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 “second step difference” , which is referenced in the specification as element 1530, must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference signs mentioned in the description: 1530, 1531, 1532, and 1533.
The drawings are objected to because not all of the structures in the drawings are labeled - see right side corresponding to element 270 on the left side of figures 10, 12, 15E, 15F, 16, 17, 18, 19. Is this element also 270?
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 Objections
Claim 15 objected to because of the following informalities: there is no antecedent basis for “the same layer”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities: there is no antecedent basis for “the first assembly wiring” or “the second assembly wiring” (in claim 1 they were referred to as ‘assembling wiring’). For the purpose of examination, these elements will be assumed to correspond to the assembling wirings introduced in claim 1’.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 10 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. There is no antecedent basis for “the first electrode” – “a first electrode” is claimed in claim 7, but claim 10 is not dependent on claim 7. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. WO 2020166777. Here, Park et al. US 20220246583 is used as a translation.
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a display device, comprising:
a substrate (1100 figure 12, [0165]);
a first assembling wiring on the substrate (1111 figure 12, [0138]);
a second assembling wiring on the substrate (1112 figure 12, [0138]);
a partition wall disposed on the first and second assembling wirings and having a hole (partition wall 1130 is disposed over the first and second wirings 1111 and 1112 [0140] and has a coupling hole 1102 [0142] see figure 12);
a semiconductor light-emitting device disposed in the hole and having a first step difference part on a side portion thereof (LED 1000 is disposed in coupling hole 1102 [0141-0143]) and has a first step difference part disposed on the top side portion of the semiconductor light-emitting device as shown in annotated figure 14C),
a connection electrode disposed on at least the first step difference part (connection electrode 1162/1184 is disposed on the first step difference part as seen in figure 14D [0172 and 0176]).
PNG
media_image1.png
328
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the partition wall has a second step difference part on a side portion thereof (see annotated figure 14C above)
Regarding claim 12, Park discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the partition wall comprises;
a first partition wall (1130a, the unshaded part of 1130 in annotated figure 14B) spaced apart from the semiconductor light-emitting device by a first distance (indicated by the lower horizontal arrows);
and a second partition wall (1130b, the shaded part of 1130 in annotated figure 14B) spaced apart from the semiconductor light-emitting device by a second distance (indicated by the upper horizontal arrows) and disposed on the first partition wall (1130b, the unshaded part of 1130, is disposed on 1130a) ;
PNG
media_image2.png
364
608
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the second distance being greater than the first distance (the second distance, d2, is greater than the first distance d1)
Regarding claim 13, Park discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the second step difference part comprises:
a second-first side region on a side portion of the first partition wall (see annotated figure 14D);
a second-second side region on a side portion of the second partition wall (see annotated figure 14D);
and a second bottom region on an upper side of the second partition wall between the first partition wall and the second partition wall (see annotated figure 14D).
PNG
media_image3.png
365
661
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 3, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Kim US 20210265541.
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor light-emitting device comprises:
a first conductivity type semiconductor layer (1010 is an n-type semiconductor layer [0126]);
a second conductivity type semiconductor layer on the active layer (1030 [0176]); and
a passivation layer (1070/1160 described in [0170])
wherein the first step difference part is disposed on a side portion of the first conductivity type semiconductor layer (see annotated figure 14C above, where the first step difference is disposed on a top a side portion of the first conductivity type semiconductor layer, with the second conductivity part between).
Park lacks:
an active layer on the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer;
and that the second conductivity type semiconductor layer is on the active layer
and that the passivation layer surrounds at least the active layer and the second conductivity type semiconductor layer
However, Kim discloses in paragraph [0073] that an active layer 154 may be layered between the first conductivity-type semiconductive layer and the second conductivity-type active layer, in which case.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having reasonable skill in the art before the time of filing to add an active layer between the first conductivity-type semiconductive layer and the second conductivity-type active layer in order to improve the efficiency of the LED (see Fletcher et al. US 5008718). In the combination, this active layer 154 from Kim, would therefore be surrounded by the passivation layer (1070/1160) of Park.
Regarding claim 3, Park, as modified by Kim as in claim 2, discloses the display device according to claim 2, wherein the first conductivity type semiconductor layer comprises:
a first-first conductivity type semiconductor layer having a first width (see annotated figure 14D); and
PNG
media_image4.png
355
640
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a first-second conductivity type semiconductor layer disposed on the first-first conductivity type semiconductor layer and having a second width smaller than the first width (see annotated figure 14D).
Regarding claim 9, Park, as modified by Kim in claim 2 above, discloses the display device according to claim 2, wherein the connection electrode is disposed on the passivation layer (figure 14D shows that connection electrode 1162/1184 is disposed on passivation layer 1070/1160).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as prior art does not anticipate or render obvious the display device according to claim 3, wherein the first step difference part, a first-first side region on a side portion of the first-first conductivity type semiconductor layer; a first-second side region on a side portion of the first-second conductivity type semiconductor layer; and a first bottom region on an upper side of the first-first conductivity type semiconductor layer between the first-first side region and the first-second side region in combination as claimed.
Claims 5-8 are objected to as being dependent on claim 4, but would be allowable if claim 4 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 10, if amended to depend on claim 7 in order to resolve the 112(b) rejection above, would be allowable if claim 4 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as prior art does not anticipate or render obvious the display device according to claim 13, wherein the connection electrode is disposed on the second-first side region and the second bottom region in combination as claimed.
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as prior art does not anticipate or render obvious the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first assembling wiring and the second assembling wiring are disposed on the same layer, and the connection electrode is electrically connected to the first assembling wiring and the second assembling wiring in combination as claimed.
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as prior art does not anticipate or render obvious the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first assembling wiring and the second assembling wiring are disposed on different layers, and the connection electrode is electrically connected to the first assembling wiring and the second assembling wiring in combination as claimed.
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as prior art does not anticipate or render obvious the display device according to claim, further comprising: an electrode wiring disposed on the semiconductor light-emitting device, wherein the electrode wiring is electrically connected to an upper side of the semiconductor light-emitting device, and wherein at least one of the first assembly wiring or the second assembly wiring is electrically connected to the side portion of the semiconductor light emitting element through the connecting electrode in combination as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes Lim et al. US 10636940 similar LED device, but includes magnetic structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATRINA M H WALJESKI-MOSES whose telephone number is (571)272-0731. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 7:30 am- 5 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, Jeff Natalini can be reached at (571) 272-2266. 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. 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.
/KATRINA WALJESKI-MOSES/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/JEFF W NATALINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights