khan (US 20110073838 A1) discloses Al-containing layers (Fig. 12: layers 14, 18) but fails to establish the claimed 3-way relation of these layers with the fourth sub-layer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-5:00.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571) 272-5055. 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.
/WILLIAM H ANDERSON/ Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights