DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the communications dated 02/04/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Final Election/Restriction
2. Applicant made a provisional election with traverse to prosecute the
invention of Group I, claims 1-13, is acknowledged.
The traversal (See Applicants’ Remarks) has been fully considered, but is not found persuasive.
MPEP § 803 recites criteria for restriction between patentably distinct inventions:
“There are two criteria for a proper requirement for restriction between patentably distinct inventions:
(A) The inventions must be independent (see MPEP § 802.01, § 806.06, § 808.01) or distinct as claimed (see MPEP § 806.05 - § 806.05(j)); and
(B) There would be a serious search and/or examination burden on the examiner if restriction is not required (see MPEP § 803.02, § 808, and § 808.02).”
MPEP 806.05(f) further states:
“A process of making and a product made by the process can be shown to be distinct inventions if either or both of the following can be shown: (A) that the process as claimed is not an obvious process of making the product and the process as claimed can be used to make another materially different product; or (B) that the product as claimed can be made by another materially different process.”
Because the instant claimed inventions of Group II and those of Group I are related as process of making and product made, the inventions are independent or distinct, and there would be a serious search and examination burden if restriction were not required, as set forth in the Restriction Requirement of 06/10/2026, a restriction for examination purposes is therefore proper.
Therefore, the Restriction Requirement is made FINAL.
Claims 14-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a non-elected group there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Applicant has the right to file a divisional application covering the subject matter of the non-elected claims.
Acknowledges
3. Receipt is acknowledged of the following items from the Applicant.
Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed on 06/24/2024, 11/05/2025, and 02/04/2026. The references cited on the PTOL 1449 form have been considered.
Applicant is requested to cite any relevant prior art if being aware on form PTO-1449 in accordance with the guidelines set for in M.P.E.P. 609.
Specification
4. The specification has been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of possible minor errors. However, the applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claims 1-6, and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2016/0247971)
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a light-emitting diode (LED) chip, comprising:
a carrier submount 170 (see Fig. 2);
an active LED structure 110 on the carrier submount 170, the active LED structure 110 comprising an n-type layer 111, a p-type layer 115, and an active layer 113 between the n-type layer and the p-type layer (see paras. 0035-0044), the active LED structure 110 forming sidewalls (around ends of active layer 113) that define a perimeter of the active LED structure;
a metal reflective layer 120 and/or 130 (para. 0047, para. 0051; note: metal layer 130 has similar materials as that/those of reflective layer 120, and therefore also reflective) between the active LED structure 110 and the carrier submount 170, a portion of the metal reflective layer 120/130 extending outside the sidewalls;
a contact 180 on the carrier submount 170 in a position that is outside the sidewalls; and
a landing pad (landing pad 120 underneath contact 180, and/or landing pad comprising material between pad 180 and reflective element 120 and covered by protective layer 190) between the contact 180 and the metal reflective layer 130 or 120&130, the landing pad electrically coupling the contact 180 to the metal reflective layer 120/130 outside the sidewalls.
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the landing pad is between the contact and the metal reflective layer in a direction perpendicular to the carrier submount. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 1, wherein the metal reflective layer 120, 130 is electrically coupled to the active LED structure 110. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 3, further comprising a dielectric reflective layer 140a on the active LED structure, wherein one or more portions 120 of the metal reflective layer extend through the dielectric reflective layer 140a to electrically couple the metal reflective layer to the active LED structure 110. See Fig. 2, and para. 0048.
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 4, wherein the dielectric reflective layer 140a extends outside the sidewalls, and the landing pad 120 extends through the dielectric reflective layer 140a to electrically couple the landing pad to the contact 180. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 5, wherein a portion of the landing pad (landing pad comprising material between pad 180 and reflective element 120 and covered by protective layer 190)laterally extends on the dielectric reflective layer 140a in a position that is between the dielectric reflective layer 140a and the metal reflective layer 130. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 1, wherein the metal reflective layer comprises a thickness in a range from 0.2 microns (pm) to 1.5 pm. See para. 0094.
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 1, further comprising a passivation layer 140 between the metal reflective layer 120/130 and the carrier submount 170. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 1, further comprising one or more top passivation layers 190 on the sidewalls of the active LED structure 110 and on one or more portions of the contact 180. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 10, wherein the one or more top passivation layers 190 further contact a portion of the landing pad. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 10, further comprising a dielectric reflective layer 140a on the active LED structure, wherein one or more portions 120 of the metal reflective layer 120/130 extend through the dielectric reflective layer 140a to electrically couple the metal reflective layer 120/130 to the active LED structure 110, wherein a portion of the dielectric reflective layer extends outside the sidewalls to contact the landing pad. See Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses the LED chip of claim 12, wherein the one or more top passivation layers 190 contact a portion of the dielectric reflective layer 140a between the sidewalls and the landing pad. See Fig. 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claim 7 is allowable.
Claim 7 is 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, since the prior art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure does not teach or suggest the claimed LED chip (in addition to the other limitations in the claim) further comprising an adhesion layer between the dielectric reflective layer and the metal reflective layer, and the portion of the landing pad laterally extends on the adhesion layer in a position that is between the adhesion layer and the metal reflective layer.
Conclusion
8. A shortened statutory period for response to this action is set to expire 3 (three) months and 0 (zero) day from the day of this letter. Failure to respond within the period for response will cause the application to become abandoned (see M.P.E.P 710.02(b)).
A shortened time for reply may be extended up to the maximum six-month period (35 U.S.C. 133). An extension of time fee is normally required to be paid if the reply period is extended. The amount of the fee is dependent upon the length of the extension. Extensions of time are generally not available after an application has been allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dao H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)272-1791. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM. 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 numbers for all communication(s) is 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571)272-1633.
/DAO H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 August 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights