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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant election of group I, species IX without traverse, reading on claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 10-13. Claims 3, 5, 6, 9 and 14-18 are withdrawn from consideration.
Remarks
Applicant is reminded of his duty to disclose, to best serve the public interest, all information material to patentability of the claimed invention. Each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a duty to disclose to the Office all information known to that individual to be material to patentability as defined in 37 CFR § 1.56.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 7 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by Wirth et al. (EP-1744375), with the English translation is attached, (hereinafter, Wirth).
PNG
media_image1.png
271
848
media_image1.png
Greyscale
RE Claim 1, Wirth discloses an optoelectronic chip and has a semiconductor body with light-emitting region and a method of making the same. Wirth discloses a light-emitting chip, comprising:
a first substrate 10 “carrier”; and
at least one reflector 6/8 “dielectric/reflective metal respectively” and a light-emitting pixel layer “active layer” 1 sequentially located on the first substrate 10;
wherein the light-emitting pixel layer 1 comprises at least one light-emitting pixel 2;
the light- emitting pixel comprises a first semiconductor layer “p-type”, a light-emitting layer 1 and a second semiconductor layer 5 “n-type” sequentially located on the first substrate 10;
the reflector is arranged corresponding to the light-emitting pixel 2, referring to FIG.1. Examiner notes that the combined layer 6/8 represents the reflector equivalent to the claimed reflector; and
a first surface, close to the light-emitting pixel 2, of the reflector is a bowl-shaped surface, the bowl-shaped surface is concave in a direction close to the first substrate 10, referring to FIG. 1;
the reflector is configured to reflect light emitted by a corresponding light-emitting pixel 2 and adjust an emission direction and/or an emission angle of the light, referring to FIGS. 2 and 4.
RE Claim 2, Wirth discloses a light-emitting chip, wherein the first surface close, of the layer 6 to the light-emitting pixel and a second surface, of the layer 8 away from the light-emitting pixel 2 of the reflector 6/8 are bowl-shaped surfaces, and the reflector is configured as a bowl-shaped structure, referring to the annotated FIG. 1 above.
RE Claim 4, Wirth discloses a light-emitting chip, wherein a side, facing the first substrate 10, of the light-emitting pixel layer 1 is provided with at least one bowl-shaped protrusion 4;
the bowl-shaped protrusion 4 is protruded in a direction close to the first substrate 10; and
the bowl-shaped protrusion 4 is arranged corresponding to the reflector 6/8, and a shape of the bowl-shaped surface of the reflector 6/8 is consistent with that of the bowl-shaped protrusion 4, referring to FIG. 1 above.
RE Claim 7, Wirth discloses a light-emitting chip, wherein the light-emitting chip further comprises a first electrode and a second electrode;
the first electrode 11 “bonding pad” is located on a side, away from the light-emitting pixel layer 1, of the reflector 6/8, and the first electrode is electrically connected with the first semiconductor layer 5 “n-type”; and
the second electrode 8 is located on a side, away from the first substrate 10, of the second semiconductor layer “p-type”, and the second electrode 8 is electrically connected with the second semiconductor layer “p-type”. Examiner notes that the connection between the second electrode 8 and the second semiconductor layer “p-type” occurs via the coupling region 7, hence meeting the claimed limitation.
RE Claim 13, Wirth discloses a light-emitting chip, wherein the reflector 6/8 is arranged in one-to-one correspondence with the light-emitting pixel 2, and an orthographic projection, on the first substrate 10, of one reflector covers an orthographic projection, on the first substrate 10, of one light-emitting pixel 2, referring to FIG. 1.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 11, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wirth et al. (EP-1744375), with the English translation is attached, (hereinafter, Wirth) in view of Brodoceanu et al. (US 2020/0395521), (hereinafter, Brodoceanu).
RE Claim 11, Wirth does not disclose a light-emitting chip, wherein an isolation structure is provided between adjacent light-emitting pixels, and the isolation structure is configured to isolate light of the adjacent light-emitting pixels.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Brodoceanu discloses a head mounted device including a near-eye display with RGB micro-LED pixel arrays, referring to FIGS. 1, 2A, 3, 6-7 and [0057, 0066, 0100 and 0190], wherein individual micro-LED pixels may be electrically isolated using passivation means, such as plasma treatment, ion-implantation or alike [0189 and 0190].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the instant application, to use the Brodoceanu disclosed isolating structure to separate and electrically isolate the light emitting pixels of Wirth and prevent cross-talk
RE Claims 19 and 20, Wirth does not disclose an electronic device, comprising the light-emitting chip according to Claim 1, or the electronic device comprises a near-eye display device, and the near-eye display device comprises a near-eye display or augmented reality glasses.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Brodoceanu discloses a head mounted device including a near-eye display such as augmented reality devices with RGB micro-LED pixel arrays, referring to FIGS. 1, 2A, 3, 6-7 and [0003, 0057, 0066, 0100 and 0190].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the instant application, to use Wirth disclosed light emitting array in a similar application such as augmented reality devices with near-eye display as a well-known light emitting array application in order to achieve integrated optoelectronic integrated applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10 and 12 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YASSER ABDELAZIEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5783. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 pm.
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, Leonard Chang can be reached at (571)270-3691. 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.
/YASSER A ABDELAZIEZ, PhD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898