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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 August 12, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-8 and 16-17 in the reply filed on August 12, 2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0036] the reference of "X" should be corrected to "M".
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites a chemical formula of AX*aPbX2*bMX2 whereby the sum of a+b is between 0.7 and 1 (open bounded). Thus, the formula can be interpreted as a consolidation of the components into a compound of perovskite-type formula as follows: APbaX3:bM where M is a dopant into the perovskite-type formula (A is at least one of Cs and Rb, M is at least one of Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Zn, and Cu, and X is at least one of Cl, Br, and I as claimed).
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.
Claim 3 is 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 3 includes a phrase preceded by “i.e.” which is not clear if the claim is limited to the process following describing how the stable chemical bond is formed.
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 1-3, 5, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al (CN106350065A) in view of Zhao et al (NPL: "Divalent hard Lewis acid doped...").
Regarding claim 1, Ye et al disclose a process of making a compounded RGB tricolor fluorescent composite material (luminescent material) which comprises a CsX solution compounded to a porous material (molecular sieve) and addition of PbX2. In examples, Ye uses each of Br, Cl, and I as the halogens (X as claimed). Ye does not teach addition of a bMX2 component which is understood to be a dopant. Zhao teaches an analogous embodiment whereby inorganic CsPbBr3 perovskites are compositionally engineered by doping divalent hard Lewis acids (Mg, Ca, Sr, and Ba which fall within “M” as claimed). Zhao incorporates the hard Lewis acid cations into CsPbBr3 to form CsPb1-xMxBr3 whereby x = 0-1 and M is Mg, Ca, Sr, and Ba. The “1-x” and “x” values are similar to and overlap with “a” and b” as claimed. In Table 1, Zhao dopes up to an amount of x = 0.05, thus within the range of “b”. Incorporation of the Lewis acids improves power conversion efficiency, stability, humidity/thermal-tolerances, and optoelectronic performance of the perovskite. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to dope the compounded perovskite of Ye with a hard Lewis acid, as informed by Zhao, to improve the stability and performance of the prepared perovskite and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Ye and Zhao teach the claimed “A luminescent material, wherein the luminescent material is formed by compounding a porous material with a luminescent substance, and has a chemical formula of: N@AX-aPbX2-bMX2; wherein N denotes the porous material, @ denotes compounding, and AX-aPbX2-bMX2 denotes the luminescent substance, and wherein A is at least one of Cs and Rb, X is at least one of Cl, Br, and I; M is at least one of Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Zn, and Cu, and 0.7<a≤1, 0<b≤0.3, and 0.7<a+b<1”.
Regarding claim 2, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 1. Ye uses a Y-type molecular sieve in their embodiment. Thus, Ye and Zhao teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 1, wherein the N is at least one of mesoporous silica, a KIT-6 molecular sieve, an MCM-41 molecular sieve, an SBA molecular sieve, an MCM-22 molecular sieve, a titanium silicon molecular sieve TS-1, an SAPO-34 molecular sieve, an SAPO-11 molecular sieve, a ZSM-5 molecular sieve, a Y-type molecular sieve, a ZSM-35 molecular sieve, a P molecular sieve, a ZSM-23 molecular sieve, a 3A molecular sieve, 4A molecular sieve, A 5A molecular sieve, and a 13X molecular sieve.”.
Regarding claim 3, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 2. Ye does not specify dangling bonds in their embodiment between chemical bonding interactions of the luminescent substance (perovskite) and the molecular sieve (porous material). However, Ye’s disclosed process matches the bonding interactions as claimed. Ye contacts the luminescent substance with a solvent during formation in the porous material. Ye teaches that “the Y-shaped molecular sieve, except containing Si, Al and O as major elements, also contains a certain amount of Na +, and Na + present on the inner wall of the molecular sieve pore canal; by replacing the Na ion Y-type molecular sieve is Cs ion, separating in-situ in the pore canal is CsPbX3 (X=Cl, Br, I) provides Cs ion source, and then the ion-exchange molecular sieve added to the preparation in advance lead halide solution, both of them to react, so as to realize the molecular sieve synthesized quantum dots”. Ye adds CsBr and PbBr2 (with addition of teachings of Zhao a further MX2 source would be provided to dope the substance) to the Y-type molecular sieve in the presence of octadecyl, oleic acid, and oleylamine which are understood to be solvents. The solution in the molecular sieve is stirred, heated and reacted to form the compounded/composite material which would involve formation of chemical bonds between the molecular sieve and formed perovskite luminescent substance via ion exchange. Thus, Ye and Zhao teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 2, wherein chemical bonding is present between the porous material and the luminescent substance, i.e., a dangling bond on a surface of the AX-aPbX2-bMX2 contacts with a solvent to form a passivation layer subjected to chemical bonding with a dangling bond on an inside wall of a pore of the N, to form a stable chemical bond”.
Regarding claim 5, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 1. Ye teaches excitation light of 315 and 365nm. At 365nm excitation, the material emits light ~520nm but has a FWHM that appears just outside the claimed range (slightly wider than 30nm). At 315nm excitation, the material has a FWHM ~25nm but emits light outside the claimed range (~415nm). Although the material emits light outside the wavelength as claimed, Ye teaches that emission properties of the material can be tuned within the primary colors of red, green, and blue. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to modulate the emission wavelength into the blue-green end of the spectrum or deeper into green and red as a known potential wavelength if desired while maintaining the FWHM and excitation properties as disclosed with a predictable result of preparing a green or red luminescent material for use in a white LED device and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Ye and Zhao teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 1, wherein the luminescent material is excited by any light having a wavelength range of 300-365 nm to obtain a spectrum having a wavelength of 460-760 and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of 15-30 nm.”.
Regarding claim 16, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 1. Ye teaches preparation of the luminescent material to emit red, green, or blue light to be implemented into a white light LED device. Thus, Ye and Zhao teach the claimed “A light-emitting diode (LED) device, comprising the luminescent material according to claim 1.”.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al in view of Zhao as applied to claims 2 and 1 above, and further in view of Li et al (NPL: “Guanidinium Chloride Passivated Perovskites…”) and Zhang et al (NPL: "Ceramic-like stable CsPbBr3 nanocrystals...").
Regarding claim 3, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 2. Ye does not specify dangling bonds in their embodiment between chemical bonding interactions of the luminescent substance (perovskite) and the molecular sieve (porous material). However, Ye’s disclosed process matches the bonding interactions as claimed. Ye contacts the luminescent substance with a solvent during formation in the porous material. Ye teaches that “the Y-shaped molecular sieve, except containing Si, Al and O as major elements, also contains a certain amount of Na +, and Na + present on the inner wall of the molecular sieve pore canal; by replacing the Na ion Y-type molecular sieve is Cs ion, separating in-situ in the pore canal is CsPbX3 (X=Cl, Br, I) provides Cs ion source, and then the ion-exchange molecular sieve added to the preparation in advance lead halide solution, both of them to react, so as to realize the molecular sieve synthesized quantum dots”. Ye adds CsBr and PbBr2 (with addition of teachings of Zhao a further MX2 source would be provided to dope the substance) to the Y-type molecular sieve in the presence of octadecyl, oleic acid, and oleylamine which are understood to be solvents. The solution in the molecular sieve is stirred, heated and reacted to form the compounded/composite material which would involve formation of chemical bonds between the molecular sieve and formed perovskite luminescent substance via ion exchange. Ye does not specifically mention passivation effects. Li teaches the importance of passivating perovskites for use in optoelectronic devices. Although Li teaches specific to MAPbI3 perovskites, the overall teachings can be applied to the joint embodiment of Ye and Zhao as Li teaches passivation improves deposition (thus would improve bonding to molecular sieve/substrate), crystallization, and morphology of the perovskite which are relevant parameters for crystallizing the compounded perovskite of Ye and Zhao. Li passivates the perovskite using an isopropanol/guanidinium chloride (GACl) solution which enhances grain size and reduces grain boundaries, enabling improved power conversion efficiency, film quality, performance and stability which is similar to the effects provided by the doping of Zhao as Zhao similarly cites passivation effects of the Lewis hard acid. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to passivate the prepared perovskite with an isopropanol/GACl solvent as informed by Li in order to improve perovskite performance and reduce defects in the prepared perovskite and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Ye, Zhao and Li teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 2, wherein chemical bonding is present between the porous material and the luminescent substance, i.e., a dangling bond on a surface of the AX-aPbX2-bMX2 contacts with a solvent to form a passivation layer subjected to chemical bonding with a dangling bond on an inside wall of a pore of the N, to form a stable chemical bond”.
Regarding claim 4, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 2. Further, Ye teaches preparation of the luminescent substance in the presence of a solvent, compounding to a porous material, calcining, and washing and drying to prepare the material. However, Ye does not specifically teach passivation with a solvent nor a calcining temperature in the range as claimed (Ye calcines at 300°C but does not limit the calcination to 300°C). Li teaches the importance of passivating perovskites for use in optoelectronic devices. Although Li teaches specific to MAPbI3 perovskites, the overall teachings can be applied to the joint embodiment of Ye and Zhao as Li teaches passivation improves deposition (thus would improve bonding to molecular sieve/substrate), crystallization, and morphology of the perovskite which are relevant parameters for crystallizing the compounded perovskite of Ye and Zhao. Li passivates the perovskite using an isopropanol/guanidinium chloride (GACl) solution which enhances grain size and reduces grain boundaries, enabling improved power conversion efficiency, film quality, performance and stability which is similar to the effects provided by the doping of Zhao as Zhao similarly cites passivation effects of the Lewis hard acid. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to passivate the prepared perovskite with an isopropanol/GACl solvent as informed by Li in order to improve perovskite performance and reduce defects in the prepared perovskite and arrive at the invention as claimed. Zhang teaches a similar process to Ye whereby CsBr/PbBr2 are soaked into a molecular sieve (mesoporous silicon dioxide/silica), calcined, washed, and dried to form a compounded perovskite-molecular sieve composite material (Fig. 1). Zhang tests calcination temperatures of 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900°C to prepare such materials. Zhang teaches that 700°C is the optimal temperature offering the highest photoluminescent quantum yield and longest average lifetime, indicating the suppression of nonradiative decay. Zhang attributes this effect of temperature to collapsing the mesoporous silica to protect the perovskites. Thus, if applying the temperatures of Zhang to the embodiment of Ye, the thermal stability of the Y-type molecular sieve would have to be considered. Regardless, the mesoporous silica of Zhang and calcination temperature could be applied directly in place of Ye’s molecular sieve and calcination temperature. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to substitute the Y-type molecular sieve for a mesoporous silica as a known alternative molecular sieve capable of incorporating perovskites and calcinate at a temperature of 700°C, as informed by Zhang, to improve the PLQY and average lifetime of the prepared luminescent material and arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Ye, Zhao, Li, and Zhang teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 2, wherein during preparation of the luminescent substance, a solution having a nominal composition ofAX-aPbX2-bMX2 is passivated with a solvent and then compounded with the porous material, calcined at a temperature of 450-900°C, washed and dried to obtain the luminescent material”.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al in view of Zhao et al as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Zhang et al (NPL: "Ceramic-like stable CsPbBr3 nanocrystals...") and Lin et al (NPL: "All-inorganic encapsulation for remarkably stable...").
Regarding claim 6, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 5 but Ye does not disclose stability properties of the material. Zhang teaches a similar process to Ye whereby CsBr/PbBr2 are soaked into a molecular sieve (mesoporous silicon dioxide/silica), calcined, washed, and dried to form a compounded perovskite-molecular sieve composite material (Fig. 1). Zhang tests calcination temperatures of 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900°C to prepare such materials. Zhang teaches that 700°C is the optimal temperature offering the highest photoluminescent quantum yield and longest average lifetime, indicating the suppression of nonradiative decay. Zhang attributes this effect of temperature to collapsing the mesoporous silica to protect the perovskites. Thus, if applying the temperatures of Zhang to the embodiment of Ye, the thermal stability of the Y-type molecular sieve would have to be considered. Regardless, the mesoporous silica of Zhang and calcination temperature could be applied directly in place of Ye’s molecular sieve and calcination temperature. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to substitute the Y-type molecular sieve for a mesoporous silica as a known alternative molecular sieve capable of incorporating perovskites and calcinate at a temperature of 700°C, as informed by Zhang, to improve the PLQY, long-term stability, and average lifetime of the prepared luminescent material. Zhang tests the stability of the prepared material after 50 days of soaking in water or in an aqueous HCl solution (Fig. 5). The relative PLQY does not decrease after 50 days in water or after 50 days in HCl, demonstrating the protection offered by the mesoporous silica. Zhang does not test beyond 50 days. In a similar embodiment, Lin also prepares encapsulated perovskites in mesoporous silica and characterizes PL intensity changes after water soaking for 3000h (125 days, Fig. 5). Similar to Zhang, Lin shows no significant drop off in luminescent intensity after soaking (intensity increases after 125 days of soaking). While neither Lin nor Zhang show testing for 200 days, the trends offered after 50 days or 125 days suggests long term stability that would hold to 200 days. While the reference does not disclose the claimed properties, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the exemplified luminescent materials to inherently have the claimed properties absent any showing to the contrary since they fall within the claimed composition and are produced by the claimed process. See MPEP2112.01II. Thus, Ye, Zhao, Zhang, and Lin teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 5, wherein a luminescent intensity of the luminescent material after being soaked into water for 200 d declines in a proportion of not greater than 10% of an initial value thereof”.
Regarding claim 7, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 5 but Ye does not disclose stability properties of the material. Zhang teaches a similar process to Ye whereby CsBr/PbBr2 are soaked into a molecular sieve (mesoporous silicon dioxide/silica), calcined, washed, and dried to form a compounded perovskite-molecular sieve composite material (Fig. 1). Zhang tests calcination temperatures of 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900°C to prepare such materials. Zhang teaches that 700°C is the optimal temperature offering the highest photoluminescent quantum yield and longest average lifetime, indicating the suppression of nonradiative decay. Zhang attributes this effect of temperature to collapsing the mesoporous silica to protect the perovskites. Thus, if applying the temperatures of Zhang to the embodiment of Ye, the thermal stability of the Y-type molecular sieve would have to be considered. Regardless, the mesoporous silica of Zhang and calcination temperature could be applied directly in place of Ye’s molecular sieve and calcination temperature. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to substitute the Y-type molecular sieve for a mesoporous silica as a known alternative molecular sieve capable of incorporating perovskites and calcinate at a temperature of 700°C, as informed by Zhang, to improve the PLQY, long-term stability, and average lifetime of the prepared luminescent material. Zhang tests thermal stability after aging the material at 85°C/85% humidity for 180h (Fig. 6b) whereby the prepared luminescent material does not show any decrease in luminescent intensity but does not test up to 125°C as claimed. In a similar embodiment, Lin also prepares encapsulated perovskites in mesoporous silica and characterizes PL intensity changes after thermal quenching (Fig. 6) whereby CsPbBr3 offers greatest stability. Data is not shown but Lin claims to also heat samples up to 200°C, thus offering rationale for testing beyond the 85°C of Zhang. Given the strong luminescent stability after thermal aging already depicted by Zhang and Lin, it would be expected that the material would hold suit at 125°C. While the reference does not disclose the claimed properties, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the exemplified luminescent material to inherently have the claimed properties absent any showing to the contrary since they fall within the claimed composition and are produced by the claimed process. See MPEP2112.01II. Thus, Ye, Zhao, Zhang, and Lin teach the claimed “The luminescent material according to claim 5, wherein a luminescent intensity of the luminescent material at 125°C declines in a proportion of not greater than 50% of a luminescent intensity thereof at room temperature”.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al in view of Zhao et al as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Zhang et al, Lin et al, and Zhou et al (CN113061429A).
Regarding claim 8, Ye and Zhao teach the luminescent material of claim 5 but Ye does not disclose stability properties of the material. Zhang teaches a similar process to Ye whereby CsBr/PbBr2 are soaked into a molecular sieve (mesoporous silicon dioxide/silica), calcined, washed, and dried to form a compounded perovskite-molecular sieve composite material (Fig. 1). Zhang tests calcination temperatures of 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900°C to prepare such materials. Zhang teaches that 700°C is the optimal temperature offering the highest photoluminescent quantum yield and longest average lifetime, indicating the suppression of nonradiative decay. Zhang attributes this effect of temperature to collapsing the mesoporous silica to protect the perovskites. Thus, if applying the temperatures of Zhang to the embodiment of Ye, the thermal stability of the Y-type molecular sieve would have to be considered. Regardless, the mesoporous silica of Zhang and calcination temperature could be applied directly in place of Ye’s molecular sieve and calcination temperature. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to substitute the Y-type molecular sieve for a mesoporous silica as a known alternative molecular sieve capable of incorporating perovskites and calcinate at a temperature of 700°C, as informed by Zhang, to improve the PLQY, long-term stability, and average lifetime of the prepared luminescent material. Zhang tests photostability of their embodiment after 1000h irradiation under 20 mA, 2.7V of a blue LED chip whereby the PL intensity does not decline (Fig. 6a) but does not extend to 2000h nor disclose the wavelength of irradiation or power density. In a similar embodiment, Lin also prepares encapsulated perovskites in mesoporous silica and characterizes PL intensity changes after UV (365nm) illumination for 4000h (Fig. 5b) whereby PL intensity also does not significantly decline. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to test the efficacy at a UV illumination for 4000h as a known alternative test for long-term stability parameters, as informed by Lin, in luminescent perovskites and arrive at the invention as claimed. Given the strong stability offered by Zhang already, Zhang’s embodiment would be expected to hold under extended testing and under UV illumination. Lin does not disclose the power density though. Zhou additionally teaches preparation of a perovskite material in a mesoporous silicon dioxide molecular sieve, enabling high stability and thus analogous to the embodiments of Ye, Zhao, Zhang, and Lin. Zhou discloses LED testing (Table 1), although at 450nm, using an intensity or power density of 5W/mm2 (or 500W/cm2 which is several orders of magnitude stronger than the power density as claimed of 150mW/cm2) for up to 800h. Given Zhou’s embodiment shows strong stability at a higher power density than claimed, the embodiments of Ye, Zhao, Zhang, and Lin (as well as Zhou) would also be expected to hold up at the power density of 150mW/cm2. While the reference does not disclose the claimed properties, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the exemplified luminescent material to inherently have the claimed properties absent any showing to the contrary since they fall within the claimed composition and are produced by the claimed process. See MPEP2112.01II.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al in view of Zhao et al as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Xiang et al (CN112745839A), Wang et al (CN105733556A), and Hsu et al (NPL: "Efficient mini/micro-perovskite light-emitting diodes")
Ye and Zhao teach the LED device of claim 16 but do not specify the LED chip components nor luminescent layer composition. Ye teaches preparation of a white LED whereby each of the red, green, and blue components are formed by the luminescent material whereby the LED chip emits UV light (range of 350-410nm, which is encompassed by the 300-470nm range as claimed) to excite the powders. Xiang teaches an analogous embodiment whereby CsPbX3 is prepared in a TS-1 molecular sieve for use in white light LED devices. Xiang teaches preparation by using silica gels (example 8) mixed with the luminescent powders to form a luminescent layer in the LED. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to form the luminescent layer using the red, green, and blue perovskites of Ye and Zhao using a silica gel layer, as informed by Xiang, as a known embodiment for preparing white LED devices and arrive at the limitation as claimed. Xiang adds 0.1g of perovskite compounded molecular sieve powder with 0.8g of a different fluorescent emitting material that isn’t the perovskite compounded material but does not disclose how much silica gel is used by mass. Wang similarly teaches preparation of a QD or perovskite material in a mesoporous material to be implemented into a silica gel-based luminescent layer of a white LED device. Wang teaches mixing 50mg of green light QD composite and 50mg of another color emitting QD to 1g of silica gel in examples 4-5, thus a mass% of 4.5% of the luminescent material to luminescent layer. However, Wang teaches for QD while Xiang uses masses for perovskites. Thus, the mass of silica disclosed by Wang could be used for the mixture of Xiang while maintaining the perovskite mass of Xiang (0.1g). Therefore, a mass% of 9.1% (100mg/1100mg) would be obtained or a mass% of 7.7% (100mg/1300mg) if using three distinct perovskites. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to prepare the luminescent layer according to Xiang that is specific for perovskites while using a known silica gel, as informed by Wang, as a known preparation method for forming a luminescent layer of perovskites for use in a white LED device and arrive at the limitation as claimed. None of Ye, Zhao, Xiang, nor Wang disclose the LED chip size. Hsu teaches use of efficient mini/micro-LEDs based on perovskite semiconductors with a chip size of 191 µm by 95 µm or (0.191mm by 0.095mm, thus within claimed size range as shown in graphical abstract). Hsu teaches that fabrication of such mini-LED devices in their embodiment are ideal for implementing perovskites through use of an interlayer allowing surface tension relief, enabling robust integration of high-efficiency perovskites with self-aligned photolithography. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date, to implement the perovskites/luminescent layer of Ye, Zhao, Xiang, and Wang into a mini-LED device of chip size 0.191mmx0.095mm, as informed by Hsu, as a known LED device capable of integrating perovskites with robust performance, relieved surface tension, and high-efficiency to arrive at the invention as claimed. Thus, Ye, Zhao, Xiang, Wang, and Hsu teach the claimed “The LED device according to claim 16, wherein the LED device is a Mini-LED device comprising an LED chip with a size of (0.05 mm-0.2 mm) x (0.05 mm-0.2 mm) and a luminescent layer, wherein the LED chip emits a spectrum having a wavelength range of 300-470 nm; the luminescent layer is a silica gel layer solidified with the luminescent material or an epoxy resin layer solidified with the luminescent material; the luminescent material accounts for 5-75% of a total mass of the luminescent layer by mass.”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ye et al (CN107384387A) teach doping of CsPbBr3 with Mn compounded in a Y-type molecular sieve and solvent.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Noa W. F. Grooms whose telephone number is (571)272-9981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30PM EST.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571) 272-1234. 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.
/NWFG/Examiner, Art Unit 1759
/MELVIN C. MAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights