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
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I (Claims 1-16) in the reply filed on 04/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant argues that the search of the all claims in the application could be made without serious burden. In response to the Applicant's election argument, the traversal is not found persuasive because the fields of search for method and device claims may overlap, but they are not coextensive. Also, search strategies for device and method claims are different. Thus, separate searches are required.
The determinations of the patentability of method and device claims are different, that is process limitations and device limitations are given weight differently in determining the patentability of the claimed inventions.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 17-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 04/13/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/18/2024 and 06/19/2025. The submission 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 § 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2023/0111380).
As for claim 1, Kim et al. disclose in Fig. 1-7 and the related text a light-emitting diode (LED) device comprising:
an epitaxial stack comprising a first p-n junction ST1, a second p-n junction ST2, and a third p-n junction ST3 on a substrate 210;
a first electrical contact terminal CNE1 in contact with the epitaxial stack (Fig. 5);
a second electrical contact terminal CNE2 in contact with the epitaxial stack (Fig. 5);
a third electrical contact terminal CNE3 in contact with the epitaxial stack (Fig. 5); and
a fourth electrical contact terminal CNE4 in contact with the epitaxial stack (Fig. 5).
As for claim 2, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the device is a polychromatic LED chip ([0010] and [0073]).
The limitation “polychromatic” has not been given patentable weight because it is considered to be intended use and/or functional language. This type of description does not affect the structure of the final device. It is respectfully noted that intended use and/or other types of functional language must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). Note that Applicant has burden of proof in such cases, as the above case law makes clear. Furthermore, it has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
As for claim 3, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the first electrical contact terminal, the second electrical contact terminal, the third electrical contact terminal, and the fourth electrical contact terminal are on the same side of the device (Fig. 5).
As for claim 5, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the first electrical contact terminal, the second electrical contact terminal, and the third electrical contact terminal are on the same side of the device, and the fourth electrical contact terminal is on an adjacent side of the epitaxial stack (Fig. 5).
As for claim 6, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the epitaxial stack comprises an n-type layer NSM1, a p-type layer PSM1, and an active region MQW1 (Fig. 5).
As for claim 7, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the epitaxial stack comprises a first active region MQW1, a second active region MQW2, and a third active region MQW3 (Fig. 5).
As for claim 8, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 7, wherein one or more of the first active region, the second region, and the third active region emits blue light [0010].
As for claim 9, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 7, wherein one or more of the first active region, the second region, and the third active region emits red light [0010].
As for claim 10, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 7, wherein one or more of the first active region, the second region, and the third active region emits green light [0010].
As for claim 11, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 6, wherein one or more of the n-type layer NSM1, the active region MQW1, and the p-type layer PSM1 independently comprises one or more of gallium nitride (GaN), aluminum nitride (AIN), indium nitride (InN), gallium aluminum nitride (GaAIN), gallium indium nitride (GalnN), aluminum gallium nitride (AIGaN), aluminum indium nitride (AIInN), indium gallium nitride (InGaN), indium aluminum nitride (InAIN), and the like ([0117] AND [0122]).
As for claim 12, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 11, wherein one or more of the n-type layer NSM1, the active region MQW1, and the p-type layer PSM1 independently comprises gallium nitride (GaN) ([0117] AND [0122]).
As for claim 13, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the device forms a part of a direct- view display (Figs. 1-7, [0073] AND [0074] teach the display device having the same structure as claimed invention, therefore it is capable to have direct-view display).
As for claim 14, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the device is a micro-LED [0073].
As for claim 15, Kim et al. disclose in Fig. 1-7 and the related text an LED direct-view display comprising:
an LED device including epitaxial stack comprising a first p-n junction ST1, a second p-n junction ST2, and a third p-n junction ST3 on a substrate 210, a first electrical contact terminal CNE1 in contact with the epitaxial stack, a second electrical contact terminal CNE2 in contact with the epitaxial stack, a third electrical contact terminal CNE3 in contact with the epitaxial stack, and a fourth electrical contact terminal CNE4 in contact with the epitaxial stack (FIG. 5);
a backplane 110; and
interconnects (CAE1/ANO1)/(CAE2/ANO2)/(CAE3/ANO3) connecting the LED device to the backplane (FIG. 5).
As for claim 16, Kim et al. disclose the LED direct-view display of claim 15, wherein the backplane 110 comprises one or more of active electrical circuitry or passive interposer PXC1/PXC20PXC3 [0099].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. in view of Pan et al. (CN 114725276).
As for claim 4, Kim et al. disclose the LED device of claim 1, wherein the first electrical contact terminal, the second electrical contact terminal, and the third electrical contact terminal are on the same side of the device (Fig. 5).
Kim et al. do not disclose the fourth electrical contact terminal is on an opposing side of the epitaxial stack.
Pan teaches in Fig. 8 and the related text a fourth electrical contact terminal 50/101 is on an opposing side of the epitaxial stack 30.
Kim et al. and Pan et al. are analogous art because they both are directed light emitting devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Kim et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Kim et al. to include the fourth electrical contact terminal is on an opposing side of the epitaxial stack, as taught by Pan, in order to improve interconnections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRANG Q TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3259. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (9am-4pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 5712721670. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TRANG Q TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights