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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) based upon an application filed in the REPUBLIC OF CHINA on 07/22/2022.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species L, claims 10-18 and 20 in the reply filed on 03/05/2026 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species are not patentably distinct and examination of the entire application can be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive since the species are distinct because the claims to the different species of a “backplate assembly” recite the mutually exclusive characteristics (different parts or components of a backplate assembly) of such species. Therefore, the claims of species A-L require separate searches in multiple fields, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Furthermore, the species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different subclasses or electronic resources or non-patent language, or deploying different search queries); and/or the prior art applicable to one species would not likely be applicable to another species; and/or the species are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Claims 1-9 and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 03/05/2026.
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.
Claim 15 is 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.
The limitation “a distance between a surface of the solder gradient layer facing away from the pad and a surface of the connecting electrode facing away from the pad is defined as a thickness of the solder gradient layer” fails to particularly point out or define the thickness of the solder gradient layer, because the thickness of the solder gradient layer includes items external to the solder gradient layer. According to Fig. 4D, at least the pad 302 and the electrode 304 are external to the solder gradient layer 100; therefore, the pad 302 and the electrode 304 items should not be included when defining the thickness of item 100.
The limitation “a ratio of the thickness of the solder gradient layer to an area of orthogonal projection of the solder gradient layer on the backplate is in a range of 0.001 to 0.1” fails to properly define a ratio (ratio fails to be unitless), because the limitation compares a length to an area.
Application will be examined with Claim 15 being best interpreted by the Examiner in the following manner:
The backplate assembly as claimed in claim 10, wherein the backplate further comprises a connecting electrode disposed on a side of the pad facing away from the solder gradient layer; a distance between a surface of the solder gradient layer facing away from the pad and a surface of the solder gradient in contact with the pad is defined as a thickness of the solder gradient layer; and a ratio of the thickness of the solder gradient layer to a maximum length of orthogonal projection of the solder gradient layer on the backplate is in a range of 0.001 to 0.1.
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.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 11,508,704 B2; Chae et al.; 11/2022; (“704”).
Regarding Claim 10. 704 teaches in Figs. 9A and 9B about a backplate assembly, comprising:
a backplate (Fig. 9A, items 221a,121a,115 and 110), comprising a pad (Fig. 9A, item 221a) for soldering a light-emitting element (Fig. 9A, item 221a is used for soldering item 100); and
a solder gradient layer (Fig. 9A, items 121b,221b and 223; wherein, “bonding material layer 223 may be formed of an In layer” and “the upper metal layer 221b … an Au layer…, the upper metal layer 221b may be formed of a metal layer that is mixed with the bonding material layer 223 to form an alloy during a bonding process”, Col. 14, Ln. 29-40), disposed on the pad of the backplate (Fig. 9A, items 121b,221b and 223 are disposed on item 221a of the backplate).
704 does not teach about a backplate assembly, comprising:
wherein a melting point of the solder gradient layer gradually decreases in a direction facing away from the pad.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to experiment with different amounts and proportions of In and Au to achieve different mixing levels and mixing gradients between layers 221b and 223, therefore achieving a solder gradient layer 220 (as taught by 704 in Fig. 9B) with routine experimentation and optimization. In re Woodruff, 16 USPQ2d 1935, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding Claim 20. 704 teaches in Fig. 9B about a backplate assembly, comprising:
the backplate assembly as claimed in claim 10; and
a light-emitting element (item 100), soldered on the backplate assembly through the solder gradient layer (item 100 soldered on the backplate through item 220).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-18 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, since the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE ANDRES LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8:30am to 5:00pm).
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached on 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JORGE ANDRES LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights