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 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 1-7 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 claim 1, lines 8-9 recite
“the p-electrode including one of a Ru layer, a Rh layer, a Ni Layer, and an ITO layer” (emphasis examiner’s).
It is not immediately clear to a person of ordinary skill in the art if the ITO layer is part of the alternative list, meaning there are 4 options for the p-electrode material, or if the ITO layer is a separate limitation, meaning there are 3 options for the p-electrode material with an additional ITO layer. In the interest of compact prosecution, and par. 52 of the specification, examiner will interpret the claim to mean the former where ITO is one of the 4 options for the p-electrode material.
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent to a claim rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamiya et al. (US20120049219A1, hereinafter Kamiya) view of Kamiya (US20160172540A1, hereinafter Kamiya’540).
Regarding claim 1, Kamiya teaches a light emitting element having an emission wavelength of 200 to 280 nm (Par. 53 Kamiya teaches that “the light emitting element 1 can also be a LED emitting a light having a peak wavelength in ultraviolet region” and that “the region of the peak wavelength of the light emitted from the LED is not limited to the above-mentioned regions” and so a person of ordinary skill is capable of making the LED emit in the claimed wavelength range) and including a group-III nitride semiconductor containing Al (Par. 41 “a III-group nitride compound semiconductor of AlxGayIn1−x−yN (0≦x≦1,0≦y≦1,0≦x+y≦1) can be used”), the element, comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 2A substrate 10);
a semiconductor layer including an n-type layer (Fig. 2A n-type semiconductor layer 21),
a light emitting layer (Fig. 2A light emitting layer 22), and
a p-type layer which are laminated on the substrate in this order (Fig. 2A p-type semiconductor layer 23 and layers 21/22/23 are laminated on substrate 10 in that order);
a hole provided in a predetermined region of a surface of the p-type layer, the hole having a depth reaching the n-type layer (Fig. 2A see plurality of film openings 56 in surface of layer 23 that have a depth that reaches n-type semiconductor layer 21);
a p-electrode provided on the p-type layer in contact therewith (Fig. 2A p-side transparent contact electrode 30 on p-type semiconductor layer 23 in contact therewith),
the p-electrode including one of a Ru layer, a Rh layer, a Ni Layer, and an ITO layer (Par. 45 “the p-side transparent contact electrode 30…[is] formed of an oxide semiconductor, for example, Indium Tin Oxide (ITO)”);
an n-electrode provided on the n-type layer exposed at a bottom of the hole (Fig. 2A n-side contact electrode 31 on n-type semiconductor layer 21 at bottom of film openings 56); and
a protective film covering an entire upper surface of the element, the protective film including
a first protective film made of SiO2 (Fig. 2A, par. 45 “insulating film 51…[is] formed of, for example, silicon oxide (SiO2)”)and
a second protective film which are laminated in this order from a side of the substrate (Fig. 2A insulating layer 61 laminated on insulating film 51).
Kamiya does not appear to teach
the second protective film being made of SiN.
Kamiya’540 teaches in par. 56, when discussing insulating layer 15, that “[i]nstead of SiO2, SiN, Al2O3, TiO2, or the like may be used.”
Being in analogous arts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kamiya with the teachings of Kamiya’540 because in par. 56 Kamiya’540 explicitly teaches that “[i]nstead of SiO2, SiN…may be used.”
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1, further comprising
a reflection film between the first protective film and the second protective film (Figs. 2A/2B reflecting layer 52 between insulating layers 51/61), the reflection film including Al or an alloy mainly composed of Al (Kamiya par. 52 “the reflecting layers 52, 62 can be also formed of…an alloy including Al”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1,
wherein the hole is formed plurally and a plurality of the holes are arranged in a pattern of a square lattice, a triangular lattice, or a honeycomb; and the n-electrode is formed on a bottom of each hole (Kamiya fig. 1 light emitting element 1 arranged in a square lattice).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1,
wherein the second protective film has a thickness of 320 nm or more (Kamiya par. 46 teaches that “[i]t is preferable that the insulating films 51, 61 have a thickness of not less than 0.1 μm and not more than 1.0 μm,” which examiner notes is a taught range of 100 nm to 1000 nm. As the range taught by Kamiya overlaps the claimed range, it is taught by the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540, see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1,
wherein a thickness ratio of the second protective film to the first protective film falls within a range of 0.5 to 2 (Kamiya par. 46 teaches that “[i]t is preferable that the insulating films 51, 61 have a thickness of not less than 0.1 μm and not more than 1.0 μm.” Therefore, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches embodiments where insulating films 51/61 are 300 nm and 600 nm, respectively. Additionally, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches embodiments where insulating films 51/61 are 600 nm and 300 nm, respectively. Therefore, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the claimed range, see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kamiya (US20120049219A1) and Kamiya’540 (US20160172540A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kamei et al. (US20110316037A1, hereinafter Kamei) and Okuno (US20130015487A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1, wherein the n-electrode includes:
a first layer at a position in contact with the n-type layer (Fig. 5 n-side contact electrode 31 in contact with n-type semiconductor layer 21), and
a second layer at a position in contact with the first layer (Fig. 5 n-side transparent wiring electrode 41 in contact with n-side contact electrode 31).
The combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 do not appear to teach
the first layer being made of AlNx, or AlyGa1-yNx having an Al composition higher than that of the n-type layer and having a thickness of 1nm or more and 3nm or less, and
the second layer being made of metal including Al as a main component and V and having a thickness of 50 nm or more and 500 nm or less.
Kamei (US20110316037A1) teaches
the first layer being made of AlNx, or AlyGa1-yNx having an Al composition higher than that of the n-type layer and having a thickness of 1nm or more and 3nm or less (Par. 82 “[t]he p-contact layer 160 b is preferably AlxGa1-xN (0≦x≦0.4). If the Al composition is in the above range, it is preferable in that favorable crystallinity and a favorable ohmic contact with the first electrode 210 can be maintained”).
Okuno teaches in par. 34 a “first intermediate electrode 30 [that] has a double structure and is constituted by successively depositing a vanadium (V) layer 31 having a film thickness of approximately 18 nm and an aluminum (Al) layer 32 having a film thickness of approximately 1.8 μm.”
Being in analogous arts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 with the teachings of Kamei because as Kamei teaches that the Al composition within the AlGaN layer affects the ohmic contact, it is a result effective variable that may be optimized by a person of ordinary skill, see MPEP 2144.05(II)(B)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Kamiya, Kamiya’540, and Kamei with the teachings of Okuno because as both Kamiya and Okuno teach suitable materials for use in an electrode, it would have been obvious to substitute Kamei’s ITO with Okuno’s double structured electrode with aluminum and vanadium to achieve the predictable result of forming a double structured electrode with aluminum and vanadium.
Additionally, the combination of Kamiya, Kamiya’540, Kamei, and Okuno teaches the limitation
the first layer having a thickness of 1nm or more and 3nm or less (While Kamei teaches a p-contact layer 160b in par. 84 with a thickness of 10 nm, as the only difference between the combination of Kamiya, Kamiya’540, Kamei, and Okuno and the claimed invention is a relative recitation of dimensions and nothing within the disclosure indicates that a device having the claimed dimensions would perform differently than the combination of Kamiya, Kamiya’540, Kamei, and Okuno, such a recitation of relative dimensions is not enough to be patentably distinct, see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kamiya (US20120049219A1) and Kamiya’540 (US20160172540A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Krosney et al. (US20140030144A1, hereinafter Krosney).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1.
The combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 do not appear to teach
the light emitting element for use in water sterilization or in air sterilization in a high-humidity environment.
Krosney teaches in par. 4 that “decontamination of hospital room surfaces between occupancies…can be accomplished by irradiating the room and all of its surfaces with high-level ultra-violet (UV) radiation.”
Being in analogous arts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540 because Krosney teaches an application for an LED device as taught by the combination of Kamiya and Kamiya’540.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLE LEON LINDSEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4028. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, Christine Kim can be reached at (571)272-8458. 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.
/COLE LEON LINDSEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/CHRISTINE S. KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812