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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9.14.2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 4-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 2.12.2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 9-10, “the encapsulant is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof” (emphasis added) renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear if the claimed outer peripheral surface refers back to “the encapsulant has a single outer peripheral surface” (emphasis added) of base claim 1 or to another surface.
For purposes of examination it is presumed it refers to the single outer peripheral surface of base claim 1 or a separate one.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 8 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yu et al. (of record, KR 20200129973 A, machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, Yu discloses a light emitting diode package (Figs. 1 and 10), comprising:
a package substrate (100) including a first substrate electrode (210) and a second substrate electrode (220) that are spaced apart from each other (Fig. 1);
a light emitting diode chip (300) disposed on the package substrate to be electrically connected to the first substrate electrode and the second substrate electrode (Fig. 1); and
an encapsulant (only 520) containing a fluorine compound (“the second resin 520 may include a fluororesin-based material”) and covering the light emitting diode chip to be in direct contact (at 310) with the light emitting diode chip (Fig. 1), wherein the encapsulant (only 520) has a single outer peripheral surface (521) forming a continuous curved surface (Fig. 1), and
wherein the fluorine compound (“the second resin 520 may include a fluororesin-based material”) is contained in the encapsulant (520) as a constituent (component) material of the encapsulant such that (MPEP 2112 and/or 2114) the encapsulant has (at least partly) optical transparency and (at least partly) refracts light emitted from the light emitting diode chip (see below), and
wherein the fluorine compound of includes one or more of fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) (“fluorinated ethylene-propylene (FEP)” disclosed for 520), hexa fluoro propylene (HFP), penta fluoro propylene (PFP), tri fluoro ethylene (TFTP), tri fluoro chloro ethylene (TFCE), tetra fluoro ethylene (TFE), vinyl fluoride (VF), perfluoro acrylic ester (PAE), acrylic perfluoro alkyl (APA), perfluoro methyl vinyl ether (PMVE), or perfluoro propyl vinyl ether.
Regarding “such (MPEP 2112 and/or 2114) that the encapsulant has (at least partly) optical transparency and (at least partly) refracts light emitted from the light emitting diode chip”, this limitation is drawn to a functional limitation of the claimed encapsulant which does not impart a structural limitation to the claimed package.
Moreover, the examiner takes the position that since the prior art discloses FEP as a constituent of the encapsulant which also claimed by the applicant, then any functional limitation based on this material is inherently met by the prior art. See MPEP 2112 and/or 2114.
In the event “such that the encapsulant has (at least partly) optical transparency and (at least partly) refracts light emitted from the light emitting diode chip” is not inherently met, which the examiner does not concede, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive at the claimed functionality in Yu (a) because Yu discloses FEP as claimed and/or (b) so as to achieve “high reliability for light emitted from the light emitting device 300 and can transmit the emitted light” as disclosed by Yu and so as to maximize lighting extraction efficiency.
PNG
media_image1.png
436
943
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein the encapsulant (only 520) has an upward convex shape (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein a separation space (occupied by 510) between the first substrate electrode (210) and the second substrate electrode (220) is surrounded by the light emitting diode chip (300) and the package substrate (100), and
wherein the encapsulant (only 520) is in contact with the light emitting diode chip so as not to be placed in the separation space (Fig. 1; for claim 3, the encapsulant is only 520).
Regarding claim 8, Yu discloses (Fig. 10) the light emitting diode package of claim 1, further comprising:
a housing (800) disposed on the package substrate (100) and having a cavity in which the light emitting diode chip is placed (Fig. 10),
wherein the encapsulant (only 520) is at least partially placed in the cavity (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 12, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein the first substrate electrode (210) and the second substrate electrode (220) include one or more materials of Au, Pd, Ni, P, Cu, or W (“the bonding pads 210 and 220 may include at least one metal or alloy selected from Cu, Ti, Au, Ag, Ni, Cr, Ta, Pt, Sn, P, Fe, Al, and Zn”)>
Regarding claim 13, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein the package substrate (100) further includes a base (100) on an upper surface of which the first substrate electrode (210) and the second substrate electrode (220) are disposed (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein the light emitting diode chip includes:
an electrode pad (301/302) electrically connected to the first substrate electrode and the second substrate electrode (210/220); and
a bonding agent (410/420) connecting the electrode pad to each of the first substrate electrode and the second substrate electrode (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Yu discloses the light emitting diode package of claim 1, wherein the encapsulant (only 520) has a refractive index of 1.2 to 1.4 inclusive.
Claim 15 refers to a property of the encapsulant. Yu discloses the encapsulant (only 520) as “fluorinated ethylene-propylene (FEP)” which a material also disclosed by applicant in claim 1.
Since the material of Yu matches that of applicant, the examiner takes the position that Yu inherently meets “a refractive index of 1.2 to 1.4 inclusive”. See MPEP 2112 and/or 2114.
In the event that Yu fails to inherently meet the claimed refractive index, which the examiner does not concede, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive at a value within the claimed range in Song (a) because Yu discloses FEP as claimed and/or (b) so as to maximize lighting extraction efficiency.
Claims 8, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (of record, KR 20200129973 A, machine translation provided) in view of Hung et al. (of record, US 20170084587 A1).
Regarding claim 8, 9 and 11, Yu fails to disclose (claim 8; alternative rejection) the light emitting diode package of claim 1, further comprising: a housing disposed on the package substrate and having a cavity in which the light emitting diode chip is placed, wherein the encapsulant is at least partially placed in the cavity, (claim 9) the light emitting diode package of claim 8, wherein the encapsulant is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof is in contact with an inner surface of the housing and (claim 11) the light emitting diode package of claim 8, wherein the housing is provided so that a distance from a surface of the package substrate to an upper end of the housing is smaller than a distance from the surface of the package substrate to an upper end of the encapsulant.
Hung discloses (claim 8) further comprising: a housing (150) disposed on the package substrate (110) and having a cavity (MPEP 2125; unlabeled in Fig. 1) in which the light emitting diode chip (120) is (partly at least) placed, wherein the encapsulant (130+140) is at least partially placed in the cavity (Fig. 1), (claim 9) wherein the encapsulant (130+140) is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof (for example, at 141s or 130s) is in contact with an inner surface of the housing (Fig. 1) and (claim 11) wherein the housing (150) is provided so that a distance from a (topmost) surface of the package substrate (110) to an upper (not an uppermost end, but an upper end at 141s) end of the housing is smaller than a distance from the (topmost) surface of the package substrate to an upper (uppermost) end of the encapsulant (130+140, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to include the arrangement of Hung in Yu and arrive at the claimed invention so as to achieve relieving the deterioration of a packaged LED (Hung, [0005]).
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (KR 20200129973 A, machine translation provided) in view of Thompson et al. (of record, US US 20070092636 A1).
Regarding claim 8-11, Yu fails to disclose (claim 8; alternative rejection) the light emitting diode package of claim 1, further comprising: a housing disposed on the package substrate and having a cavity in which the light emitting diode chip is placed, wherein the encapsulant is at least partially placed in the cavity, (claim 9) the light emitting diode package of claim 8, wherein the encapsulant is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof is in contact with an inner surface of the housing, (claim 10) the light emitting diode package of claim 8, wherein the encapsulant is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof is placed outside of the housing and (claim 11) the light emitting diode package of claim 8, wherein the housing is provided so that a distance from a surface of the package substrate to an upper end of the housing is smaller than a distance from the surface of the package substrate to an upper end of the encapsulant.
Thompson discloses (claim 8) further comprising: a housing (“reflector cup 26”) disposed on the package substrate (7) and having a cavity in which the light emitting diode chip (2) is placed, wherein the encapsulant (24) is at least partially placed in the cavity (Fig. 2), (claim 9) wherein the encapsulant (24) is provided so that an outer peripheral surface thereof is in contact with an inner surface of the housing (26, Fig. 2), (claim 10) wherein the encapsulant (24) is provided so that an outer (and upper) peripheral surface thereof is placed outside of the housing (26, Fig. 2) and (claim 11) wherein the housing (26) is provided so that a distance from a (topmost) surface of the package substrate to an upper (most) end of the housing (26) is smaller than a distance from the (topmost) surface of the package substrate to an upper(most) end of the encapsulant (24, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to include the arrangement of Thompson in Yu and arrive at the claimed invention so as to prevent wire sweep (Thompson, [0003-0004]) and/or so as to provide an arrangement for directing light emission in a given direction away from an LED.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 9.14.2026, with respect to amended claim 1 overcoming Song et al. (KR 20190031093 A) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1, 3 and 12-15 over Song et al. (KR 20190031093 A) are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 9.14.2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant alleges, against Yu et al. (of record, KR 20200129973 A, machine translation provided):
PNG
media_image2.png
424
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The examiner notes that the claimed encapsulant is mapped in Yu as only 520 wherein said encapsulant has a “second outer surface 521 may have a curvature defined as a second curvature R2” in Fig. 1 which meets the limitation “wherein the encapsulant has a single outer peripheral surface forming a continuous curved surface”. Moreover, the examiner relies on Fig. 1 which does not contain a third outer surface 522; 522 is part of a separate embodiment (Fig. 3) which the examiner does not rely on. Hence, the structural limitations of the claimed are met.
Examiner’s Suggestion
In order to overcome Yu, and based on elected Fig. 5, the examiner suggests reciting -- wherein the encapsulant has a single outer peripheral surface forming a continuous curved surface which extends between and directly physically contacts both the first substrate electrode and the second substrate electrode-- or a similar limitation that focuses on the overall shape of the encapsulant 200 and a direct physical contact of the encapsulant 100 with the substrate electrodes (330 and 320).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20220293828 A1 to Hakamata et al. discloses a fluororesin layer 140 covering and contacting an ultraviolet light emitting element 120 (Fig. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRES MUNOZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3346. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM Central Time.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571)270-3829. 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.
/Andres Munoz/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights