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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the light-emitting band gap” lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “a band gap of the light-emitting layer” in order to avoid a potential 112-indefiniteness rejection. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6-8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the radial length of the recessed window part” in each of claims 6-8 lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “a radial length of the recessed window part” in order to avoid a potential 112-indefiniteness rejection. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“the thickness of the transparent conductive layer” lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “a thickness of the transparent conductive layer” in order to avoid a potential 112-indefiniteness rejection.
the variables n and λ in “n* λ/4” have not been explicitly defined in the claim and they are considered indefinite. The Examiner suggests adding limitations of n is a position integer and λ is an emission wavelength according to [0030] of the specification in order to avoid a potential 112-indefiniteness rejection.
Appropriate correction is required.
For purposes of examination, the above claims have been examined according to the Examiner’s suggestions.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UCHIDA et al. (US PG Pub 2023/0216277 A1) in view of FUJII et al. (US PG Pub 2020/0403378 A1).
Regarding claim 1, UCHIDA discloses a semiconductor laser element (400, FIG. 3C, [0086]), comprising:
a semiconductor epitaxial structure (comprising layers 401-404, FIG. 3C) including a light-emitting layer (440, FIG. 3C, [0087]) and a light-emitting control layer (406, FIG. 3C, [0097]), wherein the light-emitting control layer is located above the light-emitting layer (FIG. 3C) and forms a light-emitting opening area (d2, FIG. 3C);
a light-absorbing structure (442, FIG. 3C, [0086]) being located on the semiconductor epitaxial structure and forms a hollow part (an airgap between 442 within d3, FIG. 3C, [0086]) to expose the semiconductor epitaxial structure (the airgap exposes an upper surface of 404, FIG. 3C);
a transparent conductive layer (462, FIG. 3C, [0086]) including a recessed window part (see annotated FIG. 3C below) and an extension part (see annotated FIG. 3C below), the recessed window part is located in the hollow part (see annotated FIG. 3C below) and covers the semiconductor epitaxial structure (see annotated FIG. 3C below), and the extension part covers the light-absorbing structure (see annotated FIG. 3C below); and
an electrode layer (450, FIG. 3C) being located on the transparent conductive layer and forms an opening (FIG. 3C) to expose the transparent conductive layer, wherein the recessed window part is located in the opening (FIG. 3C);
wherein a position of the recessed window part corresponds to a position of the light-emitting opening area based on the light-emitting direction (see annotated FIG. 3C below).
PNG
media_image1.png
531
585
media_image1.png
Greyscale
UCHIDA does not explicitly disclose a band gap of the light-absorbing structure is smaller than the light-emitting band gap.
FUJII discloses “the light absorbing material layer 71 may include a compound semiconductor material narrower in bandgap than the compound semiconductor constituting the light emitting structure 20.” ([0156])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the light-absorbing structure of UCHIDA with a compound semiconductor material narrower in bandgap than that of the light-emitting layer in order to obtain desired output beam characteristics, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 2, UCHIDA discloses the light-absorbing structure includes a first light-absorbing layer that is electrically conductive (442 comprises a p-type GaAs layer which is electrically conductive, 442 in FIG. 3C is equivalent to 342 in FIG. 3B, [0082] and [0086]).
Regarding claim 3, UCHIDA discloses the light absorbing structure further includes a second light absorbing layer (442 further comprises a n-type GaAs layer, [0082]), the first light absorbing layer is stacked on the second light absorbing layer (it’s implicitly taught that the p-type GaAs layer is stacked on the n-type GaAs layer forming a p-n junction, [0082]), and the second light absorbing layer and the first light absorbing layer has opposite polarities ([0082]).
Regarding claim 4, UCHIDA discloses the light absorbing structure further includes a second light absorbing layer (442 further comprises a n-type GaAs layer, [0082]), the first light absorbing layer is stacked on the second light absorbing layer (it’s implicitly taught that the p-type GaAs layer is stacked on the n-type GaAs layer forming a p-n junction, [0082]), and the second light absorbing layer has insulating properties (the n-type GaAs layer may have insulating properties depending on the carrier density).
Regarding claim 6, UCHIDA discloses a radial length of the opening is greater than the radial length of the recessed window part (d2>d3, FIG. 3C).
Regarding claim 7, UCHIDA discloses the radial length of the light-emitting opening area is greater than the radial length of the recessed window part (d2>d3, FIG. 3C) so that the semiconductor laser element provides single-mode light emission.
Regarding claim 8, the combination has disclosed the light-emitting opening area and the recessed window part outlined in the rejection to claim 1 above except the radial length of the light-emitting opening area is no greater than the radial length of the recessed window part so that the semiconductor laser element provides multi-mode light emission. However, it’s known in the art to adjust a size of an oxide aperture in order to control the lasing mode of a laser. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the radial length of the light-emitting opening area of the combination with no greater than the radial length of the recessed window part so that the semiconductor laser element provides multi-mode light emission in order to obtain desired output mode, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 MPEP 2144.05 (II-A)
Regarding claim 10, UCHIDA discloses the recessed window part forms an ohmic contact with the semiconductor epitaxial structure (FIG. 3C).
Regarding claim 11, UCHIDA discloses the light absorbing structure is made of gallium arsenide material, aluminum gallium arsenide material, or aluminum gallium indium arsenide phosphorus material (442 comprises GaAs material, [0082]).
Regarding claim 12, UCHIDA discloses the semiconductor epitaxial structure further includes: a first semiconductor structure (402, FIG. 3C, 402 is equivalent to 302 in FIG. 3B, [0075]); and a second semiconductor structure (404, FIG. 3C, 404 is equivalent to 304 in FIG. 3B, [0075]), wherein the light-emitting layer is located between the first semiconductor structure and the second semiconductor structure (403 is located between 402/404, FIG. 3C), and the light-emitting control layer is formed in the second semiconductor structure adjacent to the light-emitting layer (406 is formed in 404, FIG. 3C).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over UCHIDA et al. and FUJII et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sun (US Patent 6,185,241 B1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination has disclosed the transparent conductive layer outlined in the rejection to claim 1 above except the thickness of the transparent conductive layer is n*λ/4. Sun discloses the thickness of the transparent conductive layer is n*λ/4 (ITO 126 has a quarter wavelength thickness, col. 2 lines 56-59). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the transparent conductive layer of the combination with an n*λ/4 thickness as taught by Sun in order to minimize unwanted reflection of the transparent conductive layer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
LAI et al. (US PG Pub 2024/0235158 A9) discloses a tunnel junction having a three-layer structure forming a PIN-junction (see FIG. 3).
SUGA et al. (US PG Pub 2023/0216275 A1) discloses a semiconductor laser element comprising a light absorption structure similar to the claimed invention (see FIG. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUANDA ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1439. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
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, MINSUN HARVEY can be reached at (571)272-1835. 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.
/YUANDA ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights