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 application No. 18404884 filed on 01/04/2024.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 01/04/2024 is acknowledged.
Allowable subject matter
Claims 4-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (independent claim 1), but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art known to the Examiner is listed on the PTO 892 forms of record.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Farrell, Jr. et al. (US 9,231,376).
With respect to dependent claims 4-9, the cited prior art does not anticipate or make obvious, inter alia, the step of: “wherein the light emission operation occurs at the interface region between the second well layer and the barrier layer”.
With respect to dependent claim 5, the cited prior art does not anticipate or make obvious, inter alia, the step of: “wherein the light emission operation occurs at the interface region between the second well layer and the barrier layer”.
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 of this title, 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 1-3, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farrell, Jr. et al. (US 9,231,376) in view of Bong (KR 20130050144 A).
Regarding Independent claim 1, Farrell, Jr. et al. teach a light-emitting diode comprising:
a first well layer (Fig. 5, Col. 10, lines 17-19 disclose InGaN quantum wells which is the same as the instant application);
a barrier layer (Fig. 5, Col. 10, lines 17-19 disclose GaN barrier layer which is the same as the instant application) formed on the first well layer and having a higher bandgap than the first well layer; and
a second well layer (Fig. 5, Col. 10, lines 17-19 disclose InGaN barrier layer) formed on the barrier layer and having a lower bandgap than the barrier layer (optimizing the bandgap would be within the grasp of one of ordinary skill in the art),
wherein the first well layer and the second well layer (Fig. 1, discloses tilted bands 104 & 106) have a tilted band structure.
Farrell, Jr. et al. do not explicitly disclose a red light-emitting diode and wherein electrons in the first well layer recombine with holes in the second well layer through tunneling to perform a light emission operation.
Bong teaches a d light-emitting diode wherein electrons in the first well layer recombine with holes in the second well layer through tunneling to perform a light emission operation (specification discloses “As the active layer 124 has a superlattice structure, the thickness of the barrier layer W may be sufficiently thin, and the well structure of the energy bandgap may also have a superlattice miniband shape having a thin well barrier. As the thickness of the barrier layer W becomes thin, the quantum confinement effect of the barrier layer W may be reduced. Thus, the barrier layer W may function as a quantum tunneling layer through which electrons and holes can tunnel. That is, quantum tunneling of electrons or holes bound by the barrier layer W becomes possible, and thus electrons and holes can be dispersed throughout the active layer 124).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the teachings of Farrell, Jr. et al. according to the teachings of such that “the light emitting efficiency of the light emitting device can be improved by increasing the probability of recombination of electrons and holes”.
Regarding claim 2, Farrell, Jr. et al. modified by Bong teach wherein the barrier layer is made of InGaN, GaN, or AlGaN (Fig. 5, Col. 10, lines 17-19 of Farrell disclose GaN barrier layer).
Regarding claim 3, Farrell, Jr. et al. modified by Bong teach wherein the first well layer or the second well layer is made of InGaN (Fig. 5, Col. 10, lines 17-19 of Farrell disclose InGaN quantum wells) and has a fraction of indium (In) that is higher than that of the barrier layer (It would be within the grasp of one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the concentration).
Regarding claim 10, Farrell, Jr. et al. modified by Bong teach wherein the energy of the conduction band of the first well layer decreases toward the barrier layer, and the energy of the conduction band of the second well layer increases toward the barrier layer (Col. 13, lines 26-30 disclose the capability to alter the conduction properties).
Cited Prior Art
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant.
Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHED AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-3477. 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Gauthier can be reached on 571-270-0373. 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.
/SHAHED AHMED/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights