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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on April 16, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 11, 12, 14 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 9-10, “on one or more of the spectrally selective optical elements” should read --on the one or more of the spectrally selective optical elements--.
In claim 1, lines 9-10, “output portions of the red, green, and blue emitted light exit the device …” should read --output portions of the red, green, and blue emitted lights exit the light-emitting device ...--.
In claim 3, line 4, “that short-wavelength portion” should read --the short-wavelength portion--.
In claim 11, line 4, “that LED stack” should read --the LED stack--.
In claim 11, lines 6-7, “that short-wavelength portion” should read --the short-wavelength portion--.
In claim 12, lines 2-3, “the red, green, and blue output light propagates …” should read -- the red, green, and blue output lights propagate …--.
In claim 12, line 6, “that short-wavelength portion” should read --the short-wavelength portion--.
In claim 14, line 3, “output surfaces of the LED stacks” should read --the corresponding output surfaces of the LED stacks--. Support can be found at least in lines 2-3 of the intervening claim 13.
In claim 15, lines 3-4, “corresponding output surfaces of corresponding LED stacks” should read --the corresponding output surfaces of the LED stacks--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-7, 9, 16-18 and 20 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihara JP 2002277454 (the original document and a machine-generated English translation thereof are used in rejection) in view of Sizov et al. US 2023/0324689.
Regarding claim 1, Ichihara teaches a light-emitting device (e.g., Figs. 1-5; translation [22]-[61]) comprising:
one or more red InGaN-based light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (e.g., LED including the active layer 160 (InGaN) emitting red emitted light by red phosphor (128) conversion, Fig. 4, translation [53]), arranged to emit red emitted light;
one or more green III-nitride-based LEDs (e.g., LED including the active layer 153 emitting green emitted light by green phosphor (131) conversion, Fig. 4, translation [52]) arranged to emit green emitted light;
one or more blue III-nitride-based LEDs (e.g., LED including the active layer 145 emitting blue emitted light by blue phosphor (141) conversion, Fig. 4, translation [51], [11], [12]) arranged to emit blue emitted light; and
one or more spectrally selective optical elements (e.g., 129, 132 and/or 142, Fig. 4, translation [51]) positioned and arranged so that (i) at least the red emitted light is incident on one or more of the spectrally selective optical elements (e.g., Fig. 4, translation [53]), and (ii) output portions of the red, green, and blue emitted light exit the device as red output light (e.g., 127, Fig. 4, translation [53]) characterized by a red output color point, green output light (e.g., 140, Fig. 4, translation [52]) characterized by a green output color point, and blue output light (e.g., 150, Fig. 4, translation [51]) characterized by a blue output color point, respectively.
Ichihara does not explicitly teach the red, green, and blue output color points defining an output color gamut that encompasses at least an sRGB color gamut.
Ichihara, however, recognizes that the spectrally selective optical elements (129, 132 and/or 142) improve the purities of respective colors such as red, green and/or blue (e.g., translation [55], [57], [59]), thereby obtaining the respective colors with good color purity and good contrast (e.g., translation [60]).
It has been well known in the art that display devices may include an sRGB (Standard Red Green Blue) color gamut or a DCI-P3 (Digital Cinema Initiatives - Protocol 3) color gamut for a consistent color standard (high color accuracy and contrast) of the display devices as suggested by Sizov (e.g., [38]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the device of Ichihara may include the red, green, and blue output color points defining an output color gamut that encompasses at least an sRGB color gamut for the purpose of obtaining a display device with a consistent color standard for example.
Regarding claim 3, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, the one or more spectrally selective optical elements including one or more notch or long-pass optical filters (e.g., Ichihara, 129, [53], [48]) arranged so as to reduce or eliminate transmission of a short-wavelength portion of an optical spectrum of the red emitted light, so as to reduce or eliminate that short-wavelength portion from the red output light (e.g., Ichihara, 129, [53], [48]; Sizov, [38]).
Regarding claim 4, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1 wherein (i) the red emitted light is characterized by a red emitted color point, (ii) the green emitted light is characterized by a green emitted color point, (iii) the blue emitted light is characterized by a blue emitted color point, and (iv) over at least an upper portion of an operational range of electrical drive currents applied to the one or more red, green, and blue LEDs, the red, green, and blue emitted color points define a color gamut (e.g., Ichihara, the red, green, and blue emitted color points of the red, green, and blue emitted lights (discussed in claim 1) may define a color gamut; Fig. 4, translation, the description thereof).
Ichihara in view of Sizov does not explicitly teach the red, green, and blue emitted color points define a color gamut that fails to encompass an sRGB color gamut.
Ichihara in view of Sizov, however, recognizes that the output color points of the output color lights filtered by the spectrally selective optical elements (Ichihara, 129, 132 and/or 142) may form a output color gamut that encompasses at least an sRGB color gamut (see the discussion in claim 1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in Ichihara in view of Sizov the device may include the red, green, and blue emitted color points define a color gamut that fails to encompass an sRGB color gamut because the red, green, and blue emitted color lights were not pass through the spectrally selective optical elements, thus, their red, green, and blue emitted color points may form a color gamut that fails to encompass an sRGB color gamut for example.
Regarding claim 5, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, the red emitted light being characterized by a red emitted color point having a dominant wavelength that is shorter than a dominant wavelength of the red output color point (e.g., Sizov, [38]).
Regarding claim 6, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1 wherein (i) the one or more green LEDs comprise one or more InGaN-based green LEDs, and (ii) the one or more blue LEDs comprise one or more InGaN-based blue LEDs (e.g., Ichihara, translation [52]).
Regarding claim 7, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of any one of claim 1, the red, green, and blue LEDs being arranged in a single layer as a two-dimensional array with the corresponding output surfaces of the red, green, and blue LEDs forming an output surface of the array (e.g., Ichihara, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 9, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 7, the one or more spectrally selective optical elements comprising multiple discrete optical filtering elements, the discrete optical filtering elements being positioned opposite corresponding output surfaces of at least corresponding red LEDs of the array (e.g., Ichihara, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 16, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, the one or more spectrally selective optical elements including one or more optical elements that exhibit spectrally selective optical absorption (e.g., Ichihara, 129 absorbing lights other than red light, translation [51]).
Regarding claim 17, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, the one or more spectrally selective optical elements including one or more optical elements that exhibit spectrally selective optical reflectivity and transmittivity (e.g., Ichihara, 129 transmitting red light (translation [51]) and having an optical reflectivity to some extent).
Regarding claim 18, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, the one or more spectrally selective optical elements being positioned opposite corresponding output surfaces of corresponding red, green, or blue LEDs (e.g., Ichihara, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 20, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1, further comprising one or more primary optical elements (e.g., Ichihara, 128, 131 and/or 141, Fig. 4) positioned between corresponding output surfaces of one or more of the red, green, or blue LEDs and one or more of the one or more spectrally selective optical elements (e.g., Ichihara, Fig. 4).
Claim 2 is rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihara in view of Sizov as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Armitage et al. US 2023/0138761.
Regarding claim 2, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 1 as discussed above.
Ichihara in view of Sizov does not explicitly teach the red emitted light being characterized by a spectrum full width at half maximum greater than 30 nm.
It has been well known in the art that InGaN-based light-emitting diodes may include a spectrum full width at half maximum (FWHM) of about 50-70 nm in the red range as suggested by Armitage (e.g., [3]), which is within the claimed range.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in Ichihara in view of Sizov the red emitted light may be characterized by a spectrum full width at half maximum greater than 30 nm because the LED including the active layer 160 (see the discussion to claim 1) pertains to InGaN-based light-emitting diodes for example.
Claim 8 is rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichihara in view of Sizov as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Watanabe et al. WO 2023/106049 (the original document and a machine-generated English translation thereof are used in rejection).
Regarding claim 8, Ichihara in view of Sizov teaches the light-emitting device of claim 7 as discussed above.
Ichihara in view of Sizov does not explicitly the one or more spectrally selective optical elements comprising one or more continuous optical filtering layers positioned opposite output surfaces of the red, green, and blue LEDs of the array.
Watanabe teaches the one or more spectrally selective optical elements (e.g., 22, Fig. 22, translation [78]) comprising one or more continuous optical filtering layers positioned opposite output surfaces of the red, green, and blue LEDs of the array.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Ichihara in view of Sizov to include the one or more spectrally selective optical elements comprising one or more continuous optical filtering layers positioned opposite output surfaces of the red, green, and blue LEDs of the array as suggested by Watanabe for the purpose of simplifying the manufacturing process for example (e.g., Watanabe, translation [78]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 13, 19 and 21 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.
Claims 11, 12, 14 and 15 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, and if amended to overcome the claim objection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bo Bin Jang whose telephone number is (571) 270-0271. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. 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.
/BO B JANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 January 16, 2026