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 .
Response to Amendments
Applicant's response of 06/16/2026 has been acknowledged. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 14 have been amended. Claims 2, 5, and 9 have been cancelled. Claims 18 and 19 have been added. No new matter has been added.
This office action considers claims 1, 3-4, 6-8, 10-19 pending for prosecution and are examined on their merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/16/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 6, and 9-15 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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.
Notes: when present, hyphen separated fields within the hyphens (- -) represent, for example, as (30A - Fig 2B - [0128]) = (element 30A - Figure No. 2B - Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. The same conventions apply to Column and Sentence, for example (19:14-20) = (column19:sentences 14-20). These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 1, 3, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui et al. (US 20120235117 A1 – hereinafter Fukui) in view of Okuno et al. (US 20250151463 A1 – hereinafter Okuno) and Herner et al. (US 20160141450 A1 – hereinafter Herner).
Regarding independent claim 1, Fukui teaches
(Currently Amended) A semiconductor light emitting element (100 –
Fig. 3 – [0184] – “light emitting element 100”) comprising:
a growth substrate (112 – Fig. 3 – [0045] – “substrate 110 includes a
conductive base material 111, and an n-type semiconductor layer 112”);
a plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center
nanorod 131”) on the growth substrate (112) ;
a side surface reflection portion (160 – [0190] – “electrode 160 partially covers
the side surfaces (upper portions) of the core-multishell nanowires 130”) provided on a side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer (131) and configured to reflect ([0192] – “the generated light is reflected by the second electrode 160, the light is emitted externally from the upper end face of the core-multishell nanowires 130, and not from the side surfaces”) at least a part of light emitted from the columnar semiconductor layer (131); and
an embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer and the side surface reflection portion (160),
wherein the side surface reflection portion (160 – [0192] – “the generated light is reflected by the second electrode 160” – this is on the side surface and is reflective) is a light reflection film in contact (160 – Fig. 3 shows is in contact with the side surface of the center nanorod, 131, including covering [0187] – “The quantum well layer 133 is formed of an i-type III-V compound semiconductor (e.g., i-type GaAs), and covers the first barrier layer 132. The second barrier layer 134 is formed of a p-type III-V compound semiconductor (e.g., p-type AlGaAs), and covers the quantum well layer 133” – this corresponds to how applicant describes “in contact” in [0092] – “the side surface reflection portion 17 is formed in contact with the side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer including the nanowire layer 14, the active layer 15, and the p-type layer 16”) with the side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer (131), and
wherein the light reflection film is a dielectric multilayer film containing any one of HfO2, TiO2, Ta2O5, Al2O3, SiO2, and NgF2.
Fukui does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 1.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
an embedded layer (140 – Fig. 2 – [0035] – “buried layer 140”) covering the columnar semiconductor layer (130 – Fig. 3 – [0035] – “columnar semiconductor 130”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result providing support and stability to the nanowire structures.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Fukui and Okuno do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 1.
However, in an analogous art, Herner teaches
wherein the light reflection film ({[0090] – “A nanowire LED structure was selectively coated with Al.sub.2O.sub.3 to provide an insulating layer”}, {[0067] – “Silver, among the metals, has the best reflection coefficient in the visible region of the optical spectra, but is more prone to exhibit corrosion damage in normal atmosphere if not sealed. Si.sub.3N.sub.4, SiO.sub.2, Al.sub.2O.sub.3 or any other stable dielectric can be used as a capping layer” – this is a reflective film on the sidewalls) is a dielectric multilayer film containing any one of HfO2, TiO2, Ta2O5, Al2O3, SiO2, and NgF2 (her ([0090] – “As shown in FIG. 7A, a semi-isolated nanowire, i.e., nanowire with no nearest neighbors, exhibited Al2O3 deposition down the sidewall”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the light reflecting film material structure as taught by Herner into Fukui and Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Herner in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of [0003] – “nanowire LEDs offer unique properties due to the three-dimensional nature of the nanowires, improved flexibility in materials combinations due to less lattice matching restrictions and opportunities for processing on larger substrates.”
Regarding claim 3, Fukui, as modified by Okuno and Herner, teaches claim 1 from which claim 3 depends. Fukui further teaches
(Currently Amended) The semiconductor light emitting element
according to claim [[2]] 1, wherein the light reflection film (160) is formed of a metal material containing any one of Al, Au, Ag, and Cr as a main component ([0190] – “electrode 160 is, for example, a Cr/Au multilayer film, an AuZn alloy film”).
Regarding independent claim 10, Fukui teaches
(Currently Amended) A semiconductor light emitting element (100 –
Fig. 3 – [0184] – “light emitting element 100”) comprising:
a growth substrate (112 – Fig. 3 – [0045] – “substrate 110 includes a
conductive base material 111, and an n-type semiconductor layer 112”);
a plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (130 – Fig 4. – [0184] – “core-
multishell nanowires 130”) formed on the growth substrate (112); and
[[an]] a conductive embedded layer formed to cover side surfaces and upper surfaces of the plurality of columnar semiconductor layers,
wherein the columnar semiconductor layer (130) comprises:
a nanowire layer (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center nanorod 131”);
an active layer (133 – Fig. 4 – [0184] – “a quantum well layer 133, formed of an i-type III-V compound semiconductor”) disposed on an outer periphery of the nanowire layer (130); and
a p-type layer (134 – Fig. 4 – [0184] – “a second barrier layer 134, formed of a p-type III-V compound semiconductor”) disposed on an outer periphery of the active layer (133), and
wherein a side surface of the active layer
constituted by facets having inclination angles of 80 degrees or less with respect to the main surface of growth substrate.
Fukui does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 10.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
[[an]] a conductive embedded layer (140 – Fig. 2 – [0079] – “the buried layer 140 is a n-type GaN layer. However, a n-type AlGaN layer instead of a n-type GaN layer may be used as the buried layer 140. The refractive index of the AlGaN layer is smaller than the refractive index of the n-type GaN layer. Therefore, when a LD structure is formed, the efficiency of light confinement is improved. The buried layer 140 may be other n-type AlInGaN layer” – this is a semiconductive layer and therefor conductive) formed to cover side surfaces and upper surfaces ([0039] – “The buried layer 140 is a layer for filling in a space between the columnar semiconductors 130. The buried layer 140 covers the columnar semiconductor 130”) of the plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (130 – Fig. 3 – [0035] – “columnar semiconductor 130”),
wherein a side surface of the active layer (440 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “buried layer 440 has a first layer 441, a second layer 442, and a third layer 443” – this corresponds to the active layer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 1.
Fukui and Okuno do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 10.
However, in an analogous art, Herner teaches
constituted by facets ([0089] – “it should be emphasized that although the figures illustrate embodiments having a pillar-like geometry and are based on nano wire core, i.e. “one dimensional” cores, it should be understood that the cores can have other geometries such as pyramidal shapes by changing growth conditions. Also, by changing growth conditions, the final nano element can have a pyramidal shape, or any shape between a pillar-like and a pyramid shape” – this describes facets) having inclination angles of 80 degrees or less ([0050] – “The angle may be, e.g., less than 80, 70, 60, 50, 45, 40, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10, or 5 degrees”) with respect to the main surface ([0005] – “the angle between the line followed by the substance and the plane of the support is less than 90° when measured from the center of the support”) of growth substrate (5 – Fig. 4 – [0041] – “growth substrate 5”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the facet structure as taught by Herner into Fukui and Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Herner in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Fukui, as modified by Okuno and Herner, teaches claim 10 from which claim 11 depends. Fukui and Herner do not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 10.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
(Currently Amended) The semiconductor light emitting element according
to claim 10, wherein the nanowire layer (130 – Fig. 20 – [0036] – “columnar semiconductor 130”) includes an inclined side surface portion (441 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “first layer 441) which is a side surface inclined with respect to the main surface (110 – Fig. 20 – [0117] – “substrate 110” – Fig. 20 shows this) of the growth substrate (112 – Fig. 20 – [0046] – “n-type semiconductor layer 112 is a base layer for growing a columnar semiconductor 130”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the side surface portion structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui and Herner.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of providing support and stability to the nanowire structures and to focus extracted light from the sides towards the substrate.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Regarding claim 12, Fukui, as modified by Okuno and Herner, teaches claim 11 from which claim 12 depends. Fukui and Herner do not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 12.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
(Original) The semiconductor light emitting element according to claim 11,
further comprising:
a mask (120 – Fig. 20 – [0035] – “a mask 120”) on the growth substrate (110), the mask (120) having an opening (120a – Fig. 3 – [0046] – “the opening 120a of the mask 120”),
wherein the nanowire layer (130) is selectively grown from the opening ({[0049] – “The n-type columnar semiconductor 131 is a semiconductor layer selectively grown in a column shape from the n-type semiconductor layer 112”}, {[0047] – “columnar semiconductor 130 includes an n-type columnar semiconductor 131”}) and the inclined side surface portion (440) is formed in a region partially covering the mask (120 – Fig. 20 shows this).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the mask embedded layer material structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui and Herner.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result growing columnar shaped structures perpendicular to the substrate without having to etch them.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Regarding claim 13, Fukui as modified by Okuno and Herner, teaches claim 10 from which claim 13 depends. Fukui and Herner do not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 13.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
(Currently Amended) The semiconductor light emitting element according
to claim 10,
wherein the nanowire layer (131 – Fig. 15 – [0078] – “the n-type columnar
semiconductor 131”), the active layer ([0078] – “the well layer is an InGaN layer”), and the p-type layer (133 – Fig. – [0078] – “the p-type cylindrical semiconductor 133 is a p-type GaN layer”) are formed of a nitride semiconductor ([0078] – “the n-type columnar semiconductor 131 is an n-type GaN layer, the well layer is an InGaN layer, the barrier layer is an AlGaN layer, and the p-type cylindrical semiconductor 133 is a p-type GaN layer. These are merely examples, and other Group III nitride semiconductor or other semiconductor may be employed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the material as taught by Okuno into Fukui and Herner.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of more rapidly and easily growing a crystal on a base that is efficiently emits light of a desired wavelength.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui in view of Okuno, Herner, and Jin (KR 20190115726 A – hereinafter Jin).
Regarding claim 4, Fukui as modified by Okuno and Herner, teaches claim 1 from which claim 4 depends. Fukui further teaches
(Currently Amended) The semiconductor light emitting element according
to claim [[2]] 1,
wherein the light reflection film ({[0204] – “The first barrier layer 222 is formed of a p-type III-V compound semiconductor (e.g., p-type AlGaAs)”}, {[0122] – “the insulating film that covers the substrate is preferably an interface of "a III-V compound semiconductor/a totally reflecting insulating film." That is, it is appropriate for the outermost layer of the insulating film that contacts the lower end face of the quantum well layer to be a totally reflecting insulating film”} – this barrier layer acts as a reflection film) is formed of a semiconductor material having a band gap larger than a wavelength of the light ([0105] – “The first barrier layer is formed of a III-V compound semiconductor of the first conductivity type that has a bandgap larger than that of the III-V compound semiconductor used to form the center nanorod”), the light reflection film having an optical thickness larger than the wavelength of the light.
Fukui, Okuno, and Herner do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 4.
However, in an analogous art, Jin teaches
the light reflection film having an optical thickness larger than the wavelength of the light ([0044] – “the distributed Bragg reflector (130a) may be formed by repeatedly stacking SiO2/TiO2, SiO2/Ta2O2, or SiO2/HfO, and SiO2/TiO2 will have good reflection efficiency for blue light, and SiO2 /Ta2O2 or SiO2/HfO will have good reflection efficiency for UV light. When the distributed Bragg reflector (130a) is composed of SiO2/TiO2, it is desirable to go through an optimizationprocess by considering the incident angle and reflectivity according to the wavelength based on an optical thickness of 1/4 of the wavelength of light coming from the active layer (115), and it is not necessary that the thickness of each layer maintain an optical thickness of 1/4 of the wavelength. The number of combinations is suitable for 4 to 40 pairs” – the combined thickness is greater than the wavelength).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the optical thickness as taught by Jin into Fukui, Okuno, and Herner.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Jin in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result creating a reflective surface using a silicon oxide material, otherwise known as a Bragg Reflector.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui in view of Okuno, and Herner and Tsuda et al. (US 20040041156 A1 – hereinafter Tsuda).
Regarding claim 7, Fukui as modified by Okuno, and Herner, teaches claim 1 from which claim 7 depends. Fukui further teaches
(Previously Presented) The semiconductor light emitting element
according to claim 1,
wherein the light of the side surface reflection portion (170 – Fig. [0191] –
“The dielectric film 170 is an insulating film that covers part of the side surfaces of the core-multishell nanowires 130 (the lower portions not covered with the second electrode) and part of the insulating film 120 (the portion where the core-multishell nanowires 130 are not arranged). The dielectric film 170 is either a lamination of an Al.sub.2O.sub.3 film having a thickness of 15 nm and an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm, or an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm” – 170 is a Distributed Bragg Reflector) has a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90%.
Fukui, Okuno, and Herner do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 7.
However, in an analogous art, Tsuda teaches
a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90% ({[0184] – “As the feedback method of the laser resonator, commonly known DFB (distributed feedback), DBR (distributed bragg reflector) or the like may also be employed”}, {[0185] – “After formation of the mirror end surfaces of the Fabry-Perot resonator, dielectric films of SiO.sub.2 and TiO.sub.2 are alternately formed on one of the mirror end surfaces by evaporation, to make a dielectric multilayer reflection film having a reflectance of 70%. Alternatively, multilayer films of SiO.sub.2/Al.sub.2O.sub.3 or the like may be used for the dielectric multilayer reflection film”}).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the side surface reflection structure as taught by Tsuda into Fukui, Okuno, and Herner.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Tsuda in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of decreasing the amount of light loss from not traveling perpendicular to the substrate.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui in view of Okuno.
Regarding independent claim 6, Fukui teaches
(Currently Amended)
A semiconductor light emitting element (100 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “light emitting element 100”) comprising:
a growth substrate (112 – Fig. 3 – [0045] – “substrate 110 includes a
conductive base material 111, and an n-type semiconductor layer 112”);
a plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center
nanorod 131”) on the growth substrate (110);
a side surface reflection portion (160 – [0190] – “electrode 160 partially covers
the side surfaces (upper portions) of the core-multishell nanowires 130”) provided on a side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center nanorod 131”) and configured to reflect ([0192] – “the generated light is reflected by the second electrode 160, the light is emitted externally from the upper end face of the core-multishell nanowires 130, and not from the side surfaces”) at least a part of light emitted from the columnar semiconductor layer (131); and
an embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer and the side surface reflection portion (160),
wherein the embedded layer is formed of a material having a refractive index different from that of the columnar semiconductor layer,
wherein the side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer has an inclined side surface inclined with respect to a main surface of the growth substrate, and
wherein the side surface reflection portion (160) is formed of an interface
between the inclined side surface and the embedded layer (140 – Fig. 3 – [0188] – “insulating resin 140 is provided for the n-type silicon substrate 110 (the insulating film 120) to fill the spaces between the core-multishell nanowires 130, and electrically isolates the individual core-multishell nanowires 130.”}, {[0122] – “the interface between the lower end face of the quantum well layer and the insulating film that covers the substrate is preferably an interface of "a III-V compound semiconductor/a totally reflecting insulating film." That is, it is appropriate for the outermost layer of the insulating film that contacts the lower end face of the quantum well layer to be a totally reflecting insulating film”}) .
Fukui does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 6.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
an embedded layer (140 – Fig. 2 – [0035] – “buried layer 140”) covering the columnar semiconductor layer (130 – Fig. 3 – [0035] – “columnar semiconductor 130”),
wherein the embedded layer (140) is formed of a material ([0039] – “buried layer 140 is made of, for example, n-type GaN”) having a refractive index different from that of the columnar semiconductor layer ({[0079] – “the buried layer 140 is a n-type GaN layer. However, a n-type AlGaN layer instead of a n-type GaN layer may be used as the buried layer 140. The refractive index of the AlGaN layer is smaller than the refractive index of the n-type GaN layer. Therefore, when a LD structure is formed, the efficiency of light confinement is improved. The buried layer 140 may be other n-type AlInGaN layer”}, {[0078] – “n-type columnar semiconductor 131 is an n-type GaN layer”}),
wherein the side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer (130 – Fig. 20 – [0117] – “columnar semiconductor 130”) has an inclined side surface (441 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “first layer 441) inclined with respect to a main surface of the growth substrate (112 – Fig. 20 – [0046] – “n-type semiconductor layer 112 is a base layer for growing a columnar semiconductor 130”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 1.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui in view of Okuno and Tsuda.
Regarding claim 18, Fukui as modified by Okuno, teaches claim 6 from which claim 18 depends. Fukui further teaches
(New) The semiconductor light emitting element according to claim
6, wherein the light of the side surface reflection portion (170 – Fig. [0191] –
“The dielectric film 170 is an insulating film that covers part of the side surfaces of the core-multishell nanowires 130 (the lower portions not covered with the second electrode) and part of the insulating film 120 (the portion where the core-multishell nanowires 130 are not arranged). The dielectric film 170 is either a lamination of an Al.sub.2O.sub.3 film having a thickness of 15 nm and an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm, or an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm” – 170 is a Distributed Bragg Reflector) has a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90%.
Fukui and Okuno do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 18.
However, in an analogous art, Tsuda teaches
a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90% ({[0184] – “As the feedback method of the laser resonator, commonly known DFB (distributed feedback), DBR (distributed bragg reflector) or the like may also be employed”}, {[0185] – “After formation of the mirror end surfaces of the Fabry-Perot resonator, dielectric films of SiO.sub.2 and TiO.sub.2 are alternately formed on one of the mirror end surfaces by evaporation, to make a dielectric multilayer reflection film having a reflectance of 70%. Alternatively, multilayer films of SiO.sub.2/Al.sub.2O.sub.3 or the like may be used for the dielectric multilayer reflection film”}).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the side surface reflection structure as taught by Tsuda into Fukui and Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Tsuda in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 7.
Regarding claim 19, Fukui as modified by Okuno, teaches claim 8 from which claim 19 depends. Fukui further teaches
(New) The semiconductor light emitting element according to claim
6, wherein the light of the side surface reflection portion (170 – Fig. [0191] –
“The dielectric film 170 is an insulating film that covers part of the side surfaces of the core-multishell nanowires 130 (the lower portions not covered with the second electrode) and part of the insulating film 120 (the portion where the core-multishell nanowires 130 are not arranged). The dielectric film 170 is either a lamination of an Al.sub.2O.sub.3 film having a thickness of 15 nm and an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm, or an SiO.sub.2 film having a thickness of 50 nm” – 170 is a Distributed Bragg Reflector) has a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90%.
Fukui and Okuno do not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 19.
However, in an analogous art, Tsuda teaches
a reflectivity in a range of 30% to 90% ({[0184] – “As the feedback method of the laser resonator, commonly known DFB (distributed feedback), DBR (distributed bragg reflector) or the like may also be employed”}, {[0185] – “After formation of the mirror end surfaces of the Fabry-Perot resonator, dielectric films of SiO.sub.2 and TiO.sub.2 are alternately formed on one of the mirror end surfaces by evaporation, to make a dielectric multilayer reflection film having a reflectance of 70%. Alternatively, multilayer films of SiO.sub.2/Al.sub.2O.sub.3 or the like may be used for the dielectric multilayer reflection film”}).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the side surface reflection structure as taught by Tsuda into Fukui and Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Tsuda in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 7.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui in view of Okuno and Dheeraj et al. (US 20180204977 A1 – hereinafter Dheeraj).
Regarding independent claim 8, Fukui teaches
(Currently Amended)
A semiconductor light emitting element (100 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “light emitting element 100”) comprising:
a growth substrate (112 – Fig. 3 – [0045] – “substrate 110 includes a
conductive base material 111, and an n-type semiconductor layer 112”);
a plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center
nanorod 131”) on the growth substrate (112);
a side surface reflection portion (160 – [0190] – “electrode 160 partially covers
the side surfaces (upper portions) of the core-multishell nanowires 130”) provided on a side surface of the columnar semiconductor layer (131 – Fig. 3 – [0184] – “center nanorod 131”) and configured to reflect ([0192] – “the generated light is reflected by the second electrode 160, the light is emitted externally from the upper end face of the core-multishell nanowires 130, and not from the side surfaces”) at least a part of light emitted from the columnar semiconductor layer (131); and
an embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer and the side surface reflection portion (160),
wherein an upper surface reflection portion configured to reflect the light toward
the growth substrate is formed on a surface of the embedded layer opposite to the growth substrate.
Fukui does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 8.
However, in an analogous art, Okuno teaches
an embedded layer (140 – Fig. 2 – [0035] – “buried layer 140”) covering the columnar semiconductor layer (130 – Fig. 3 – [0035] – “columnar semiconductor 130”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the embedded layer covering the columnar semiconductor layer structure as taught by Okuno into Fukui.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Okuno in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 1.
Fukui and Okuno do not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 8.
However, in an analogous art, Dheeraj teaches
wherein an upper surface reflection portion (6 – Fig. 3 – [0208] – “top
electrode/light reflective layer 6 is positioned on top of nanowires 4”) configured to reflect the light toward the growth substrate (6 – Fig. 3 – [0208] – “top electrode/light reflective layer 6 is positioned on top of nanowires 4. The light reflective layer may also be provided with a p-electrode comprising Ni or Au. In use, this layer reflects any light emitted by the device to ensure that the light is emitted through the top of the device opposite the reflective layer”) is formed on a surface of the embedded layer (5 – Fig. 6 – [0208] – “filler 5”) opposite to the growth substrate (3 – Fig. 3 – [0207] – “Nanowires 4 are grown from substrate layer 3”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the upper surface reflection structure as taught by Dheeraj into Fukui and Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Dheeraj in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of decreasing the amount of light loss from not traveling perpendicular to the substrate.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuno and Herner.
Regarding independent claim 14, Okuno teaches:
(Currently Amended) A method for producing a semiconductor light
emitting element (400 – Fig. 20 – [0117] – “semiconductor light-emitting device 400”), the method comprising:
forming a plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (130 – Fig. 20 [0117] – “columnar semiconductor 130”) on a growth substrate (112 – Fig. 20 – [0046] – “n-type semiconductor layer 112 is a base layer for growing a columnar semiconductor 130”); and
forming [[an]] a conductive embedded layer (443 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “the third layer 443”) to cover side surfaces and upper surfaces of the plurality of columnar semiconductor layers (130 – Fig. 20 shows this),
wherein the forming the columnar semiconductor layer (130) comprises:
forming a nanowire layer (130 – Fig. 20 – [0038] – “columnar semiconductor
130 is a semiconductor selectively grown from the surface of the semiconductor” – this corresponds to a nanowire layer) having an inclined side surface portion (441 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “first layer 441) which is a side surface inclined with respect to a main surface of the growth substrate (112 – Fig. 20 shows this);
forming an active layer (442 – Fig. 20 – [0118] – “second layer 442 … is an n-type semiconductor layer, for example, n-type GaN” – this is an active layer) on an outer periphery of the inclined side surface portion (441); and
forming a p-type layer ([0125] – “When a tunnel junction part does not exist, the
buried layer for filling in a space between the columnar semiconductors 130 is a p-type layer” – this is interpreted as a p-type layer can be formed over the inclined surface filling the space between adjacent element 130, as a variation of the fourth embodiment described in Fig. 20) on an outer periphery of the active layer (35) (oku (442) , and
wherein the inclined side surface portion is constituted by facets having
inclination angles of 80 degrees or less with respect to the main surface of growth substrate.
Okuno does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 14.
However, in an analogous art, Herner teaches
wherein the inclined side surface portion is constituted by facets ([0089] –
“it should be emphasized that although the figures illustrate embodiments having a pillar-like geometry and are based on nano wire core, i.e. “one dimensional” cores, it should be understood that the cores can have other geometries such as pyramidal shapes by changing growth conditions. Also, by changing growth conditions, the final nano element can have a pyramidal shape, or any shape between a pillar-like and a pyramid shape” – this describes facets) having inclination angles of 80 degrees or less ([0050] – “The angle may be, e.g., less than 80, 70, 60, 50, 45, 40, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10, or 5 degrees”) with respect to the main surface ([0005] – “the angle between the line followed by the substance and the plane of the support is less than 90° when measured from the center of the support”) of growth substrate (5 – Fig. 4 – [0041] – “growth substrate 5”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the facet structure as taught by Herner into Okuno.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Herner in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result as stated above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Okuno, as modified by Herner, teaches claim 14 from which claim 15 depends. Okuno further teaches
(Previously Presented) The method for producing the semiconductor
light emitting element according to claim 14,
wherein the forming the nanowire layer (130) comprises:
forming a nanowire core (131 – Fig. 15 – [0078] – “the n-type columnar
semiconductor 131”) having a side surface perpendicular to the main surface of the growth substrate (110 – Fig. 20 shows this); and
forming the inclined side surface portion (440) on an outer periphery
of the nanowire core (131 – [{0047] – “columnar semiconductor 130 includes an n-type columnar semiconductor 131”} – Fig. 20 shows this).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 17 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.
Regarding claim 16, prior art of record fails to teach or suggest
ratio of a raw material is set to be lower than that in the forming the
nanowire core.
Regarding claim 17, prior art of record fails to teach or suggest
wherein in the forming the inclined side surface portion
growth temperature is set to be lower than that in the forming the nanowire core.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to GARY ABEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-0246. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (Eastern).
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, CHAD M DICKE can be reached on (571) 270-7996. 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 ttps://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.
/GRA/
Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights