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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the first of the two new limitations added via amendment “defines a physical relationship between the illumination supplied by the testing apparatus and the physical photoelectric response of the particular light emitting element being tested” and the second “defines a physical relationship between the illumination supplied by the testing apparatus and the physical photoelectric response of the particular light emitting element being tested.”
However, the examiner does not find these arguments persuasive because the first limitation does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use and the second limitation is an abstract idea (either a mental process or mathematics).
Regarding the first limitation, the examiner calls the applicant’s attention to MPEP § 2106(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) (‘The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point’). See also Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1377, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1547 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (steps of DNA amplification and analysis are not ‘sufficient’ to render claim 1 patent eligible merely because they are physical steps).
Regarding the second limitation, the examiner calls the applicant’s attention to MPEP § 2106.05(a): “It is important to note, the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement. The improvement can be provided by one or more additional elements.”
Therefore, all claims stand rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 2-6, 8-12, 14, & 15 are 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.
In claim 1, the applicant claims “estimate inherent external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element using the calculated pseudo external quantum efficiency.” In claim 2, the applicant claims “the calculation unit calculates an estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency.” In claim 1, the examiner assumes that there should be an “an” before “inherent.” However, in claim 2, it is unclear whether “the inherent external quantum efficiency” is the same as the “inherent external quantum efficiency” of claim 1 given the largely similar first half of claim 2 to the limitations following the term in claim 1, but the dissimilar limitations in the second half of claim 2. If the applicant means for both instances of “inherent external quantum efficiency” to refer to the same value, then claim 2 should be amended to remove limitations duplicated in claim 1. If the applicant means for the two instances to refer to different values, claims 1 and 2 should be amended to make that clear.
Claims 3-6, 8-12, 14, & 15 inherit the above deficiency and therefore are rejected as depending on claim 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
INDEPENDENT CLAIM 1 et seq.
Step 1: Is the Claim to a Process, Machine, Manufacture or Composition of Matter?
Claims 1-18 recite a testing apparatus. Thus, these claims are to a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Claim 19 recites a testing method. Thus, this claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Claim 20 recites a computer-readable storage medium, which appears to include transitory signals. Thus, this claim is not to one of the statutory categories of invention. (See above.) In the interest of compact prosecution, the examiner shall provide a rejection below as if the applicant had properly claimed an apparatus including a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
Step 2A: Prong One: Does the Claim Recite an Abstract Idea?
Claim 1 recites:
1. A testing apparatus comprising: a light source configured to irradiate a test target light emitting element with light including a reaction wavelength at which the test target light emitting element outputs a photoelectric signal; an electrical measurement unit configured to measure the photoelectric signal obtained by the test target light emitting element photoelectrically converting light radiated from the light source; a calculation unit configured to calculate pseudo external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element, based on irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the test target light emitting element, a light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the test target light emitting element, and the photoelectric signal being measured of the test target light emitting element, and estimate inherent external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element using the calculated pseudo quantum efficiency; and a determination unit configured to determine a quality of the test target light emitting element based on the estimated element based on the inherent external quantum efficiency. [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations]
Step 2A: Prong Two: Does the Claim Recite Additional Elements That Integrate The Abstract Idea Into a Practical Application?
The elements that are not underlined above are the additional elements.
The examiner finds that each of the following additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use:
“a light source configured to irradiate a test target light emitting element with light including a reaction wavelength at which the test target light emitting element outputs a photoelectric signal.”
The examiner finds that each of the following additional elements merely adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the abstract idea:
“an electrical measurement unit which measures a photoelectric signal obtained by a test target light emitting element photoelectrically converting light radiated from the light source.” [the examiner finds this element to be data gathering]
The examiner finds that each of the following additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use:
“feeding a radio frequency (RF) signal to the DUT.”
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Recite Additional Elements That Amount to Significantly More Than the Abstract Idea?
The examiner finds that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The same analysis applies mutatis mutandis to claims 19 and 20 because they contain the same limitations directed to a method and an NTCRM, respectively.
Regarding claim 2, the additional element “the calculation unit calculates an estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency, which is obtained from a light emission test, of the test target light emitting element from the pseudo external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element by using a correction coefficient based on the pseudo external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a reference light emitting element and inherent external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a light emission test of the reference light emitting element” further expands on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 3, the additional element “the reference light emitting element is an ideal light emitting element conforming to a design value of the test target light emitting element, or is a light emitting element that is included in a same production lot as the test target light emitting element and satisfies a predetermined acceptance reference” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Regarding claim 4, the additional element “the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the test target light emitting element is a wavelength conforming to a design value of the reference light emitting element, a wavelength measured in advance by the light emission test of the reference light emitting element, or a wavelength conforming to a design value of the test target light emitting element does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Regarding claim 5, the additional element “a light emission control unit which causes the reference light emitting element to emit light” not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use;
the additional element “a light measurement unit which measures a wavelength and light emission intensity of light emitted from the reference light emitting element, wherein the calculation unit” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional elements “calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of the reference light emitting element based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the reference light emitting element, the wavelength of the reference light emitting element measured as the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the test target light emitting element, and the photoelectric signal being measured of the reference light emitting element,
calculates the inherent external quantum efficiency of the reference light emitting element based on the wavelength and the light emission intensity being measured of the reference light emitting element and current input to the reference light emitting element by the light emission control unit, and
calculates the correction coefficient by dividing the pseudo external quantum efficiency by the inherent external quantum efficiency” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 6, the additional element “an optical system which irradiates the reference light emitting element with light incident from the light source in one direction, and irradiates the light measurement unit with light incident from the reference light emitting element in another direction” does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Regarding claim 7, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional elements “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 8, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 9, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 10, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 11, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 12, the additional element “the electrical measurement unit measures the photoelectric signal obtained by each of a plurality of test target light emitting elements photoelectrically converting light collectively radiated from the light source” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “the calculation unit calculates the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the irradiation intensity of light radiated from the light source to the plurality of test target light emitting elements, the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, and the photoelectric signal measured for each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 13, the additional elements “the calculation unit calculates an estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency, which is obtained from a light emission test, of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements from the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements by using a correction coefficient based on the pseudo external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a reference light emitting element and inherent external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a light emission test of the reference light emitting element” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 14, the additional elements “the calculation unit calculates an estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency, which is obtained from a light emission test, of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements from the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements by using a correction coefficient based on the pseudo external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a reference light emitting element and inherent external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a light emission test of the reference light emitting element” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 15, the additional elements “the calculation unit calculates an estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency, which is obtained from a light emission test, of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements from the pseudo external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements by using a correction coefficient based on the pseudo external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a reference light emitting element and inherent external quantum efficiency calculated in advance for a light emission test of the reference light emitting element” further expand on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 16, the additional element “the calculation unit uses the correction coefficient varying depending on a production lot including the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expands on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 17, the additional element “wherein the determination unit determines quality of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements based on the estimation value of the inherent external quantum efficiency of each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” further expands on the abstract idea [Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations].
Regarding claim 18, the additional element “a light emission control unit which causes the plurality of test target light emitting elements to collectively emit light” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use;
the additional element “a light measurement unit which measures, as the light emission wavelength relating to light emission of the plurality of test target light emitting elements, a wavelength of combined light obtained by combining light emitted from each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it is insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering); and
the additional element “an optical system which irradiates the plurality of test target light emitting elements with light incident from the light source in one direction, and irradiates the light measurement unit with combined light obtained by combining light incident from each of the plurality of test target light emitting elements in another direction” does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because it does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Allowable Subject Matter
All claims would be allowable if § 101 rejections above were resolved favorably. The prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest:
in claim 1, “estimate inherent external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element using the calculated pseudo external quantum efficiency,”
in claim 19, “estimating inherent external Quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element using the calculated pseudo external quantum efficiency,” and
in claim 20, “estimating inherent external quantum efficiency of the test target light emitting element using the calculated pseudo external quantum efficiency,”
in combination with all other limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20190004105 to Henley discloses LED arrays which are functionally tested by injecting current via a displacement current coupling device using a field plate comprising of an electrode and insulator placed in close proximity to the LED array.
United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20190170578 to Osawa et al. discloses an optical characteristic measurement system including a first detection element arranged in a housing; a first cooling unit at least partially joined to the first detection element that cools the detection element; and a suppression mechanism that suppresses temperature variations occurring around the detection element in the housing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert P Alejnikov whose telephone number is (571)270-5164. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00a-6:00p M-F.
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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at 571.272.2619. 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.
/ROBERT P ALEJNIKOV JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
