DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the application filed on 03/04/2024.
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for a 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1, reading on figures 1, 2, & 8, in the reply filed on 08/10/2026, is acknowledged. The applicant indicates that claims 1-35 read on the elected species. The examiner disagrees. The limitation “wherein the top contact layer is formed at an edge of the respective micro LED” of Claim 4 reads on fig. 6 of Species 3. The top contact layer 3 of fig. 6 covers the entire edge of the micro LED shown in the top view whereas the top contact layer 3 as shown in fig. 2 of Species 1 is formed in a center portion of the micro LED. Accordingly, claim 4 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 1-3 & 5-35 will be examined in this Office action.
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 1-3 & 5-35 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the array" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1 establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs.” Claims 2, 3, & 5-35 are rejected as depending on Claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the array" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 7 depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the array" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 12 depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the array" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 17 depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1. Additionally, Claim 17 recites the limitation “a second trench” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis this limitation in the claim, because Claim 1, on which Claim 17 depends on, fails to establish “a first trench” that would warrant another limitation for “a second trench.”
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the array" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 18 indirectly depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the array" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 19 indirectly depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1. Additionally, Claim 19 recites the limitation “the bottom contact” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the array" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Line 2 of Claim 1, on which Claim 20 depends on, establishes “an array of micro LEDs” and it is unclear whether Applicant intends to establish a new array or reference the “array of micro LEDs” of Claim 1.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “the top epitaxial layer forms a continuous bottom surface across the array of micro LEDs” in lines 1-2. Claim 1, on which Claim 30 indirectly depends on, establishes “wherein each micro LED… comprises… a top epitaxial layer.” Claim 30 is inconsistent with the limitation of Claim 1. It is unclear how each micro LED would have their own distinct top epitaxial layer because the continuous bottom surface across the array of micro LEDs would define a singular top epitaxial layer shared among all of the micro LEDs.
Claim 33 recites the limitation “the bottom epitaxial layer forms a continuous top surface across the array of micro LEDs” in lines 1-2. Claim 1, on which Claim 33 depends on, establishes “wherein each micro LED… comprises… a bottom epitaxial layer.” Claim 33 is inconsistent with the limitation of Claim 1. It is unclear how each micro LED would have their own distinct bottom epitaxial layer because the continuous top surface across the array of micro LEDs would define a singular bottom epitaxial layer shared among all of the micro LEDs.
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, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 20, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, & 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607).
Iguchi (see, e.g., para.0012-0013, para.0017-0019) states figs. 1, 2, 4, 5, & 6 all pertain to the first embodiment and are used together for the following rejections. Fig. 1 shows a micro LED 100, and figs. 4-6 show the steps of forming an array of micro LEDs wherein each micro LED is the micro LED 100 of fig. 1.
Regarding Claim 1, Iguchi (see, e.g., figs. 1-2, figs. 4-6) show a microlight-emitting diode (LED) structure, comprising:
an array of micro LEDs (plurality of each micro LED 100), wherein each micro LED 100 in the array comprises:
a bottom epitaxial layer 13 of a first conductive type (p-type, see, e.g., para.0044);
a light-emitting layer 12 (see, e.g., para.0044), formed on the bottom epitaxial layer;
a top epitaxial layer 11 of a second conductive type (n-type, see, e.g., para.0044), formed on the light-emitting layer;
Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 4, para.0057-0058) states the nitride semiconductor layer 14, is comprised of the bottom and top epitaxial layers 13 & 11, is grown from a sapphire growth substrate 10. Therefore the layers 13 & 11 are epitaxial layers.
Iguchi, however, fails to show
and a top contact layer , formed on the top epitaxial layer and having a continuous closed shape.
Lin (see, e.g., figs. 2a-c), in a similar device to Iguchi, shows
and a top contact layer 201 (see, e.g., para.0615), formed on the top semiconductor layer 102 and having a continuous closed shape (see, e.g., fig. 2a).
Lin (see, e.g., para.0640) states the top contact layer 201 positioned on the top semiconductor layer of a micro LED would improve the light emitting efficiency of the micro LED and reduce sidewall leakage current between adjacent micro LEDs. The top contact layer 201 of Lin is incorporated into the device of Iguchi.
Iguchi, in view of Lin (see, e.g., fig. 2a, para.0615), shows
and a top contact layer 201 (see, e.g., para.0615), formed on the top semiconductor layer 11 and having a continuous closed shape (see, e.g., fig. 2a, annotated figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
625
1303
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding Claim 2, Iguchi, in view of Lin (see, e.g., fig. 2a), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the continuous closed shape (of top contact layer 201) comprises:
a circular shape,
an annular shape,
or an annular-square shape with an annular inner portion and a square peripheral portion (see, e.g., fig. 2a, annotated figure 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the top contact layer 201 is continuously formed on the top epitaxial layer 11 in the array of micro LEDs (continuously formed as shown in fig. 2a and annotated figure 1).
The claim language of claim 1, on which claim 3 depends on, establishes the top contact layer and the top epitaxial layer to be formed in each of the micro LED 100. Since each micro LED 100 shows the top contact layer continuously formed on the top epitaxial layer within each micro LED, the limitation is rendered obvious.
Regarding Claim 7, Iguchi, in view of Lin (see, e.g., para.0622), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein each micro LED in the array further comprises
a top conductive layer 301 (see, e.g., para.0622) formed on the top epitaxial layer 11 and the top contact layer 201 (see, e.g., annotated figure 1).
Lin (see, e.g., para.0622) states the top conductive layer 301 would provide a high light transmittance ratio and improve the light emitting efficiency of the micro LED.
Regarding Claim 9, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the top epitaxial layer 11 comprises a first trench (hereinafter “11T”) between adjacent micro LEDs (see, e.g., annotated figure 1).
Regarding Claim 10, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 9,
wherein the top contact layer 201 is formed at an edge of the first trench 11T (see, e.g., annotated figure 1).
Regarding Claim 20, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 5, para.0070-0071), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein each micro LED in the array further comprises:
a bottom conductive structure 17, 18, & 23P (see, e.g., fig. 5, para.0070-0071) below the bottom epitaxial layer 13;
and an integrated circuit (IC) back plane 19, 25, & 51 formed below and electrically connected to the bottom conductive structure (see, e.g., fig. 6, para.0071).
Regarding Claim 21, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 20,
wherein: the bottom conductive structure 17, 18, & 23P comprises
a first dielectric layer 17 (see, e.g., para.0071)
and a first contact hole 18 formed in the first dielectric layer (see, e.g., para.0071);
and the IC back plane 19, 25, & 51 comprises
a second dielectric layer 25 (see, e.g., para.0071)
and a second contact hole (hole filled by element 19) formed in the second dielectric layer,
the second contact hole corresponding to the first contact hole (vertically in line, see, e.g., fig.6).
Regarding Claim 22, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 21,
wherein a width of the first contact hole 18 is greater than a width of the second contact hole (greater than the width of the hole filled by element 19, see, e.g., fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 25, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 21,
wherein the IC back plane further comprises:
a chip circuit board 50 formed below the second dielectric layer and the second contact hole (see, e.g., para.0071).
Regarding Claim 29, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the top epitaxial layer 11 is interconnected between adjacent micro LEDs (see, e.g., annotated figure 1).
Regarding Claim 30, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 6), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 29,
wherein the top epitaxial layer 11 forms a continuous bottom surface (continuous bottom surface in each micro LED is formed on the light emitting layer 12) across the array of micro LEDs (see, e.g., fig. 6, annotated figure 1).
Regarding Claim 31, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 6), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the light-emitting layer 12 is interconnected between adjacent micro LEDs (light emitting layer 12 is electrically interconnected to adjacent micro LEDs by its electrical connection to the top epitaxial layer 11, which is shared among adjacent micro LEDs, see e.g., fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 32, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 6), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the bottom epitaxial layer 13 is interconnected between adjacent micro LEDs (bottom epitaxial layer 13 is electrically interconnected to adjacent micro LEDs by its electrical connection to the top epitaxial layer 11, which is shared among adjacent micro LEDs, see e.g., fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 34, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 6), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the bottom epitaxial layer 13 forms an inverted trapezoidal shape or a bowl shape (inverted trapezoidal shape beneath the light emitting layer 12, see, e.g., fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 35, Iguchi (see, e.g., para.0044), in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein: the first conductive type is N-type and the second conductive type is P-type;
or the first conductive type is P-type (13 p-type, see, e.g., para.0044) and the second conductive type is N-type 11 (11 n-type, see, e.g., para.0044).
Claims 5 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) and further in view of Park (US 20220069161).
Regarding Claim 5, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
Iguchi, in view of Lin, however, fails to show
wherein the top contact layer comprises a conductive material.
Park (see, e.g., fig. 2d, para.0099), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows
wherein the top contact layer 106a (see, e.g., para.0099) comprises a conductive material (“partially include[s] components, Al, Ga, and As that remain without oxidation”, see, e.g., para.0099).
Park (see, e.g., para.0099) states the material configuration of the top contact layer would prevent leakage of current to outside of the LED. The material configuration of the top contact layer of Park is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the material configuration of the top contact layer of Park in the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin, to prevent leakage of current to outside of the LED.
Regarding Claim 6, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Park (see, e.g., para.0099), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 5,
wherein the conductive material of the top contact layer is metal (Al and/or Ga, see, e.g., para.0099).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) and further in view of Kim (US 20190371967).
Regarding Claim 8, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 7,
wherein the top conductive layer 301 is transparent (see, e.g., para.0614)
Iguchi, in view of Lin, however, fails to show
wherein the top conductive layer comprises indium tin oxide (ITO).
Kim (see, e.g., fig. 4a, para.0090), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows
wherein the top conductive layer 31 comprises indium tin oxide (ITO) (ITO, see, e.g., para.0090).
Kim (see, e.g., para.0090) states the material configuration of the top conductive layer would have a lower specific resistance than the semiconductor layer of the LED and allow for current to spread. The material configuration of Kim is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the material configuration of Kim in the device of Iguchi, in view of Lim, to have a lower specific resistance and allow for current to spread.
Claims 12, 14, 15, & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) and further in view of Qi (US 20220005798).
Regarding Claim 12, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
Iguchi, in view of Lin, however, fails to show,
wherein each micro LED in the array further comprises
a micro lens formed above the top epitaxial layer.
Qi (see, e.g., fig. 17, para.0071-0072), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows
a micro lens 160 & 62 (see, e.g., fig. 17, para.0071-0072) formed above the top epitaxial layer 92.
Qi (see, e.g., para.0072) states the micro lens would focus the emitted light of the micro LED in a desired direction and prevent light from propagating to adjacent micro LEDs. The micro lens of Qi is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the micro lens of Qi, into each of micro LED in the array of micro LEDs of Iguchi, in view of Lin, to focus the emitted light of the micro LED in a desired direction and prevent light from propagating to adjacent micro LEDs.
Regarding Claim 14, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Qi (see, e.g., fig. 17, para.0072), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 12,
wherein the micro lens 160 & 62 comprises a top hemisphere lens 160 (see, e.g., para.0072) and a bottom spacer 62 (see, e.g., para.0072) below the top hemisphere lens.
Regarding Claim 15, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Qi (see, e.g., fig. 17), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 14,
wherein a width of the bottom spacer 62 is greater than a diameter of the top hemisphere lens 160 (along the z-direction the diameter of 160 is wider, see, e.g., fig. 17).
Regarding Claim 16, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Qi (see, e.g., fig. 17), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 14,
wherein a height of the bottom spacer 62 is determined based on a diameter of the top hemisphere lens 160.
The current claim language does not define any relationship between the height of the bottom spacer and the diameters of the top hemisphere lens. Any combination or presence of height and diameter can be determined as being based on one another.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) & Qi (US 20220005798) and further in view of Yeh (US 20110299044).
Regarding Claim 13, Iguchi, in view of Lin & Qi, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 12,
Iguchi, in view of Lin & Qi, however, fails to show
wherein a gap is formed between the micro lens and an adjacent micro lens.
Yeh (see, e.g., fig. 6a, para.0075), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin & Qi, shows
wherein a gap 636 (air gap reflective structure) is formed between the micro lens 632 (rightmost) and an adjacent micro lens 632 (directly to the left of the rightmost micro lens)
Yeh (see, e.g., para.0075) states the gap would further isolate light and reduce cross-talking between adjacent micro LEDS. The gap of Yeh is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin & Qi.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the micro lens of Yeh, into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin & Qi, to further isolate light and reduce cross-talking between adjacent micro LEDS.
Claims 23 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) and further in view of Iguchi K (US 20190371777).
Regarding Claim 23, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 21,
Regarding the limitation “the second contact hole” of Claim 21, Iguchi (see, e.g., fig. 6), in view of Lin, shows the limitation can also map to “a second contact hole (hole filled by element 51) formed in the second dielectric layer 25.” The alternate mapping for the second contact hole is used for the rejection of Claims 23 & 24.
Iguchi, in view of Lin, however, fails to show
wherein a first metal is filled in the first contact hole
and a second metal is filled in the second contact hole.
Iguchi K (see, e.g., para.0009-0012) states figs. 1, 3a-e, & 4a-g show the first embodiment of an array of micro LEDs, the steps of manufacturing the first embodiment, and are used together for the following rejections.
Iguchi K (see, e.g., fig. 1, figs. 3d-e, fig. 4c, para.0050, para.0057), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows
wherein a first metal 19P (tantalum, tungsten, gold, see, e.g., para.0050) is filled in the first contact hole 18P (see, e.g., figs. 3d-e)
and a second metal 51 (copper, see, e.g., para.0057) is filled in the second contact hole (hole of insulating layer 55, see, e.g., fig. 4c).
Iguchi K shows the first metal and second metal are supportive materials for forming a connection between a bottom conductive structure and an IC backplane. The first metal and second metal of Iguchi K is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the first metal and second metal of Iguchi K in the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin, to provide supportive materials for forming a connection between a bottom conductive structure and an IC backplane.
Regarding Claim 24, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Iguchi K (see, e.g., figs. 4d-f, para.0062), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 23,
the first metal 19P in the first contact hole 18P is bonded to the second metal 51 in the second contact hole (hole of insulating layer 55, first and second metal are press-bonded to each other, see, e.g., figs. 4d-f, para.0062).
Claims 26 & 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) and further in view of Noda (US 20220199861).
Regarding Claim 26, Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
Iguchi, in view of Lin, however, fails to show
wherein the top epitaxial layer comprises a plurality of photonic crystals.
Noda (see, e.g., fig. 1, para.0036, para.0071), in a similar device to Iguchi, in view of Lin, shows
wherein the top epitaxial layer 36 & 30 (see, e.g., para.0071) comprises a plurality of photonic crystals 30 (see, e.g., fig. 2, para.0036).
Noda (see, e.g., para.0034) states the plurality of photonic crystals would amplify light from the micro LED with high efficiency. The plurality of photonic crystals of Noda is incorporated into the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin.
It would have been obvious to at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the plurality of photonic crystals of Noda in the device of Iguchi, in view of Lin, to amplify light from the micro LED with high efficiency.
Regarding Claim 27, Iguchi, in view of Lin and further in view of Noda (see, e.g., fig. 1, para.0033), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 26,
wherein each of the plurality of photonic crystals 30 has a cylindrical shape or a conical shape (“planar shape of the columnar part 30 can be a circular shape”, see, e.g., para.0033).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20220320374) in view of Lin (US 20210057607) & Noda (US 20220199861) and further in view of Cho (US 20070257269).
Regarding Claim 28, Iguchi, in view of Lin & Noda (see, e.g., fig. 1, para.0034, para.0036), shows the micro LED structure according to claim 26,
wherein each of the plurality of photonic crystals has a height of 300 nm and a diameter of 266nm (50-500 nm, see, e.g., para.0034), and adjacent photonic crystals are spaced by a distance of 50 nm (1-500 nm, see, e.g., para.0036).
The claimed ranges of a plurality of photonic crystals having a diameter of 266 nm and adjacent photonic crystals spaced by a distance of 50 nm is held obvious over prior art that teaches a range a plurality of photonic crystals having a diameter of 50-500 nm and adjacent photonic crystals spaced by a distance of 1-500 nm overlapping the claimed ranges. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Overlap of Ranges.
Iguchi, in view of Lin & Noda, however, fails to show
wherein each of the plurality of photonic crystals has a height of 300 nm
Cho (see, e.g., figs. 48-49, para.0319-0320) teaches wherein each of the plurality of photonic crystals 521 has a height of 300 nm to 3000 nm. The claimed range of each of a plurality of photonic crystals having a height of 300 nm is held obvious over prior art that teaches range of each of a plurality of photonic crystals having a height of 300 nm to 3000 nm overlapping the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Overlap of Ranges.
Claims 1, 9, 11, 17, 18, 19, 32, & 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 20220208739) in view of Yeh (US 20110299044).
Regarding Claim 1, Li (see, e.g., fig. 6a) shows the microlight-emitting diode (LED) structure, comprising:
an array of micro LEDs 6000, wherein each micro LED 1000 in the array comprises:
a bottom layer 101 of a first conductive type (see, e.g., para.0126);
a light-emitting layer 103 (see, e.g., para.0126), formed on the bottom layer 101 (see, e.g., fig. 6a);
a top layer 102 of a second conductive type (see, e.g., para.0126), formed on the light-emitting layer;
and a top contact layer 111 (the limitation “top contact” is broad and by contacting the top layer microlens 111 can be interpreted as a top contact layer, see, e.g., para.0128), formed on the top layer 102 and having a continuous closed shape (a polygon shape of the lens is continuous and closed even if it has a concave portion, see, e.g., fig. 6a).
PNG
media_image2.png
613
1351
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Li, however, fails to show
the bottom layer 101 is a bottom epitaxial layer
the top layer 102 is a top epitaxial layer
Yeh (see, e.g., fig. 1, para.0051-0052), in a similar device to Li, shows
a bottom epitaxial layer 242 of a first conductive type (p-type);
a light-emitting layer 244, formed on the bottom epitaxial layer 242;
a top epitaxial layer 246 of a second conductive type (n-type), formed on the light-emitting layer;
The bottom layer 101 and top layer 102 of Li (see, e.g., para.0097) are a p-type conductive layer and an n-type conductive layer respectively. Yeh (see, e.g., fig. 1, para.0051-0052), in a similar device to Li, teaches a bottom layer 242 and a top layer 246 can be a p-type epitaxial layer and an n-type epitaxial layer.
The bottom epitaxial layer and the top epitaxial layer of Yeh is incorporated into the device of Li since there is overlap between p-type and n-type layers that can also be p-type and n-type epitaxial layers.
It would have been obvious at the time of filing the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the bottom epitaxial layer and top epitaxial layer of Yeh in the device of Li because the combination is a simple substitution of one known material for another to obtain predictable results – simple substitution of one bottom and top layer of a micro LED for another for which the two are provided as alternates.
Regarding Claim 9, Li (see, e.g., fig. 6a), in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the top epitaxial layer 102 comprises a first trench (hereinafter “102T”) between adjacent micro LEDs (see, e.g., annotated figure 2).
Regarding Claim 11, Li, in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 9,
wherein the bottom epitaxial layer 101 comprises a second trench (hereinafter “101T”) formed at a position (beneath 102T) corresponding to the first trench 102T.
Regarding Claim 17, Li, in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein: the bottom epitaxial layer 11 comprises
a second trench 101T (see, e.g., annotated figure 2) between adjacent micro LEDs;
and each micro LED in the array further comprises
a reflective layer 104 (see, e.g., para.0128) formed on a sidewall (hereinafter “101S”) of the second trench 101T.
In view of the 112(b) rejection of Claim 17, the limitation “a second trench” only requires the presence of one trench and does not require the presence of two trenches.
Regarding Claim 18, Li, in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 17,
wherein each micro LED in the array further comprises
an insulating layer 109 (see, e.g., para.0103, para.0124, para.0128) formed between the second trench and the reflective layer 104 (the limitation does not require 109 to be between 104 and 101s, therefore 109 between the portions of the second trench other than 101S and the reflective layer 104 is sufficient, see, e.g., annotated figure 2).
Regarding Claim 19, Li, in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 18,
wherein each micro LED in the array further comprises:
a bottom contact pad 105 (see, e.g., para.0128) formed at a bottom surface of the bottom epitaxial layer 101 (see, e.g., fig. 6a);
and a bottom conductive structure 106 (see, e.g., para.0128) formed below the bottom contact and the bottom epitaxial layer 101;
wherein the bottom contact pad is surrounded by the insulating layer and electrically connected to the bottom conductive structure (see, e.g., para.0128).
Regarding Claim 32, Li (see, e.g., fig. 6a), in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 1,
wherein the bottom epitaxial layer 101 is interconnected between adjacent micro LEDs (interconnected by the electrical connection to light emitting layer 103).
Regarding Claim 33, Li, in view of Yeh, shows the micro LED structure according to claim 32,
wherein the bottom epitaxial layer 101 forms a continuous top surface across the array of micro LEDs (see, e.g., fig. 6a).
Since each micro LED 1000 shows the bottom epitaxial layer forming a continuous top surface within each micro LED, the limitation is rendered obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO JOSE RAMOS-DIAZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-5855. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Loke can be reached on 571-272-1657. 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.
/F.R.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/STEVEN H LOKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights