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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed on 6/25/2026 have been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding amended Claims 1-20 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Specifically, regarding Claims 1-20, Applicant argues that prior art references Hu et al, Oohata et al, Yamada et al do not disclose the amended features. The examiner disagrees in that the reference Hu et al, in the broadest reasonable interpretation, still reads on the claim which is now a new ground of rejection, which was necessitated by Applicant’s amendment, and now follows.
In the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner notes that further description of the holes and flat regions, and in particular how the holes are covered with the light shield layer as shown in Fig 1C of the instant application, would be helpful in overcoming the prior art of record. The examiner is available for an interview at Applicant’s convenience.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15- are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al (US 2020/0135997).
Regarding Claim 1, Hu et al discloses a light emitting device (photonic device 300 [0075] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees), comprising:
a substrate (passivation layer 342 [0088] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) having a mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and a light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a light emitter (light emitting diodes 104 [0018] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and comprising at least one active layer (photonic semiconductor region 108 [0019] Fig 4 viewed from 180 degrees); and
a light shield layer (isolation material 306 [0080] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and defining the light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a first insulation layer (passivation layer 206 [0072] Fig 11, shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) covering the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) overlaps with the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
wherein the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes flat regions (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
wherein each of the holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) is disposed between a respective pair of the flat regions (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) in a cross-sectional view, and
wherein the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall having an inclined angle with respect to an upper surface of the light emitter (104 fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the light shield layer (306 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall and a material having a reflective property,
wherein the holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) are covered with the light shield layer (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees).
PNG
media_image1.png
703
895
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
687
1060
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 1 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein one of the holes (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) is spaced apart from an adjacent one of the holes (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) by a distance corresponding to a width of one of the flat regions (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees).
Regarding Claim 3, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 2 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein the holes have a shape that is one of a conical shape (the examiner notes that in the broadest reasonable interpretation the shape of the holes shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees can be considered to be a conical shape when viewed in three dimensions) or a cylindrical shape.
Regarding Claim 4, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 1 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) further comprises: a first conductivity type semiconductor layer (n-type region of 108 [0019] Fig 4 and Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer (p-type region of 108 [0019] Fig 4 and Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees); and
electrodes (conductive connections 302 [0045] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) electrically connected to the first (n-type) and second conductivity type (p-type) semiconductor layers (108 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees), respectively.
Regarding Claim 8, Hu et al discloses
a light emitting device (photonic device 300 [0075] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees), comprising: a substrate (passivation layer 342 [0088] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) including a mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and a light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a light emitter (light emitting diodes 104 [0018] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and including at least one active layer (photonic semiconductor region 108 [0019] Fig 4 viewed from 180 degrees);
a light shield layer (isolation material 306 [0080] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and defining the light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees); and
a first insulation layer (passivation layer 206 [0072] Fig 11, shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) covering the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) overlaps with the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall having an inclined angle with respect to an upper surface of the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the light shield laver (306 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall and a material having a reflective property,
wherein the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes flat regions (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein each of the holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) is disposed between a respective pair of the flat regions (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) in a cross-sectional view, and
wherein the holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) are filled with the light shield layer (306 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees).
PNG
media_image3.png
609
775
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
608
933
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 8 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein one of the holes (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) is spaced apart from an adjacent one of the holes (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) by a distance corresponding to a width of one of the flat regions (shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees).
Regarding Claim 10, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 9 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein the holes have a shape that is one of a conical shape (the examiner notes that in the broadest reasonable interpretation the shape of the holes shown above in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees can be considered to be a conical shape when viewed in three dimensions) or a cylindrical shape.
Regarding Claim 11, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 8 as explained above. Hu et al further discloses
wherein the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) further comprises: a first conductivity type semiconductor layer (n-type region of 108 [0019] Fig 4 and Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer (p-type region of 108 [0019] Fig 4 and Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees); and
electrodes (conductive connections 302 [0045] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) electrically connected to the first (n-type) and second conductivity type (p-type) semiconductor layers (108 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees), respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowable.
Regarding Claim 15, Hu et al discloses
a light emitting device (photonic device 300 [0075] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees), comprising:
a substrate (passivation layer 342 [0088] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) including a mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and a light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees);
a light emitter (light emitting diodes 104 [0018] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and including at least one active layer (photonic semiconductor region 108 [0019] Fig 4 viewed from 180 degrees);
a light shield layer (isolation material 306 [0080] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) disposed on the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and defining the light shield region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees); and
a first insulation layer (passivation layer 206 [0072] Fig 11, shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) covering the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the mount region (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) overlaps with the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall having an inclined angle with respect to an upper surface of the light emitter (104 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees),
wherein the light shield layer (isolation material 306 [0080] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes an inclined sidewall and a material having a reflective property,
wherein the substrate (342 Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) includes flat regions (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and holes (shown in annotated Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees).
The reason for the indication of allowability of Claim 15 is the inclusion of
wherein the hole is filled with the light shield layer.
Specifically, the prior art reference Hu et al discloses the hole is filled with the substrate (passivation layer 342 [0088] Fig 20 viewed from 180 degrees) and does not disclose that the hole is filled with the light shielding layer. Further, should another reference be found that discloses this feature, it would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references to include this feature.
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claims 5-7 and 12-14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 5:
Regarding Claim 5, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 1 as explained above. Hu et al does not disclose
a wavelength filter disposed on the light emitter and configured to reflect a light emitted from the light emitter,
wherein the wavelength filter includes first layers and second layers alternately stacked.
The reasons for the indication of allowability of Claim 5 is the inclusion of
a wavelength filter disposed on the light emitter and configured to reflect a light emitted from the light emitter,
wherein the wavelength filter includes first layers and second layers alternately stacked.
Specifically, the prior art reference Hu et al does not disclose this feature. Further, should another reference be found that discloses this feature, it would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references to modify Hu et al to disclose this feature.
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 6 would be allowable based on its dependency on claim 5.
Claim 7:
Regarding Claim 7, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 1 as explained above. Hu et al does not disclose
wherein the substrate includes a first surface that the mount region and the light shield region are disposed on, and a second surface opposite to the first surface, wherein the second surface includes a step region.
Specifically, the prior art reference Hu et al does not disclose this feature. Further, should another reference be found that discloses this feature, it would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references to modify Hu et al to disclose this feature.
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 12:
Regarding Claim 12, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 8 as explained above. Hu et al does not disclose
a wavelength filter disposed on the light emitter and configured to reflect a light emitted from the light emitter,
wherein the wavelength filter includes first layers and second layers alternately stacked.
The reasons for the indication of allowability of Claim 12 is the inclusion of
a wavelength filter disposed on the light emitter and configured to reflect a light emitted from the light emitter,
wherein the wavelength filter includes first layers and second layers alternately stacked.
Specifically, the prior art reference Hu et al does not disclose this feature. Further, should another reference be found that discloses this feature, it would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references to modify Hu et al to disclose this feature.
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Claim 13 would be allowable based on its dependency on claim 12.
Claim 14:
Regarding Claim 14, Hu et al discloses the limitations of claim 8 as explained above. Hu et al does not disclose
wherein the substrate includes a first surface that the mount region and the light shield region are disposed on, and a second surface opposite to the first surface, wherein the second surface includes a step region.
Specifically, the prior art reference Hu et al does not disclose this feature. Further, should another reference be found that discloses this feature, it would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the references to modify Hu et al to disclose this feature.
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Related Cited Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Iwafuchi (US 2003/0025657) which discloses an image display unit [0005], and Kim et al (US 2013/0308071) which discloses a first insulating layer and a black matrix [0071].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID PAUL SEDOROOK whose telephone number is (571)272-4158. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am -5pm.
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, William B Partridge can be reached on (571) 270-1402. 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.
/D.P.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights