CTNF 18/648,202 CTNF 77398 DETAILED ACTION Table of Contents I. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 3 II. Claim Objections 3 III. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 4 A. Claims 3-7, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. 4 1. Claim 3 4 2. Claims 4 and 6 5 3. Claims 13 5 4. Claim 15 5 5. Claim 16 5 IV. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 6 A. Claims 1, 2, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2025/0301826 (“ ‘826” hereafter) as evidenced by provisional application 63/430,613 (“ ‘613” hereafter). 7 B. Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613 in view of US 2014/0219306 (“Wright”). 11 C. Claims 1, 2, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0367561 (“Liu”). 15 D. Claims 3, 4, 6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wright. 17 E. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wright, as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613. 19 V. Allowable Subject Matter 21 VI. Pertinent Prior Art 23 Conclusion 23 [The rest of this page is intentionally left blank.] I. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. II. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 12, 14, 17, 20, and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 12, lines 1-2, replace “wherein selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures …” with “wherein the selective area epitaxy depositing of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures …” to provide clear antecedent basis. In claim 14, lines 1-2, replace “wherein selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures …” with “wherein the selective area epitaxy depositing of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures …” to provide clear antecedent basis. In claim 17, line 2, replace “both c-plane and semipolar plane lattice” with “both a c-plane and a semipolar plane lattice” for clarity. In the last line of claim 20, before “quantum-confined active regions” insert “N-polar” to provide clear antecedent basis. In claim 21, line 1, replace “wherein bottom-up fabricating …” with “wherein the bottom-up fabricating …” for clear antecedent basis . Appropriate correction is required. III. 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. A. Claims 3-7, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. 1. Claim 3 Claim 3 reads, 3. The light emitting device of Claim 2, wherein the photonic crystal component comprises the plurality of N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length. The limitation, “the plurality of N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures” lacks antecedent basis to “the plurality of c-plane N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures” recited in claim 2. In addition, the limitation, “the plurality of N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length ” lacks clear antecedent basis. As such, it is unclear if the plurality of nanostructures recited in claim 3 refer to the plurality of nanostructure recited in claim 2 or are a different plurality of nanostructures “having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length”. Claims 3-7 are rejected for including the same indefinite limitations by depending from claim 2 either directly or indirectly. 2. Claims 4 and 6 Each of claims 4 and 6 recites the limitation “the cross-sectional nanostructure width”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in each claim. Claims 5 and 7 are rejected for including the same indefinite limitation by depending from claims 4 and 6, respectively. 3. Claims 13 07-34-05 AIA Claim 13 recites the limitation “ the nanostructures ” in line 1 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 13 also recites the limitation, “the quantum dot (MQD) nanostructures”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 4. Claim 15 07-34-05 AIA Claim 15 recites the limitation “ the nanostructures ” in line 1 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 also recites the limitation, “the single segment (SS) active region and short-period superlattice (SPS) regions”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 5. Claim 16 Claim 16 reads, 16. The method according to Claim 11, wherein the selective area epitaxy depositing [the] N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures include a semipolar transition between a c-plane face and sidewalls of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures. Claim 16 is unclear because the process of “selective area epitaxy depositing” cannot “include a semipolar transition between a c-plane face and sidewalls of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures”. In other words, a process cannot include a structure. For the purposes of examination, it will be presumed that Applicant means, instead, the following: 16. The method according to Claim 11, wherein the selective area epitaxy depositing the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures include a semipolar transition between a c-plane face and sidewalls of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures. IV. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. A. Claims 1, 2, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2025/0301826 (“ ‘826” hereafter) as evidenced by provisional application 63/430,613 (“ ‘613” hereafter). The ‘613 provisional application was filed on 12/06/2022, which is before the earliest effective filing date to which the Instant Application may be entitled, i.e. 04/26/2023 or 07/20/2023, while the parent application PCT/US2023/082788 of the application, 19/229,841, that became the ‘826 pre-grant publication was filed on 12/06/2023, which is after said earliest effective filing date to which the Instant Application may be entitled. As such, the ‘613 provisional application is attached with this Office action, and citations provided below, for evidence of support of that which is disclosed in the ‘826 pre-grant publication, which may be less than all that is disclosed in said ‘826 pre-grant publication, given that the ‘613 provisional application has at least fewer drawings. Turning now to the rejection … With regard to claim 1, 1. A light emitting device comprising: [1] a photonic crystal component; and [2] a N-polar nanowire component [Figs. 1(a) and 3(a)-3(c) in ‘613 and Figs. 1-3 and 5A in ‘826]. With regard to feature [1] of claim 1, ‘613 states, In embodiments, the spacing between holes is large enough to prevent unwanted coalescence of the nanopillars when accounting for a lateral growth rate. The diameter and spacing of the nanopillars may be designed to promote a photonic crystal effect and the emergence of narrow emission modes. (‘613: p. 7, last two sentences; emphasis added) The same is stated in ‘816 (¶ 41). While ‘613 and ‘826 do not necessarily show a photonic crystal, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to design the diameter and spacing of the nanopillars to function as a photonic crystal because each of ‘613 and ‘826 explicitly suggests this. With regard to feature [2] of claim 1, ‘613 states, Growth of N-polar GaN has advantages as opposed to the more prevalent metal-polar growth. This is because as nanowires grow, they will grow faster on certain crystalline planes, resulting in faceting of the surfaces of the growth edge of the nanowire . (‘613: p. 1, last ¶) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 29). ‘613 further states, Disclosed are methods of growing high-quality, high-efficiency nanowire LEDs with MOCVD. More specifically, combinations of nanowire LEDs , with N-polar growth , and MOCVD processes are disclosed, to realize high performing microLEDs. (‘613: p. 2; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (abstract; ¶ 7). ‘613 further states, A key element of the present invention is crystal growth of GaN in the N-polar direction . Due to its crystal structure single-crystalline, GaN (or AIN and InN) can be oriented either Ga- or N-polar ( (0001) or (0001) direction). This is also the case for alloys InGaN and AlGaN. (‘613: p. 3, last ¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 25). This is all of the limitations of claim 1. With regard to claim 2, 2. The light emitting device of Claim 1, wherein the N-polar nanowire component comprises a plurality of c-plane N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures [Figs. 3(a)-3(c) in ‘613 and Figs. 1-3 in ‘826]. Note that the (0001) plane ( supra ) is the c plane, as shown in Fig. 1(a) in ‘613 and in Fig. 5A in ‘826. ‘613 states, In high-volume manufacturing, the preferred crystal orientation of the surface onto which the Ga (Al, In) N layers are to be deposited is c-plane . (‘613: p. 4, 4 th ¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 35). ‘613 further states, Growth conditions are selected to favor vertical or axial growth in c-crystallographic direction of N-polar material and limit growth laterally on the pillar sidewalls to avoid coalescence of the nano-pillars at this early stage of the process. (‘613: p. 9, 4 th ¶; emphasis added) The same is stated in ‘826 (¶ 44). This is all of the limitations of claim 2. With regard to claim 10, 10. A method of manufacturing a light emitting device comprising: bottom-up fabricating a plurality of type III-V semiconductor nanostructures in a photonic crystal on an N-polar template. The method of manufacturing is explained in ‘613 at pages 8 through 18. The limitations of claim 10 are met by the following: ‘613 states, The epitaxial deposition process begins with loading the wafers prepared for selective area growth with exposed N-polar GaN sections [i.e. the claimed “N-polar template”] into the MOCVD chamber of a suitable MOCVD system. This system may be the same as the one used for generating the N-polar GaN wafers. … (‘613: p. 8, 4 th ¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶¶ 41-42). ‘613 further states, A key objective at this stage of the process is to ensure growth of N-polar GaN as hexagonal pillars over the opening s in the mask layer. Source material arriving on top of the masked portions of the wafer is expected to desorb so that no GaN growth is initiated on these sections of the wafer. … Growth conditions are selected to favor vertical or axial growth in c-crystallographic direction of N-polar material and limit growth laterally on the pillar sidewalls to avoid coalescence of the nano-pillar s at this early stage of the process. (‘613: p. 9, 3 rd and 4 th ¶¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶¶ 41, 42, 44). As shown in Figs. 3(a)-3(c) of ‘613 and Figs. 1-3 and 7-8 of ‘826, each of the layers is selectively, vertically grown one layer upon another, thereby meeting the bottom-up growth limitation. As above, while ‘613 and ‘826 do not necessarily show a photonic crystal, it would have been nonetheless obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to design the diameter and spacing of the nanopillars to function as a photonic crystal because each of ‘613 and ‘826 explicitly suggests this. This is all of the limitations of claim 10. B. Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613 in view of US 2014/0219306 (“Wright”). Claim 3 reads, 3. The light emitting device of Claim 2, wherein the photonic crystal component comprises the plurality of N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length. The prior art of ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613, as explained above, discloses each of the limitations of claims 1 and 2. ‘613 states, The substrate surface is prepared with a patterned mask layer to achieve selective area epitaxy . Under optimal conditions, GaN will grow on the exposed GaN substrate, but not on the mask, hence the selectivity of the epitaxy process. … … For the selective area epitaxy of GaN nanopillars, the patterned hole may be circular or hexagonal. In embodiments, the hole diameter is between 50 to 500 nm . In embodiments, the spacing between holes is large enough to prevent unwanted coalescence of the nanopillars when accounting for a lateral growth rate. The diameter and spacing of the nanopillar s may be designed to promote a photonic crystal effect and the emergence of narrow emission modes. (‘613: p. 7; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 41). Because the hole diameter is from 50 nm to 500 nm, the diameter, i.e. the claimed “width” of the nanopillar is necessarily less than one micrometer. See, e.g. Figs. 7 and 8 of ‘826 showing that the diameter of the nanopillars matches that of the mask holes. ‘613 and ‘826 do not mention the lattice constant of the photonic crystal but indicate that each of red and green light can be emitted ( supra ). Wright , like ‘613 and ‘826, teaches a microLED made of an array of vertically-oriented GaN-based nanowires that may include InGaN active regions that includes a photonic crystal component (Wright: title; abstract; ¶¶ 10-12, 21; Figs. 2-4). Wright further explains that the wavelength of light emitted by the photonic crystal is established by the diameter and spacing of the nanowires, stating in this regard, [0021] The present invention is directed to a 2DPC-based laser comprising a periodic array of nanowires that emits in an important region of the electromagnetic spectrum. The invention is generally useful with any vertically aligned group III-V nanowire array. The 2DPC can generally have a lattice constant that is 0.7-0.8 times the lasing wavelength and a nanowire diameter that is 0.3 to 0.5 times the lattice constant . The nanowires can have a variety of cross sections depending on the etch chemistry, including circular. … The III-V compound semiconductor can comprise one or more group III element, such as aluminum, gallium, or indium, and one or more group V element, such as antimony, arsenic, phosphorous, or nitrogen. For example, the 2DPC laser can be a GaN-based laser with a lasing wavelength less than about 650 nm [i.e. red light] , as described in further detail in the examples below. However, the invention can be generalized to other III-V semiconductors, with an expanded range of lasing wavelengths, by modifying the nanowire fabrication etch chemistries and active region heterostructures. For example, an III-nitride heterostructure can comprise at least two of GaN, AlN, InN, AlGaN, InGaN , InAlN, and AlInGaN, and have a lasing wavelength between 200 and 1800 nm . (Wright: ¶ 21; emphasis added) Thus, for visible light, about 400 nm to about 750 nanometer with red being at around 620 to 750 nanometers and green light being at around 495 to 570 nm, Wright explains that the lattice constant and diameter for visible light necessarily uses sub-micrometer dimensions for each of the photonic crystal lattice constant and the diameter of the nanowire. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make each of the diameter, i.e. the claimed “width” of the nanowire and the lattice constant of the photonic crystal to have “sub-micrometer dimensions” in order to get visible light, particularly the red and green light desired in ‘613 and ‘826, as taught by Wright. This is all of the limitations of claim 3. With regard to claims 4 and 6, 4. The light emitting device of Claim 3, wherein the cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length is selected for green light emission by the light emitting device. 6. The light emitting device of Claim 3, wherein the cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length is selected for red light emission by the light emitting device. ‘613 states, While the incorporation of a strain relaxation structure may be optional it is expected to be essential for green and especially red emitting nanowire LED structures. Here, the active region of the LED structure contains InGaN layers with high InN composition (e.g., up to 50% InN) requiring an expanded in-plane lattice constant. The above-described embodiments of strain relaxation structures have the potential to provide such function and enable green and red emitting nanowire LEDs. (‘613: p. 11, 2 nd full ¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 48). ‘613 further states, InGaN quantum well layers InN composition high enough to achieve green (about 530nm) or red (about 620nm) emission (‘613: p. 12; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 50). ‘613 further states, The light emitting active region may assume an entirely different structure especially for green and red emitting nanowire LEDs. Instead of depositing alternating layers of quantum wells and quantum barriers, a thicker InGaN layer may be provided. The thickness of the single InGaN layer may range between about 20 and about 70nm and its growth temperature may range between about 800 and about 1000°C. A preferred thickness may be about 40nm for green emission and about 60nm for red emission. (‘613: paragraph bridging pp. 14-15; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 57). See also the explanation under claim 3 which is incorporated here. This is all of the limitations of claim of claims 4 and 6. With regard to claim 7, 7. The light emitting device of Claim 6, wherein the N-polar nanowire component comprises a plurality of c-plane N-polar nanostructures including an indium gallium nitride (GaN) single segment (SS) active region disposed on a indium gallium nitride (InGaN) and gallium nitride (GaN) short-period superlattice (SPS). Again, a “single InGaN layer” having a thickness of “60nm for red emission” ( id .) is the claimed “single segment” and is shown as “InGaN Active Region” grown on the S hort- P eriod S uper L attice, i.e. “InGaN/GaN SPSL ” in Fig. 3(a) of ‘613. As also stated above, “While the incorporation of a strain relaxation structure may be optional it is expected to be essential for green and especially red emitting nanowire LED structures.” ( supra ) See also ‘613, p. 11, first full paragraph, and similarly in ‘826 at paragraphs [0048]-[0049]. Claim 11 reads, 11. The method according to Claim 10, wherein bottom-up fabricating a plurality of type III-V semiconductor nanostructures in a photonic crystal comprises: selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length. The prior art of ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613, as explained above, discloses each of the limitations of claim 10. As to the selective area epitaxy, lattice constant, and diameter of the nanowires, see the discussion under claim 3, which is incorporated here. 07-15-02-aia C. Claims 1, 2, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0367561 (“Liu”). The applied reference has a common Assignee with the Instant Application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. In addition to including any one of the statements pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) through (C), ( supra ), to overcome Liu as prior art available under 35 USC 102(a)(2), it is still applicable as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) that cannot be excepted under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C). In this instance, Applicant may rely on the exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A) to overcome this rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) by a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application, and is therefore not prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Alternatively, applicant may rely on the exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) by providing evidence of a prior public disclosure via an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(b). Turning now to the rejection … Claim 1 reads, 1. A light emitting device comprising: [1] a photonic crystal component; and [2] a N-polar nanowire component. With regard to claim 1, Liu discloses, generally in Figs. 2A-2E and 3A-3C, 1. A light emitting device 212/214 [title; ¶¶ 61-63, 65, 68; Fig. 2C] comprising: [1] a photonic crystal component [¶ 117]; and [2] a N-polar nanowire component 212 [¶¶ 65, 68, 70, 80-109]. With regard to feature [1] of claim 1, although it is not clear that the array of N-polar InGaN nanowires 212 shown in Figs. 2A-2E and 3A-3C are formed as a photonic crystal, Liu nonetheless states that “note that the nanowire structure can be readily designed and engineered to form a photonic crystal that can tailor the emission properties for ultra-stable emission wavelength and narrow emission linewidth” (Liu: ¶ 117; emphasis added). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to design and engineer the dimension and spacing of the array of InGaN nanowires 212 shown in Figs. 2A-2E and 3A-3C to form a photonic crystal, because Liu suggests this. This is all of the limitations of claim 1. With regard to claim 2, Liu further discloses, 2. The light emitting device of Claim 1, wherein the N-polar nanowire component comprises a plurality of c-plane N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures [¶¶ 68, 70; Figs. 2C, 2D]. With regard to claim 10, Liu discloses, generally in Figs. 2A-2E, 10. A method of manufacturing a light emitting device comprising: [1] bottom-up fabricating a plurality of type III-V semiconductor nanostructures in a photonic crystal on an N-polar template [¶¶ 65-69; Figs. 2A-2C]. D. Claims 3, 4, 6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wright. Claim 3 reads, 3. The light emitting device of Claim 2, wherein the photonic crystal component comprises the plurality of N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width [i.e. < 500 nm as shown in Figs. 2D; also ¶¶ 85-87] and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length. The prior art of Liu, as explained above, discloses each of the features of claims 1 and 2. As explained above, although it is not clear that the array of N-polar InGaN nanowires 212 shown in Figs. 2A-2E and 3A-3C are formed as a photonic crystal, Liu nonetheless states that “note that the nanowire structure can be readily designed and engineered to form a photonic crystal that can tailor the emission properties for ultra-stable emission wavelength and narrow emission linewidth” (Liu: ¶ 117; emphasis added). Wright , like ‘613 and ‘826, teaches a microLED made of an array of vertically-oriented GaN-based nanowires that may include InGaN active regions that includes a photonic crystal component (Wright: title; abstract; ¶¶ 10-12, 21; Figs. 2-4). Wright further explains that the wavelength of light emitted by the photonic crystal is established by the diameter and spacing of the nanowires, stating in this regard, [0021] The present invention is directed to a 2DPC-based laser comprising a periodic array of nanowires that emits in an important region of the electromagnetic spectrum. The invention is generally useful with any vertically aligned group III-V nanowire array. The 2DPC can generally have a lattice constant that is 0.7-0.8 times the lasing wavelength and a nanowire diameter that is 0.3 to 0.5 times the lattice constant . The nanowires can have a variety of cross sections depending on the etch chemistry, including circular. … The III-V compound semiconductor can comprise one or more group III element, such as aluminum, gallium, or indium, and one or more group V element, such as antimony, arsenic, phosphorous, or nitrogen. For example, the 2DPC laser can be a GaN-based laser with a lasing wavelength less than about 650 nm [i.e. red light] , as described in further detail in the examples below. However, the invention can be generalized to other III-V semiconductors, with an expanded range of lasing wavelengths, by modifying the nanowire fabrication etch chemistries and active region heterostructures. For example, an III-nitride heterostructure can comprise at least two of GaN, AlN, InN, AlGaN, InGaN , InAlN, and AlInGaN, and have a lasing wavelength between 200 and 1800 nm . (Wright: ¶ 21; emphasis added) Thus, for visible light, about 400 nm to about 750 nanometer with green light being at around 495 to 570 nm, Wright explains that the lattice constant and diameter for visible light necessarily uses sub-micrometer dimensions for each of the photonic crystal lattice constant and the diameter of the nanowire. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make each of the diameter, i.e. the claimed “width” of the nanowire and the lattice constant of the photonic crystal to have “sub-micrometer dimensions” in order to get visible light, particularly the green light desired in Liu, as taught by Wright. This is all of the limitations of claim 3. With regard to claim 4, Liu further discloses, 4. The light emitting device of Claim 3, wherein the cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length is selected for green light emission by the light emitting device [¶¶ 88, 92-96; ¶ 111: “One embodiment pertains to InGaN nanowire green light emitting diodes (LEDs) …”]. Claim 6 reads, 6. The light emitting device of Claim 3, wherein the cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length is selected for red light emission by the light emitting device. The explanation under claim 3 is incorporated here. The selection of red light is obvious because the photonic crystal can be tuned to provide red light, as explained in Wright. Claim 11 reads, 11. The method according to Claim 10, wherein bottom-up fabricating a plurality of type III-V semiconductor nanostructures in a photonic crystal comprises: selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures having sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length. The prior art of Liu, as explained above, discloses each of the limitations of claim 10. As to the selective area epitaxy, lattice constant, and diameter of the nanowires, see the discussion under claim 3, which is incorporated here. E. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wright, as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613. Claim 14 reads, 14. The method according to Claim 11, wherein selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures comprises: [1] selective area plasma-assisted molecular beam epitaxy (PA-MBE) depositing gallium nitride (GaN) short-period superlattice (SPS) regions; and [2] selective area plasma-assisted molecular beam epitaxy (PA-MBE) depositing a c-plane N-polar indium gallium nitride (InGaN) and gallium nitride (GaN) single segment (SS) active region on the gallium nitride (GaN) short-period superlattice (SPS) regions. The prior art of Liu in view of Wright, as explained above, teaches each of the features of claim 11. Liu does not disclose the limitations of claim 14, specifically the SS active region and SPS is included in the selective area growth. Liu does, however, disclose using PA-MBE to grow the GaN/InGaN-based nanowires, as shown in Figs. 2A-2C (Liu: ¶¶ 66-67). As explained above under the rejection of claims 4, 6, and 7 over ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613 in view of Wright, ‘826 as evidenced by ‘613 states, While the incorporation of a strain relaxation structure may be optional it is expected to be essential for green and especially red emitting nanowire LED structures. Here, the active region of the LED structure contains InGaN layers with high InN composition (e.g., up to 50% InN) requiring an expanded in-plane lattice constant. The above-described embodiments of strain relaxation structures have the potential to provide such function and enable green and red emitting nanowire LEDs. (‘613: p. 11, 2 nd full ¶; emphasis added) Similar is stated in ‘826 (¶ 48). The nanowire including the SS and SPSL is shown in Fig. 3(a) of ‘613, as explained above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use MBE to grow the nanowire configuration shown in Fig. 3(a) of ‘613 using PA-MBE because it would be the substitution of one known process for another known process suitable for forming GaN/InGaN-based nanowire arrays for forming LEDs. (See MPEP 2143.) Claim 15 reads, 15. The method according to Claim 14, wherein the nanostructures including the single segment (SS) active region and short-period superlattice (SPS) regions have a sub-micrometer cross-sectional nanostructure width and sub-micrometer nanostructure lattice constant length configured for red light emission by the light emitting device. Claim 15 is further obvious in view of Wright for the reasons explained under the rejection of claim 6 over Liu in view of Wright ( supra ), which is incorporated here. V. Allowable Subject Matter Pending overcoming the claim objections and rejections under 35 USC 112(b) ( supra ), claims 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 16 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 5 and 12 read, 5. The light emitting device of Claim 4, wherein the N-polar nanowire component comprises a plurality of c-plane N-polar indium gallium nitride (InGaN) and gallium nitride (GaN) multiple quantum dot (MQD) nanostructures . 12. The method according to Claim 11, wherein selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures comprise selective area plasma-assisted molecular beam epitaxy (PA-MBE) depositing a plurality of c-plane N-polar indium gallium nitride (InGaN) and gallium nitride (GaN) multiple quantum dot (MQD) nanostructures . The prior art does not reasonably teach or suggest—in the context of claim 12—the limitations of claim 12, particularly the MQD structures. The prior art does not reasonably teach or suggest—in the context of claims 5 and 12—the limitations recited in claim 5, particularly the MQD nanostructures. Claim 13 would be allowable at least for including the same allowable limitations by depending from claim 12. Claims 8, 9, and 16 read, 8. The light emitting device of Claim 2, wherein the plurality of c-plane N-polar quantum confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures include a semipolar transition between the c-plane nanostructure face and nanostructure walls. 9. The light emitting device of Claim 2, wherein the plurality of c-plane N-polar quantum confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures includes both a c-plane and semi-polar plane lattice in a faceted active region. 16. The method according to Claim 11, wherein the selective area epitaxy depositing N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures include a semipolar transition between a c-plane face and sidewalls of the N-polar quantum-confined indium gallium nitride (InGaN) nanostructures. The prior art does not reasonably teach or suggest—in the context of each of claims 8, 9, and 16—the configuration of the nanostructures including the “semipolar transition between the c-plane nanostructure face and nanostructure walls” or the “semi-polar plane lattice in a faceted active region.” 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 17-22 are allowed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 17 reads, 17. A light emitting device comprising: [1] a plurality of nanostructures including N-polar quantum-confined active regions have both c-plane and semipolar plane lattice , [2] wherein the plurality of nanostructures have a sub-micrometer cross-sectional width and sub-micrometer separation between the plurality of nanostructures. Claims 18 and 19 are allowable at least for including the same allowable limitations by depending from claim 17. Claim 20 reads, 20. A method of manufacturing a light emitting device comprising bottom-up fabricating a plurality of nanostructures including N-polar quantum-confined active regions having a semipolar plane lattice transition between a c-plane lattice face and sidewalls of the quantum-confined active regions. Claims 21 and 22 are allowable at least for including the same allowable limitations by depending from claim 20. VI. Pertinent Prior Art 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0355959 (“Dannoune”) is cited for teaching a photonic crystal made of nanowires Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIK KIELIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1693. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 10:00 AM-7:00 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wael Fahmy can be reached on 571-272-1705. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. Signed, /ERIK KIELIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814 Application/Control Number: 18/648,202 Page 2 Art Unit: 2814 Application/Control Number: 18/648,202 Page 3 Art Unit: 2814 Application/Control Number: 18/648,202 Page 4 Art Unit: 2814
Prosecution Insights