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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hori (US 20080285608).
Regarding claim 1. Fig 4 of Hori discloses A light emitting device [0017], comprising:
a first semiconductor layer 403 having a first conductivity type ([0108]/[0113]: n type);
a second semiconductor layer 405 having a second conductivity type ([0108]/[0113]: p type) different from the first conductivity type (n vs p);
a light emitting layer 404 [0048] disposed between the first semiconductor layer and the second semiconductor layer (Fig 4); and
a photonic crystal layer 406/407 [0116] disposed on a side (upper side of 405) of the second semiconductor layer opposite to the light emitting layer (404 is located bottom side of 405. Thus, being opposite), wherein
the photonic crystal layer includes:
a first region 406 provided with a first photonic crystal that causes light emitted by the light emitting layer to resonate in a direction orthogonal (horizontal) to a laminating direction (vertical direction) of the first semiconductor layer and the light emitting layer and does not cause the light to be emitted in a direction different from the orthogonal direction ([0042]: ‘resonated within the plane (first photonic crystal regions)’, which horizontally extending. It means the structure acts as a waveguide or planar resonator, trapping and confining the light in that layer. Thus, does not cause the light to be emitted in a direction different from the orthogonal direction because the light is trapped, it does not escape or emit in a perpendicular (vertical) direction. Instead, it propagates sideways (horizontally)); and
a second region provided with a second photonic crystal that does not overlap the first region when viewed in the laminating direction (Fig 4: in the vertical direction) and causes the light emitted by the light emitting layer to be emitted in a direction different from the orthogonal direction ([0042]: light is emitted into the direction perpendicular to the plane (second photonic crystal region), which is different from the horizontal direction).
Regarding claim 2. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein
the second photonic crystal emits the light generated in the light emitting layer in the laminating direction [0042].
Regarding claim 3. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 1, further comprising:
an electrode 411 [0110]; and
a contact layer 409 [0110] disposed between the photonic crystal layer and the electrode (Fig 4), wherein
the contact layer overlaps the first region and the second region when viewed in the laminating direction (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 5. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein
the first region surrounds the second region when viewed in the laminating direction (Fig 4 and Fig 5).
Regarding claim 6. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 5, further comprising
a reflecting portion ([0059]: boundary) configured to surround the first region when viewed in the laminating direction and which reflects the light emitted by the light emitting layer [0060].
Regarding claim 7. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein
the first photonic crystal has a plurality of first holes 504 arranged periodically (Fig 5B),
the second photonic crystal has a plurality of second holes 505 arranged periodically (Fig 5B), and
when viewed in the laminating direction, a shape of each of the plurality of first holes is different from a shape of each of the plurality of second holes (Fig 5B, [0127]: they have different size holes. Thus, being different shape in size).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hori (US 20080285608) in view of Kiyota (US 20090010298, in the IDS on 12/10/23).
Regarding claim 4. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 1, further comprising:
an electrode 411 [0110]; and
a contact layer 409 [0110] disposed between the photonic crystal layer and the electrode.
But Hori does not disclose the contact layer overlaps the second region without overlapping the first region when viewed in the laminating direction.
However, Fig 3 of Kiyota discloses the contact layer 114 (the 114 making direct contact to the lower layer. Thus, being a contact layer) overlaps the second region without overlapping the first region when viewed in the laminating direction (Fig 2/Fig 3, [0032]: 114 is formed on the aperture 113, which is the inner region, which is second region but no overlapping of the outer region, which is first region).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Hori’s device structure to have the Kiyota’s structure for the purpose of providing enhanced light extraction efficiency and reduce unwanted internal reflections.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hori (US 20080285608) in view of Takiguchi (US 20160064894).
Regarding claim 8. Hori discloses The light emitting device according to claim 7, wherein,
when viewed in the laminating direction,
a shape of each of the plurality of first holes has rotational symmetry (Fig 5A/Fig 5B).
But Hori does not explicitly disclose a shape of each of the plurality of second holes does not have rotational symmetry.
However, Fig 11 of Takiguchi discloses a shape of each of the plurality of second holes (6B(IN)) does not have rotational symmetry (because of right triangle shape), whereas a shape of each of the plurality of first holes (6B(OUT)) has rotational symmetry.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Hori’s device structure to have the Takiguchi’s photonic crystal shape for the purpose of providing enhanced light extraction efficiency and uniformity of the emission pattern. A high degree of rotational symmetry ensures that light is extracted uniformly in all directions, reducing total internal reflection and avoiding undesired, highly directional emission patterns.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hori (US 20080285608) in view of Mochizuki (US 20100238966).
Regarding claim 9. Hori discloses the claim 1. But Hori does not disclose A projector comprising the light emitting device according to claim 1.
However, Mochizuki discloses A projector (Fig 14, [0056]) comprising the light emitting device (Fig 2A, Fig 3, [0044], including photonic crystal).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Hori’s device to have the Mochizuki’s projector for the purpose pf providing enhanced light intensity with cost effective light source [0041].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Changhyun Yi whose telephone number is (571)270-7799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8A-4P.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached on 571-272-1945. 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.
/Changhyun Yi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights