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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the method for producing an optoelectronic element must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a process flow (see Fig. 8 of the instant application) as described in the specification . Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 8 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.
Regarding Claim 8, a “dense sphere packing” of hollow beads is described as completely filling the intermediate space. Examiner notes that the spherical shape of the hollow beads would at least leave some gap between adjacent hollow beads, thus the intermediate space would not be filled in these spaces. For examination purposes, a “dense sphere packing” is interpreted to include some space between adjacent spherical hollow beads.
Regarding Claim 16, the encapsulation element is described as having a recess wherein hollow beads are placed in the recess before being applied to the carrier and the semiconductor chip is further arranged in the recess. However, claim 14 describes the semiconductor chip being arranged in the intermediate space which is filled with the hollow beads. It is unclear how the recess is filled with hollow beads such that the semiconductor chip may further be arranged in the recess as the disposition of the hollow beads further defines an intermediate space being “between the encapsulation element and the main surface of the carrier”.
For examination purposes, claim 16 is interpreted to mean “hollow beads are placed in the intermediate space before the encapsulation element is applied to the carrier, wherein the semiconductor chip is arranged in the intermediate space.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hong (US 20160104827 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hong teaches an optoelectronic element (510, see Fig. 6) comprising:
a carrier (113);
a semiconductor chip (111) with an active layer for generating electromagnetic radiation (see [0041]); and
an encapsulation element (514b), wherein the semiconductor chip is arranged on a main surface (upper surface) of the carrier (shown Fig. 6), the encapsulation element is arranged exclusively on the main surface of the carrier (shown Fig. 6) such that the optoelectronic element comprises an intermediate space (portion of 514a comprising hollow beads 515) between the main surface of the carrier and the encapsulation element, the semiconductor chip is arranged in the intermediate space (shown Fig. 6), and the intermediate space is at least partially filled with hollow beads (515, see also [0073] which describes “hollow structures” being implemented to control a specific gravity of the scattering agent 515).
Regarding Claim 2, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according claim 1, wherein the carrier and/or the encapsulation element comprises a flexible film (see [0037] which lists polyamide as a material of the carrier 113).
Regarding Claim 3, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the carrier and the encapsulation element are transparent to electromagnetic radiation generated by the semiconductor chip during operation (see [0037] and [0042]).
Regarding Claim 5, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the hollow beads are made of glass (see [0044] which lists silica).
Regarding Claim 7, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the hollow beads are transparent to electromagnetic radiation generated by the semiconductor chip during operation (see [0044] which lists silica as a scattering agent material, which is known to be substantially transparent).
Regarding Claim 8, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the hollow beads form a dense sphere packing (shown Fig. 6), wherein the dense sphere packing completely fills the intermediate space (shown substantially filling the intermediate space).
Regarding Claim 9, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the intermediate space extends over the entire main surface of the carrier (shown Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 10, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the intermediate space is a closed cavity (shown Fig. 6, wherein the cavity is closed by the encapsulant).
Regarding Claim 11, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the hollow beads are at least partially embedded in a matrix material (514a, see also [0071]), and the matrix material connects the hollow beads in a mechanically stable manner.
Regarding Claim 13, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, wherein the hollow beads are arranged laterally spaced from the semiconductor chip (shown Fig. 6) and the hollow beads comprise a reflective surface (see [0043-0044] describing the material of the hollow beads as a “scattering agent for scattering light”.
Regarding Claim 14, Hong teaches a method for producing an optoelectronic element comprising steps of:
providing a carrier (113);
applying a semiconductor chip (111) onto a main surface of the carrier, wherein the semiconductor chip comprises an active layer for generating electromagnetic radiation (see [0041]); and
applying an encapsulation element (514b) exclusively on the main surface of the carrier (shown Fig. 6) wherein an intermediate space (portion of 514a comprising hollow beads 515) is formed between the main surface of the carrier and the encapsulation element, the semiconductor chip is arranged in the intermediate space (shown Fig. 6), and the intermediate space is at least partially filled with hollow beads (515, see also [0073] which describes “hollow structures” being implemented to control a specific gravity of the scattering agent 515).
Regarding Claim 15, Hong teaches the method according to claim 14, wherein the hollow beads are at least partially embedded in a matrix material (514a, see also [0071]) and are applied onto the main surface of the carrier (shown Fig. 6) by a screen printing process before the encapsulation element is applied (see Figs. 7-8).
Regarding Claim 16, Hong teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the hollow beads are placed in the intermediate space before the encapsulation element is applied to the carrier, wherein the semiconductor chip is arranged in the intermediate space (see Figs. 7-8).
Claim(s) 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kashihara (US 20190237639 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kashihara teaches an optoelectronic element (100, see Fig. 1b) comprising:
a carrier (2);
a semiconductor chip (1) with an active layer for generating electromagnetic radiation (see [0036]); and
an encapsulation element (4), wherein the semiconductor chip is arranged on a main surface (upper surface) of the carrier (shown Fig. 1B), the encapsulation element is arranged exclusively on the main surface of the carrier (shown Fig. 1B) such that the optoelectronic element comprises an intermediate space (3) between the main surface of the carrier and the encapsulation element (shown Fig. 1B), the semiconductor chip is arranged in the intermediate space (shown Fig. 1B), and the intermediate space is at least partially filled with hollow beads (5, being filled at least partially at the interface between light-transmissive members 3 and 4, see also [0033]).
Regarding Claim 6, Kashihara teaches the optoelectronic element of claim 1, wherein the hollow beads have an average diameter between 1 micrometer and 100 micrometers, inclusive (see [0047]).
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.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (US 20160104827 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 11, wherein the matrix material substantially fills spaces between the hollow beads (shown Fig. 6).
Hong teaches an alternative embodiment (see Fig. 4C) wherein a coagulant is implemented on a surface of the hollow beads.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to implement the coagulant to surfaces of the hollow beads of the embodiment of Fig. 6 as this would further increase coherence between the hollow beads and enable controlled spatial distribution of particles of a similar size (see [0061]).
Specifically, this modification would teach that at least some of the intermediate space is occupied by the coagulant such that the matrix material does not completely fill spaces between the hollow beads.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong (US 20160104827 A1) in further view of Singer (US 20190189598 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Hong teaches the optoelectronic element according to claim 1, but is silent regarding an edge length of the semiconductor chip.
Singer teaches a multi-chip module wherein each implemented semiconductor chip (light emitting diode chips) may comprise an edge length between 1 micrometer and 100 micrometers (see Singer: [0059]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to implement a light emitting diode comprising an edge length under 500 micrometers as the semiconductor chip of Hong as implementing semiconductor chips with minimal chip area is common in the art as this is known to increase package density.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hosokawa (US 20160079484 A1) teaches a light emitting element comprising multiple filler layers (72, 82) which are formed by filling molds with resin materials are “separately provided”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY PAUL BOATMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4778. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM - 5:30 PM ET.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at (571)270-3042. 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.
/C.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights