Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/296,154

LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 05, 2023
Examiner
KIM, SU C
Art Unit
2899
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Epistar Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
695 granted / 899 resolved
+9.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -12% lift
Without
With
+-12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
947
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
57.6%
+17.6% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 899 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al. US20150287762) in view of Shakuda (US 7977703). Regarding claim 1, Chae discloses that a light-emitting device, comprising: a substrate 121c ; a first semiconductor layer 123 and a semiconductor platform (a semiconductor platform is a space between element 131 in Fig. 12(b)) disposed on the first semiconductor layer 123, wherein the semiconductor platform comprises a second semiconductor layer 127 and an active layer 125 between the first semiconductor layer and the second semiconductor layer; a plurality of first electrodes 133a located on the first semiconductor layer 123 in the plurality of openings and not covering the semiconductor platform 133; a second electrode 130 on the second semiconductor layer and not covering the first semiconductor layer in the plurality of openings (Fig. 22(b); a plurality of first electrode pads 137a located on the first semiconductor layer in the plurality of openings and not covering the semiconductor platform; and a second electrode pad 137b located on the semiconductor platform 131 and not covering the first semiconductor layer 123 ( both edge of the first semiconductor in Fig. 21(b)) in the plurality of openings 131a , wherein a first surface of the plurality of first electrode pads 137a is higher than a second surface of the second electrode pad 137b. Chae fails to teach that a plurality of openings passing through the semiconductor platform to uncover the first semiconductor layer and a step difference between the first surface and the second surface is less than 2 um. However, Shakuda suggests that a plurality of opening 4 & 4a passing through the semiconductor platform to uncover the first semiconductor layer (Fig. 1A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Chae with a plurality of openings passing through the semiconductor platform to uncover the first semiconductor layer as taught by Chae in order to provide high quality of a GaN film and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. Chae & Shakuda fail to specify that a step difference between the first surface and the second surface is less than 2 um. However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization. Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain step difference, because it would have been to obtain a certain ep difference to achieve adopting variable contact differences. Reclaim 2, Chae & Shakuda disclose that , in a top view, the second electrode pad comprises a plurality of concave portions and a plurality of convex portions on the semiconductor platform (Fig. 26). Reclaim 3, Chae & Shakuda disclose that each of the plurality of first electrode pads 137a is disposed between two adjacent of the plurality of convex portions of the second electrode pad, and the plurality of first electrode pads corresponds to the plurality of concave portions of the second electrode pad and forms a one-to- one arrangement with the plurality of concave portions of the second electrode pad (Chae, Fig. 4(a)). Reclaim 4, Chae & Shakuda disclose that one of the plurality of first electrode pads and one of the plurality of convex portions of the second electrode pad respectively comprises an end, the light-emitting device comprises an edge, and the end of the one of the plurality of convex portions of the second electrode pad is closer to the edge of the light-emitting device than the end of the one of the plurality of first electrode pads (Chae, Fig. 4(a)). Reclaim 5, Chae & Shakuda disclose that a first diagonal and a second diagonal, a distance between two of the plurality of concave portions of the second electrode pad on the first diagonal is less than a distance between two of the plurality of concave portions of the second electrode pad on the second diagonal. 6. The light-emitting device according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of first electrode pads has a total area, and the second electrode pad has an area greater than the total area of the plurality of first electrode pads (Chae, Fig. 4(a)). Reclaim 7, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the semiconductor platform has a height, each of the plurality of first electrodes has a thickness greater than the height of the semiconductor platform (Chae in view of Shakuda’s Fig. 1A). Reclaim 8, Chae & Shakuda disclose that an insulating layer covering the plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode, wherein the insulating layer comprises a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) structure (Fig. 4(b)). Reclaim 9, Chae & Shakuda disclose that two diagonals, wherein the plurality of first electrodes is located on one of the two diagonals of the light-emitting device (Fig. 4(a)). Reclaim 10, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the second electrode comprises an outer edge, each of the plurality of first electrodes comprises a first extension electrode extending along the outer edge of the second electrode in a top view (Fig . 4(a) & 5(a)). Reclaim 11, Chae & Shakuda disclose that a first diagonal and a second diagonal, wherein a first diagonal distance between two of the first extension electrodes on the first diagonal is less than a second diagonal distance between two of the first extension electrodes on the second diagonal (Fig. 4(b) & 5(b)). Reclaim 12, Chae & Shakuda disclose that a first side and a second side connected with the first side, wherein one of the plurality of first electrode pads adjacent to the first side and the second side is separated from the first side by a first distance and is separated from the second side by a second distance, and the second distance is greater than the first distance (Chae, Fig. 26 or 4(a) & 5(a)). Reclaim 13, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the second electrode pad is separated from the first side by a first spacing and separated from the second side by a second spacing, and the second spacing is less than the second distance (Chae, Fig. 26 or 4(a) & 5(a)). Reclaim 14, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the first spacing is equal to or greater than the second spacing (Chae, Fig. 26 or 4(a) & 5(a)). Reclaim 15, Chae & Shakuda disclose that one of the plurality of first electrode pads and one of the plurality of first electrodes respectively has an area, and the area of the one of the plurality of first electrode pads accounts for a first ratio of that of the one of the plurality of first electrodes, and wherein the second electrode pad and the second electrode respectively has an area, and the area of the second electrode pad accounts for a second ratio of that of the second electrode, wherein the first ratio is greater than the second ratio (Chae, Fig. 26 or 4(a) & 5(a)). Regarding claim 16, Chae & Shakuda disclose that a light-emitting apparatus comprising: a light-emitting device comprising: a substrate 121; a first semiconductor layer 123 and a semiconductor platform disposed on the first semiconductor layer, wherein the semiconductor platform (a semiconductor platform is a space between element 131 in Fig. 12(b) in view of Shakuda’s element 4 & 4a in Fig. 1A) comprises a second semiconductor layer 127 and an active layer 127 between the first semiconductor layer 123 and the second semiconductor layer 123 ; an opening passing 4 & 4a (Shakuda, Fig. 1A) through the semiconductor platform to uncover the first semiconductor layer; a first electrode 133a located on the first semiconductor layer in the opening and not covering the semiconductor platform; a second electrode 131a on the second semiconductor layer and not covering the first semiconductor layer in the opening; a first electrode pad 137a located on the first semiconductor layer in the opening and not covering the semiconductor platform, wherein the first electrode pad 137a comprises a first pattern; and a second electrode pad 137b located on the semiconductor platform and not covering the first semiconductor layer 133a ( at the edge of Fig. 24(b)) in the opening, wherein the second electrode pad 137b comprises a second pattern, and a first surface of the first electrode pad 137a is higher than a second surface of the second electrode pad 137b; and a mounting substrate comprising a third pattern and a fourth pattern respectively corresponding to the first pattern and the second pattern of the light-emitting device (Chae, Fig. 27, para. 0102). Reclaim 17, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the mounting substrate further comprises a first conductor portion and a second conductor portion on a surface of the mounting substrate, and the first conductor portion and the second conductor portion respectively comprises the third pattern and the fourth pattern (para. 0102, Chae). Reclaim 18, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the first conductor portion comprises a first conductor extension and the second conductor portion comprises a first concave portion surrounding the first conductor extension (Chae, Fig. 27). Reclaim 19, Chae & Shakuda disclose that the second electrode pad comprises a second concave portion and a second convex portion on the semiconductor platform, and the second conductor portion comprises a first convex portion corresponding to the second convex portion of the second electrode pad (Chae, Fig. 27). Reclaim 20, Chae & Shakuda fail to specify that a step difference between the first surface and the second surface is less than 2 um. However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization. Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain step difference, because it would have been to obtain a certain ep difference to achieve adopting variable contact differences. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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. /SU C KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 05, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 14, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 23, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604570
LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE AND DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585001
OPTICAL DETECTION APPARATUS AND OPTICAL DETECTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581776
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE WITH HIGH LUMINOUS EFFICIENCY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581914
OPTICAL METROLOGY WITH NUISANCE FEATURE MITIGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563981
METHOD OF PROCESSING SUBSTRATE, SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS, RECORDING MEDIUM, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (-12.4%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 899 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