Attorney’s Docket Number: 5440/1043PUS1
Filing Date: 12/15/2023
Claimed Foreign Priority Date: 11/29/2023 (CN202311433446.9)
12/27/2022 (CN202211682816.8)
12/16/2022 (CN202211682812.X)
Applicants: Lin et al.
Examiner: Younes Boulghassoul
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the Election filed on 05/01/2026.
Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1, in the reply filed on 05/01/2026, is acknowledged. However, the restriction requirement between Species 1-4, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 03/04/2026, has been reconsidered and is hereby withdrawn. Accordingly, pending in this application are claims 1-19.
In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on applications filed in China on 11/29/2023, 12/27/2022, and 12/16/2022, respectively. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed certified copies of the CN202311433446.9 and CN202211682812.X applications as required by 37 CFR 1.55. (also, see examiner’s Interview Summary mailed on 07/15/2026 raising the issues above).
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
- Claim 3, L. 3-4: amend to -- said second metallic electrode extends outwardly from inside of said third opening to an outside surface of said first insulating layer so as to partially cover said outside surface--, for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2, 3, 4, 11, 14, 16, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
- the body of the claims refers to dimensions/angles as labelled in Drawings of the instant application (e.g., D3, D4, H1, θ1, θ2, L2, D2, θ21, θ22). Consider removing these labels from the body of the claims as the claim language itself should sufficiently identify the various corresponding features claimed.
These corrections are optional.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 recites “a boundary wall of said insulating layered unit that bounds said second opening has a second inclined angle (θ2) relative to a surface of said second mesa that is less than said first inclined angle (θ1)” at L. 3-5. However, this limitation contradicts the next limitations reciting “said first inclined angle (θ1) ranges from 20° to 55°; and said second inclined angle (θ2) ranges from 30° to 60°” at L. 6-7 (i.e., the claimed range of θ2 includes values where θ2 > θ1), and further contradicts the written description at Par. [0063],[0070] disclosing instead “The first inclined angle (θ1) is no greater than the second inclined angle (θ2)”, thus disclosing that θ1 < θ2.
The examiner believes that a typographical mistake was introduced and that applicant meant claim 11 to recite instead -- a boundary wall of said insulating layered unit that bounds said second opening has a second inclined angle (θ2) relative to a surface of said second mesa that is not less than said first inclined angle (θ1) --. Accordingly, and for the purpose of examination, the claim will be construed as discussed above until further clarifications are provided by applicant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 8-10,16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US2017/0108937).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-17 and Par. [0133]-[0176]) shows all aspects of the instant invention, including a micro light-emitting diode (LED) comprising:
- a semiconductor layered structure (e.g., light emitting structure 120) including a front side and a back side (see, e.g., Fig. 14: bottom and top sides respectively), said semiconductor layered structure further including a first-type semiconductor layer (e.g., first conductive type semiconductor layer 121), an active layer (e.g., active layer 123), and a second-type semiconductor layer (e.g., second conductive type semiconductor layer 125) sequentially disposed in a thickness direction from said front side to said back side of said semiconductor layered structure, said semiconductor layered structure having a first depression on said back side that indents in said thickness direction from said second-type semiconductor layer to said first-type semiconductor layer through said active layer to partially expose said first-type semiconductor layer (see, e.g., Figs. 13-15: one of grooves 120g at edge of mesa 120m and exposing 121), a first mesa formed at said first-type semiconductor layer (e.g., local mesa associated with exposed 121), a second mesa formed at said second-type semiconductor layer (e.g., local mesa associated with protruding/non-recessed 125), and a mesa side wall located between said first mesa and said second mesa (see, e.g., Fig. 14: slanted sidewall therebetween)
- a first metallic electrode (e.g., plated metallic electrode 151) disposed on said back side of said semiconductor layered structure, and electrically connected to said first-type semiconductor structure (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- a second metallic electrode (e.g., plated metallic electrode 153) disposed on said back side of said semiconductor layered structure, and electrically connected to said second-type semiconductor structure (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- an insulating layered unit disposed on and covering said semiconductor layered structure, and extending from said first mesa to said second mesa (see, e.g., Figs. 12-14 and Par. [0157]-[0158]: insulation layer 240 is a lamination of a “lower” SiO2 interface layer, a “middle” distributed Bragg reflector of alternating TiO2/SiO2 layers, and “upper” moisture barrier of SiNX), a portion of said insulating layered unit on said first mesa having a first insulating layer disposed on said first mesa (e.g., “upper” moisture barrier of SiNX of 240 on exposed 121), a portion of said insulating layered unit on said second mesa having a second insulating layer that has a first sublayer covering said second mesa (e.g., “middle” distributed Bragg reflector of 240 on 125), and a second sublayer covering said first sublayer (e.g., “upper” moisture barrier of SiNX of 240 on 125) (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- wherein said first insulating layer has a first opening formed on said first mesa (see, e.g., Fig. 12: opening 240a in “upper” moisture barrier of 240 on exposed 121), said first metallic electrode extending from inside of said first opening on said first mesa to an outside surface of said first insulating layer (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- wherein said first sublayer has a second opening formed on said second mesa (see, e.g., Fig. 12: opening 240b in “middle” distributed Bragg reflector of 240 on 125), and said second metallic electrode being partially disposed in said second opening (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- wherein a third opening is formed above said second opening (see, e.g., Fig. 12: opening 240b in “upper” moisture barrier of 240 on 125) and in said second sublayer (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- wherein a perpendicular projection of said second opening onto a plane parallel to said back side of said semiconductor layered structure entirely falls within a perpendicular projection of said third opening onto the plane (see, e.g., Figs. 12-14: opening 240b forms an enclosed opening with outwardly-slanted sidewalls through 240, with the “middle” distributed Bragg reflector sidewalls being closer to each other than the “upper” moisture barrier sidewalls), said second metallic electrode extends from inside of said second opening to said third opening, and a boundary wall of said second insulating layer that is exposed within said third opening includes at least one of said first sublayer or said second sublayer (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
Regarding Claim 8, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-17 and Par. [0133]-[0176]) shows wherein:
- said first insulating layer (e.g., “upper” moisture barrier of 240 on 121) extends from said first mesa to said second mesa via said mesa side wall and forms a contiguous structure with said second sublayer layer of said second insulating layer disposed on said second mesa (e.g., “upper” moisture barrier of 240 on 125)
- said first insulating layer includes only one type of dielectric material (e.g., SiNX), and said second insulating layer includes at least two types of dielectric materials (e.g., TiO2/SiO2, SiNX).
Regarding Claim 9, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-17 and Par. [0133]-[0176]) shows wherein said first insulating layer (e.g., “upper” moisture barrier of 240 on 121) includes one type of dielectric material (e.g., SiNX) and said second insulating layer includes at least two types of dielectric materials (e.g., TiO2/SiO2, SiNX).
Regarding Claim 10, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-17 and Par. [0133]-[0176]) shows wherein:
- said dielectric material of said first insulating layer is silicon oxide or silicon nitride (e.g., SiNX)
- said dielectric materials of said second insulating layer include silicon oxide and silicon nitride, or silicon oxide, silicon nitride, and titanium oxide (e.g., TiO2/SiO2, SiNX)
Regarding Claim 16, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-17 and Par. [0133]-[0176]) shows wherein:
- said first metallic electrode (e.g., 151) extends to cover said first insulating layer on said second mesa (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
- an area of said first metallic electrode covering said second mesa has a width (D2) greater than 20% of, or ranging from 20% to 90% of a length of a short side (L2) of a maximum rectangular cross section of said semiconductor layered structure that is perpendicular to said thickness direction of said semiconductor layered structure (see, e.g., Figs. 11-12)
Regarding Claim 19, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 17 and Par. [0108],[0205]) shows a display device (e.g., display device) comprising a printed circuit board (PCB) board (e.g., substrate 300 includes a PCB), and includes a micro LED claimed in claim 1 and mounted on said PCB.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US2017/0108937).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim (see, e.g., Figs. 11-14 and Par. [0157]-[0158],[0167]) shows wherein:
- said second insulating layer is an insulating reflective layer that includes titanium oxide (e.g., includes a “middle” distributed Bragg reflector of alternating TiO2/SiO2 layers)
- said second metallic electrode (e.g., 153) extends outwardly from inside of said third opening to an outside surface said first insulating layer so as to partially cover said outside surface (see, e.g., Fig. 14)
Furthermore, Kim discloses that an increased contact area between electrode 153 and insulation layer 240 is beneficial for preventing peeling of the electrode. Therefore, Kim recognizes the contact area, and implicitly the width/length dimensions thereof, as result effective variables.
Accordingly, the specific width of a portion of said second metallic electrode that covers said outside surface claimed by the applicant, i.e., a width ranging from 0.1 μm to 10 μm, is only considered to be the “optimum” width disclosed by Kim that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been able to obtain using routine experimentation based, among other things, on the metallic electrode/insulating layer compositions and stiction characteristics thereof, etc. (see In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), and since neither non-obvious nor unexpected results, i.e., results which are different in kind and not in degree from the results of the prior art, will be obtained as long as the width defines a contact area that prevents the electrode from peeling or delamination, as already suggested by Kim himself.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US2017/0108937) in view of Inazu et al. (US2020/0220046).
Regarding Claim 5, Kim is silent about the composition of said metallic electrodes. Inazu (see, e.g., Fig. 1 and Par. [0041],[0053]), on the other hand and in the same field of endeavor, teaches a semiconductor light emitting element 10 having a n-side contact electrode 36 and a p-side contact electrode 40, wherein contact electrode materials comprise, e.g., Ti and Al.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have Ti or Al as the materials of at least one of said first metallic electrode and said second metallic electrode in the structure of Kim, because because Ti or Al are known to be suitable materials for implementing electrodes of a light emitting element, as suggested by Inazu, and selecting a known material based on its suitability for its intended use would have been obvious to the skilled artisan. See, Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 12-15, and 17-18 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references cited disclose LED devices having electrodes on backside mesas, and having arrangements of dielectric layers with openings therein having some aspects similar to the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Younes Boulghassoul at (571) 270-5514. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm EST (Eastern Standard Time), or by e-mail via younes.boulghassoul@uspto.gov. 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached at (571) 272-1705. 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.
/YOUNES BOULGHASSOUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights