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
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 09/21/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 11-20 now depend on claim 1. Since, functionally, only device claims are present in claims 1-20, (i.e. claims 11-20 are treated as device claims instead of method claims as they are all dependent on the device of claim 1) Examiner rescinds the requirement for restriction, as Applicant has elected the device for prosecution.
Examiner further notes that, if the Applicant make independent method claims in future prosecution, they will be treated under an election by original presentation, and will be withdrawn. (See MPEP 821.03)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7, and 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sheng et al. (US 20200194624 A1, hereinafter Sheng)
With regards to claim 1, Sheng discloses a micro-light emitting diode (uLED) device (FIG. 12) comprising:
a plurality of micro-light emitting diodes (uLEDs), each of the uLEDs comprising:
a pixel; (epitaxial layered structure 4)
an N-contact (N electrode 51) in contact with the pixel and having an N-contact top surface;
a P-contact (P second electrode 52) in contact with the pixel and having a P-contact top surface;
an N-contact test pad (extension electrode 511 connected to N electrode 51) on the N-contact top surface and having an N-contact test pad surface; and
a P-contact test pad (extension electrode 521 connected to P electrode 52) on the P-contact top surface and having a P-contact test pad surface; and
a primary release layer (insulating protective layer 7) positioned between all of the N-contacts and P-contacts of the uLEDs. (See FIG. 12)
With regards to claim 2, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1, wherein a first surface area of the N- contact test pad surface is larger than a second surface area of the N-contact top surface and a third surface area of the P-contact test pad surface is larger than a fourth surface area of the P-contact top surface. (see FIG. 12, where a surface of electrodes 511 and 521 facing away from the contacts 51 and 52 are larger than the surfaces facing towards the contacts 51 and 52)
With regards to claim 7, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1, wherein each of the N-contacts and the P- contacts comprise one or more of: aluminum (AI), nickel (Ni), titanium (Ti), gold (Au), platinum (Pt), and palladium (Pd). (Paragraph [0052]: “The first and second electrodes 51, 52 may be made of a material such as Au/AuZn/Au.”)
With regards to claim 9, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1 further comprising a device substrate (growth substrate 1, see FIG. 12) that supports the pixel.
With regards to claim 10, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 9, wherein the device substrate comprises:
a material selected from the group consisting of: a sapphire, silicon carbide, and Ill- nitride. (paragraph [0022]: “the growth substrate 1 is made of a gallium arsenide (GaAs) -based material, but is not limited thereto. Other materials such as gallium phosphide (GaP)-based material and indium phosphide (InP)-based material may also be used to make the growth substrate 1.”)
With regards to claims 11-20, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1.
It should be noted that the limitations of claims 11-20 are being interpreted as a product by process, and will not be given patentable weight. (See MPEP 2113 I.)
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheng et al. (US 20200194624 A1, hereinafter Sheng)
With regards to claim 8, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1.
However, Sheng does not explicitly teach wherein each of the N-contact test pad and the P-contact test pad comprises one or more of: copper (Cu), aluminum (AI), nickel (Ni), titanium (Ti), titanium-tungsten (TiW), silver (Ag), gold (Au),platinum (Pt), and palladium (Pd).
It should be noted that Sheng does teach the electrodes 51 and 52 comprise gold. (Paragraph [0052]: “The first and second electrodes 51, 52 may be made of a material such as Au/AuZn/Au.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Sheng to have gold contact pads, as gold is merely one of a limited number of well-known conductors to be substituted for predictable results, namely conduction.
Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheng et al. (US 20200194624 A1, hereinafter Sheng) in view of Wei et al. (WO 2021196817, hereinafter Sheng)
With regards to claim 3, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1.
However, Sheng does not explicitly teach wherein the primary release layer comprises a photoresist material.
Wei teaches using a photoresist in a passivation layer 3 (See abstract)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Sheng to have a photoresist as recited in Wei, as both references are in the same field of endeavor.
One of ordinary skill would appreciate that using photoresist/resin is merely one of a limited number of well-known insulators to be substituted for predictable results, namely insulation.
With regards to claim 4, Sheng in view of Wei teaches uLED device of claim 3.
While Sheng in view of Wei does not explicitly teach wherein the photoresist material comprises polydimethylglutarimide (PMGI) and/or a cyclopentanone-based polymer, it should be noted that Wei teaches using a photoresist, where the above materials are some of a limited number of well-known photoresists that can be substituted to obtain predictable results, namely insulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Sheng in view of Wei to have a specific photoresist as recited above.
With regards to claim 5, Sheng discloses the uLED device of claim 1.
Wei further teaches further comprising a secondary release layer covering all of the N-contact test pads and the P-contact test pads. (passivation layer 5)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Sheng to have the passivation layer as recited in Wei, as both references are in the same field of endeavor.
One of ordinary skill would appreciate that using the passivation layer 5 helps further protect the LED device.
With regards to claim 6, Sheng in view of Wei teaches uLED device of claim 5.
While Sheng in view of Wei does not explicitly teach wherein the secondary release layer comprises a photoresist material, it should be noted that Wei teaches using a photoresist, where the above materials are some of a limited number of well-known photoresists that can be substituted to obtain predictable results, namely insulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Sheng in view of Wei to have a photoresist as recited above.
One of ordinary skill would appreciate that using photoresist/resin is merely one of a limited number of well-known insulators to be substituted for predictable results, namely insulation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20210249558 A1 – uLED device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN M Page whose telephone number is (571)272-3249. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Christine S. Kim can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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.
/STEVEN M PAGE/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
