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 .
Status of Claims
Applicants’ election of invention II drawn to claims 5-8 and species I are acknowledged. Claims 1-4, drawn to an unelected invention are thus withdrawn from further examination. Claims 5-8 are examined herein.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-8 are pending in the present application. Claims 1-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/09/2026. Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 5-8 in the reply filed on 06/09/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election without traverse of species I in the reply filed on 06/09/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/18/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/15/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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(s) 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1) in view of Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1) teaches a light emitting element which comprises a group III nitride semiconductor containing Al and has an emission wavelength of 200 nm to 280 nm (paragraph 0002+0031, teaches Nitride compound semiconductors such as InN, GaN, AlN, and their ternary and quaternary alloys depending on alloy composition enable ultraviolet (UV) emissions ranging from 410 nm approximately to 200 nm. These include UVA (400-315 nm), UVB (315-280 nm), and part of UVC (280-200 nm) emissions. UVA emissions are leading to revolutions in curing industry, and UVB and UVC emissions owing to their germicidal effect are looking forward to general adoption in food, water, and surface disinfection businesses...group III nitride in general refers to metal nitride with cations selecting from group IIIA of the periodic table of the elements. That is to say, III-nitride includes AlN, GaN, InN and their ternary (AlGaN, InGaN, InAlN) and quaternary (AlInGaN) alloys. In this specification, a quaternary can be reduced to a ternary for simplicity if one of the group III elements is significantly small so that its existence does not affect the intended function of a layer made of such material. For example, if the In-composition in a quaternary AlInGaN is significantly small, smaller than 1%, then this AlInGaN quaternary can be shown as ternary AlGaN for simplicity. Using the same logic, a ternary can be reduced to a binary for simplicity if one of the group III elements is significantly small), the light emitting element comprising: a substrate (substrate 10, Figure 1, paragraph 0033, teaches Substrate can be selected from sapphire, AlN, SiC, and the like); a semiconductor layer, in which an n layer (structure 30, Figure 1, paragraph 0033, teaches Formed over template is a thick n-AlGaN structure for electron supply and n-type ohmic contact formation. Structure may include a thick (2.0-5.0 μm such as 3.0 μm, n=2.0×1018−5.0×1018 cm31 3) n-type N-AlGaN layer for current spreading, a heavily n-type doped (0.2-0.8 μm such as 0.60 μm, n=8×1018−2×1019 cm31 3) N+-AlGaN layer for MQW active-region polarization field screening, and a lightly doped N31 -AlGaN layer (0.1-0.5 μm such as 0.3 μm, n=2.5×1017−2×1018 cm31 3) to reduce current crowding and prepare uniform current injection into the following AlbGa1-bN/AlwGa1-wN MQW active-region), a light emitting layer (MQW active-region 40, Figure 4, paragraph 0033, teaches MQW is made of alternatingly stacked n-AlbGa1-bN barrier and AlwGa1-wN well for a few times, for example, for 3-8 times. The barrier thickness is in the range of 8-16 nm, and the well thickness is 1.2-5.0 nm. The total thickness of MQW is usually less than 200 nm, for example, being 75 nm, 100 nm, or 150 nm. The n-AlbG1-bN barrier and AlwGa1-wN well may have an Al-composition in the range of 0.3-1.0, and 0.0-0.85, respectively, and the Al-composition difference of the barrier and well is at least 0.15, or so to ensure a barrier-well bandgap width difference (ΔEg) at least 400 meV to secure quantum confinement effect), and a p layer (p-AlGaN structure 50, Figure 1, paragraph 0033, teaches Following MQW is a p-type AlGaN structure. Structure can be a p-AlGaN layer of uniform or varying Al-composition, or a p-AlGaN superlattice structure, or a p-AlGaN MQW structure, or a p-AlGaN multilayer structure serving as hole injecting and electron blocking layer. Structure has enough Al-composition and modulation to allow for sufficient electron blocking and hole injection efficiencies. Further, structure is also efficient in spreading hole current laterally) are stacked in this order over the substrate; a p electrode having a Ru layer provided on and in contact with the p layer (p-contact layer 60 + p-ohmic contact 71, Figure 1, paragraph 0033+0034+0037, teaches p-contact layer, which can be engineered according to U.S. Pat. No. 10,276,746, the content of which is herewith incorporated by reference in its entirety, to have surface hole gas accumulation for p-type ohmic contact formation. Briefly, p-contact layer is a thin (0.6-10 nm), strained, and heavily acceptor-doped nitride layer (e.g. Mg-doped, to a concentration about 10.sup.20 cm.sup.31 3 or more). For UVB/UVC LEDs (emissions from 200 nm-315 nm), p-contact layer prefers to be a Mg-doped AlGaN layer with Al-composition larger than 0.7, or with Al-composition to be from 0.7 to 1.0...The surface high-density 2DHG of p-contact layer can form good ohmic contact to many metals, not only to high-work-function metals like Nickel (Ni), Tungsten (W), Molybdenum (Mo) Palladium (Pd), Platinum (Pt), Iridium (Ir), Osmium (Os), Rhodium (Rh) and Gold (Au), but also to some low-work-function metals like UV reflective metal Aluminum (Al) and visible light reflective Silver (Ag) and Indium (In)...p-ohmic contact is a metallic contact containing element oxygen (O). This means that p-ohmic contact contains metal and oxygen elements, however, it does not need to be perfect stoichiometric metal oxides. According to an embodiment of the present invention, metallic oxygen-containing p-ohmic contact formed over hole supplier and p-contact layer); and an n electrode ((n-ohmic contact 81, Figure 1,) provided over the n layer exposed on a bottom surface of the hole, and a second layer (paragraph 0036, teaches n-ohmic contact, which can be made of thin metal layer stacks such as titanium/aluminum/titanium/gold (Ti/Al/Ti/Au) with respective layer thickness of 30-40/70-80/10-20/80-100 nm, for example 35/75/15/90 nm, or V/Al/V/Ag, V/Al/V/Au, and V/Al/Ti/Au, of respective thicknesses such as 20/60/20/100 nm. MPEP 2144.05(I) states, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (The prior art taught carbon monoxide concentrations of "about 1-5%" while the claim was limited to "more than 5%." The court held that "about 1-5%" allowed for concentrations slightly above 5% thus the ranges overlapped.); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Claim reciting thickness of a protective layer as falling within a range of "50 to 100 Angstroms" considered prima facie obvious in view of prior art reference teaching that "for suitable protection, the thickness of the protective layer should be not less than about 10 nm [i.e., 100 Angstroms]." The court stated that "by stating that ‘suitable protection’ is provided if the protective layer is ‘about’ 100 Angstroms thick, [the prior art reference] directly teaches the use of a thickness within [applicant’s] claimed range."). See also In re Bergen, 120 F.2d 329, 332, 49 USPQ 749, 751-52 (CCPA 1941) (The court found that the overlapping endpoint of the prior art and claimed range was sufficient to support an obviousness rejection, particularly when there was no showing of criticality of the claimed range)) that is located on and in contact with the first layer, that comprises a metal mainly containing Al and containing V, and that has a thickness of 50 nm or more and 500 nm or less, as claimed.
Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1) is silent to teach a hole provided at a predetermined region of a surface of the p layer and having a depth reaching the n layer, the n electrode having a first layer that is located in contact with the n layer, that comprises AlNx or AlyGa1-yNx having a higher Al composition than the n layer, and that has a thickness of 1 nm or more and 3 nm or less, and wherein a pattern of the hole and a pattern of the p electrode are set such that a proportion of an area of the p electrode to a total area of the hole and the p layer is 70% or more.
In an analogous art, Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) teaches a hole provided at a predetermined region of a surface of the p layer and having a depth reaching the n layer (hole 6, Figure 1F, paragraph 0034+0048, teaches a plurality of holes provided at specific locations in the p-side semiconductor layer… the holes are holes that expose the n-side semiconductor layer), as claimed. Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) further teaches wherein a pattern of the hole and a pattern of the p electrode are set such that a proportion of an area of the p electrode to a total area of the hole and the p layer is 70% or more (paragraph 0057, teaches the first p-electrode is provided on the p-side semiconductor layer, in contact with the p-side semiconductor layer. The first p-electrode is an ohmic electrode layer, but can also function as a light reflecting electrode layer, for example. Accordingly, it is better for the first p-electrode to have a larger contact surface area with the p-side semiconductor layer, and is preferably formed, for example, over at least 50%, and more preferably at least 60%, and even more preferably at least 70% of the surface area of the semiconductor layer. Further, it is preferably formed on substantially the entire surface including the above-mentioned corners), as claimed.
In another analogous art, Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) teaches the n electrode having a first layer (n electrode 35, Figure 7(b)) that is located in contact with the n layer, that comprises AlNx or AlyGa1-yNx having a higher Al composition than the n layer, that has a thickness of 1 nm or more and 3 nm or less (n electrode 35, Figure 7(b), col 7, lines 38-41, teaches the n electrode and the n electrode before alloying when the base layer is formed of V (thickness is 150 Å) and the main electrode layer thereon is formed of Al (thickness is 1.5 μm). MPEP 2144.05(I) states, Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See also Warner-Jenkinson Co., Inc. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co., 520 U.S. 17, 41 USPQ2d 1865 (1997) (under the doctrine of equivalents, a purification process using a pH of 5.0 could infringe a patented purification process requiring a pH of 6.0-9.0); In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%); In re Scherl, 156 F.2d 72, 74-75, 70 USPQ 204, 205-206 (CCPA 1946) (prior art showed an angle in a groove of up to 90° and an applicant claimed an angle of no less than 120°); In re Becket, 88 F.2d 684 (CCPA 1937) ("Where the component elements of alloys are the same, and where they approach so closely the same range of quantities as is here the case, it seems that there ought to be some noticeable difference in the qualities of the respective alloys."); In re Dreyfus, 73 F.2d 931, 934, 24 USPQ 52, 55 (CCPA 1934)(the prior art, which taught about 0.7:1 of alkali to water, renders unpatentable a claim that increased the proportion to at least 1:1 because there was no showing that the claimed proportions were critical); In re Lilienfeld, 67 F.2d 920, 924, 20 USPQ 53, 57 (CCPA 1933)(the prior art teaching an alkali cellulose containing minimal amounts of water, found by the Examiner to be in the 5-8% range, the claims sought to be patented were to an alkali cellulose with varying higher ranges of water (e.g., "not substantially less than 13%," "not substantially below 17%," and "between about 13[%] and 20%"); K-Swiss Inc. v. Glide N Lock GmbH, 567 Fed. App'x 906 (Fed. Cir. 2014)(reversing the Board's decision, in an appeal of an inter partes reexamination proceeding, that certain claims were not prima facie obvious due to non-overlapping ranges); In re Brandt, 886 F.3d 1171, 1177, 126 USPQ2d 1079, 1082 (Fed. Cir. 2018)(the court found a prima facie case of obviousness had been made in a predictable art wherein the claimed range of "less than 6 pounds per cubic feet" and the prior art range of "between 6 lbs./ft3 and 25 lbs./ft3" were so mathematically close that the difference between the claimed ranges was virtually negligible absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality.)), as claimed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the teachings of Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1) with the teachings of Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) thereby having a hole through the p layer reaching the n layer to attach an n electrode connected to the n layer, an n electrode with a first layer having an Al concentration higher than the n layer, the first layer being between 1 nm and 3 nm thick, and whereby the p electrode is 70% or more than the hole and p layer.
Regarding claim 6, Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1), and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) teach the light emitting element according to claim 5, as claimed. Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) further teaches wherein the hole is formed at plural locations, an arrangement pattern of the holes is a lattice, and the n electrode is formed on a bottom surface of each of the holes (holes 6, Figure 1F, paragraph 0098, teaches the p-side semiconductor layer has a plurality of holes. The active layer present under these holes is also removed to expose the n-side semiconductor layer), as claimed.
Claim(s) 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1) and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) in view of Matsui (International Patent Application Publication WO2020/137470A1).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1), and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) teach the light emitting element according to claim 5, as claimed.
Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1), and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) are silent to teach further comprising: a first pn electrode and a second pn electrode provided over the p electrode and over the n electrode, respectively; a protective film which is an insulator and covers an entire upper surface of the element; a p pad electrode provided over the protective film and connected to the first pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film; and an n pad electrode provided over the protective film, connected to the second pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film, and spaced apart from the p pad electrode.
In an analogous art, Matsui (International Patent Application Publication WO2020/137470A1) teaches further comprising a first pn electrode (p wiring electrode P2, Figure 1) and a second pn electrode (n wiring electrode N2, Figure 1) provided over the p electrode and over the n electrode, respectively; a protective film (insulating film IF1, Figure 1, paragraph 0029, teaches the insulating film insulates the p electrode such as the p wiring electrode from the n electrode such as the n wiring electrode. The material of the insulating film is, for example, SiO2. Of course, other materials may be used) which is an insulator and covers an entire upper surface of the element; a p pad electrode (p pad electrode P3, Figure 1) provided over the protective film and connected to the first pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film; and an n pad electrode (n pad electrode N3, Figure 1) provided over the protective film, connected to the second pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film, and spaced apart from the p pad electrode, as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
415
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the teachings of Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1), and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) with the teachings of Matsui (International Patent Application Publication WO2020/137470A1) thereby having pn electrodes on the p and n electrodes, a protective insulating film coating the light emitting element, and pad electrodes on the p and n electrodes for operating the light emitting element.
Regarding claim 8, Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0102588A1), Takenaga (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0033262A1), and Uemura (US Patent No 6,103,543) teach the light emitting element according to claim 6, as claimed. Matsui (International Patent Application Publication WO2020/137470A1) further teaches further comprising: a first pn electrode (p wiring electrode P2, Figure 1) and a second pn electrode (n wiring electrode N2, Figure 1) provided over the p electrode and over the n electrode, respectively; a protective film (insulating film IF1, Figure 1, paragraph 0029, teaches the insulating film insulates the p electrode such as the p wiring electrode from the n electrode such as the n wiring electrode. The material of the insulating film is, for example, SiO2. Of course, other materials may be used) which is an insulator and covers an entire upper surface of the element; a p pad electrode (p pad electrode P3, Figure 1) provided over the protective film and connected to the first pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film; and an n pad electrode (n pad electrode N3, Figure 1) provided over the protective film, connected to the second pn electrode via a hole provided at the protective film, and spaced apart from the p pad electrode, as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
415
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREEM M MOHAMED-ALY whose telephone number is (571)270-0312. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday 8am-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, Leonard Chang can be reached at (571) 270-3691. 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.
/KAREEM M MOHAMED-ALY/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/Leonard Chang/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights