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) submitted on 12/15/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-8 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3, lines 1 and 4, the limitation of “the pore”, the optical”, and “the optical” should be corrected into “a pore”, an optical”, and “an optical”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 4, lines 9-10, the limitation of “the GaN/InGaN quantum wells” should be corrected into “GaN/InGaN quantum wells”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 5, lines 2 and 4, the limitation of “the doping level” and “layer (104)” should be corrected into “a doping level” and “layer”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 6, lines 5 and 9, the limitation of “the central portion” and “the other portion” should be corrected into “a central portion” and “other portion”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 7, line 13, the limitation of “the GaN/InGaN quantum wells” should be corrected into “GaN/InGaN quantum wells”. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 8, line 2, the limitation of “a fist” should be corrected into “a first”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
In claim 1, lines 16-18, the limitation of “the optical index”, “the optical index”, and “the optical index” renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis and no optical index was previously recited. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “the optical index”, “the optical index”, and “the optical index” in claim 1, lines 16-18 to “an optical index”, “an optical index”, and “an optical index”. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted and examined as “an optical index”, “an optical index”, and “an optical index” recited in claim 1. Correction is requested.
Claims 2-7 are also rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
In claim 8, lines 11-12, the limitation of “the optical index”, “the optical index”, and “the optical index” renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis and no optical index was previously recited. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “the optical index”, “the optical index”, and “the optical index” in claim 8, lines 11-12 to “an optical index”, “an optical index”, and “an optical index”. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted and examined as “an optical index”, “an optical index”, and “an optical index” recited in claim 8. Correction is requested.
Claims 9-12 are also rejected as being dependent on claim 8.
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(s) 1-2, 8-9 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (US 2015/0303655) in view of Pinos (US 2023/0187421).
Regarding claim 1, Han discloses, in at least figures 2A-2J and related text, a method for manufacturing micro-LEDs comprising at least the following steps:
i) providing a stack (201/260, [48], [60]) comprising at least one strongly n-doped GaN layer (226, [55], [58]), an n-doped GaN layer (224, [54]), quantum wells (230, [56]) and a p-doped GaN layer (240, [57]) and a first electrode (260, [60]),
ii) porosifying the strongly n-doped GaN layer (226, [55], [58]), whereby a porosified GaN layer (228, [62]) is obtained,
iii) forming mesas (205, [61]) in the stack (201/260, [48], [60]),
iv) covering the porosified GaN layer with a second electrode formed by a conductive transparent oxide layer, the second electrode being in direct contact with the porosified GaN layer, then, preferably, covering the second electrode with an encapsulation layer, or
depositing a second electrode (272, [67]) over a lateral face of the porosified GaN layer (228, [62]) or over a lateral face of the n-doped GaN layer and covering the porosified GaN layer (228, [62]) with an encapsulation layer (290, [71]), the encapsulation layer (290, [71]) being in direct contact with the porosified GaN layer (228, [62]),
steps ii) and iii) could be carried out in the order ii) and iii) or in the order iii) and ii),
step ii) being carried out.
Han does not explicitly disclose the optical index of the porosified GaN layer does not vary by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer.
Pinos teaches, in at least figure 8, table1, and related text, the method comprising the optical index of the porosified GaN layer (20, [89]) does not vary by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode (40, [97]) and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer, for the purpose of providing anti-reflection in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light ([69]).
Han and Pinos are analogous art because they both are directed to method for forming a semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Han with the specified features of Pinos because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method disclosed in Han to have the optical index of the porosified GaN layer doing not vary by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer, as taught by Pinos, for the purpose of providing anti-reflection in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light ([69], Pinos).
Regarding claim 2, Han in view of Pinos discloses the method according to claim 1 as described above.
Han does not explicitly disclose the conductive transparent oxide layer is an indium-tin oxide layer and/or in that the encapsulation layer is made of SiN, SiO2 or SiON.
Pinos teaches, in at least figure 8, and related text, the method comprising the conductive transparent oxide layer (40, [97]) is an indium-tin oxide layer ([97]) and/or in that the encapsulation layer is made of SiN, SiO2 or SiON, for the purpose of providing conductive transparent layer in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light.
Han and Pinos are analogous art because they both are directed to method for forming a semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Han with the specified features of Pinos because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Han to have the conductive transparent oxide layer being an indium-tin oxide layer and/or in that the encapsulation layer is made of SiN, SiO2 or SiON, as taught by Pinos, for the purpose of providing conductive transparent layer in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (US 2015/0303655) in view of Pinos (US 2023/0187421), and further in view of Mezouari (US 2023/0317892).
Regarding claim 3, Han in view of Pinos discloses the method according to claim 1 as described above.
Han in view of Pinos does not explicitly disclose the pore volumetric concentration in the porosified GaN layer is determined based on the following formula: neff=
1
-
p
x
n
G
a
N
2
+
p
x
n
a
i
r
2
with p the pore volumetric concentration, nGaN the optical index of GaN and nair the optical index of air.
Mezouari teaches, in paragraph [41], the method comprising the pore volumetric concentration in the porosified GaN layer is determined based on the following formula: neff=
1
-
p
x
n
G
a
N
2
+
p
x
n
a
i
r
2
with p the pore volumetric concentration, nGaN the optical index of GaN and nair the optical index of air ([41]), for the purpose of providing DBR having porous GaN ([12]) thereby increasing the light extraction efficiency of light.
Han, Pinos, and Mezouari are analogous art because they all are directed to method for forming a semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Han in view of Pinos with the specified features of Mezouari because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method disclosed in Han in view of Pinos to have the pore volumetric concentration in the porosified GaN layer being determined based on the following formula: neff=
1
-
p
x
n
G
a
N
2
+
p
x
n
a
i
r
2
with p the pore volumetric concentration, nGaN the optical index of GaN and nair the optical index of air, as taught by Mezouari, for the purpose of providing DBR having porous GaN ([12], Mezouari) thereby increasing the light extraction efficiency of light.
Regarding claim 8, Han discloses, in at least figure 2J and related text, a micro-LED structure comprising a stack, the stack comprising at least one porosified strongly n-doped GaN layer (228/227, [62], [63]), an n-doped GaN layer (224, [54]), quantum wells (230, [56]) and a p-doped GaN layer (240, [57]), a fist electrode (260, [60]), mesas (205, [61]) being formed in the stack,
the porosified GaN layer being covered and in direct contact with a second electrode formed by a conductive transparent oxide layer, the second electrode being preferably covered with an encapsulation layer, or
a second electrode (272, [67]) being arranged over a lateral face of the porosified GaN layer (228/227, [62], [63]) or over a lateral face of the n-doped GaN layer, the porosified GaN layer (228/227, [62], [63]) being covered and in direct contact with an encapsulation layer (290, [71]).
Han does not explicitly disclose the optical index of the porosified GaN layer not varying by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer.
Pinos teaches, in at least figure 8, table1, and related text, the device comprising the optical index of the porosified GaN layer (20, [89]) not varying by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode (40, [97]) and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer, for the purpose of providing anti-reflection in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light ([69]).
Han and Pinos are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Han with the specified features of Pinos because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Han to have the optical index of the porosified GaN layer not varying by more than 10% with respect to the optical index of the second electrode and/or with respect to the optical index of the encapsulation layer, as taught by Pinos, for the purpose of providing anti-reflection in order to increase the light extraction efficiency of light ([69], Pinos).
Regarding claim 9, Han in view of Pinos discloses the structure according to claim 8 as described above.
Han further discloses, in at least figure 2J and related text, the porosified GaN layer (228/227, [62], [63]) of the mesas comprises a non-porosified central portion (227, [63]) and a porosified boundary (228, [62]).
Regarding claim 11, Han in view of Pinos discloses the structure according to claim 8 as described above.
Han further discloses, in at least figure 2J and related text, the central portion (227, [63]) is strongly doped.
Regarding claim 12, Han in view of Pinos discloses the structure according to claim 8 as described above.
Han further discloses, in at least figure 2J and related text, the porosified GaN layer (228/227, [62], [63]) has a thickness comprised between 100 and 500 nm, preferably between 300 and 500 nm ([55]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 4 that recite "a) providing an initial stack comprising a support layer, possibly a buffer layer made of (Al,Ga)N, a non-intentionally doped GaN layer, the strongly n-doped GaN layer, the n-doped GaN layer, the quantum wells, the p-doped GaN layer and the first electrode, b) transferring the initial stack onto a support substrate covered with a metal layer, c) removing the support layer, where appropriate the buffer layer made of (Al,Ga)N, the non-intentionally doped GaN layer, for example by thinning, whereby a substrate of interest comprising the support substrate, the first electrode, the p-doped GaN layer, GaN/InGaN quantum wells, the n-doped GaN layer and the strongly n-doped GaN layer is obtained" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 4.
Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1 and 7 that recite "i) providing a stack comprising a support layer, a non-intentionally doped GaN layer, a strongly n-doped GaN layer, an n-doped GaN layer, quantum wells and a p-doped GaN layer and a first electrode, iii) forming mesas in the stack, by etching the first electrode, the p-doped GaN layer, the quantum wells, the n-doped GaN layer, the strongly n-doped GaN layer and a portion of the non-intentionally doped GaN layer, - implementing step ii), whereby a porosified GaN layer is obtained, - transferring the obtained stack onto a support substrate covered with a metal layer, - removing the support layer, the non-intentionally doped GaN layer, for example by thinning whereby a substrate of interest comprising the support substrate, the first electrode, the p-doped GaN layer, GaN/InGaN quantum wells, the n-doped GaN layer and the strongly n-doped GaN layer is obtained, - implementing step iv)" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1 and 7.
Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1, 9, and 10 that recite "the central portion is weakly doped" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1, 9, and 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONG-HO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571-272-1670. 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.
/TONG-HO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811