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 .
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.
Claims 1 – 14, and 16 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teng et al. (US 2005/0153473).
Regarding claim 1, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
A method comprising:
selectively depositing material over a layered structure of a light-emitting device (FIG. 6C); and
defining an emitter size of the light-emitting device by causing the material to disorder regions of a light-emitting layer included in the layered structure (at least [0099] – [0104], [0132]).
Regarding claim 2, Teng teaches intermixing to modify the bandgap in patterned areas through a thermal process, which inherently extracts desired elements, including Group III elements in the heterostructure stack (at least [0099] – [0104], [0132]):
The method of claim 1, wherein causing the material to disorder the regions of the light-emitting layer comprises inducing impurity-free disordering of the material within the light-emitting layer via Group III element extraction at a temperature that exceeds a certain threshold.
Regarding claim 3, Teng teaches heterostructure intermixing through thermal processes, which is inherently a diffusion process:
The method of claim 1, wherein causing the material to disorder the regions of the light-emitting layer comprises causing impurity-induced disordering of the material within the light-emitting layer via at least one of: ion implantation; or atomic diffusion.
Regarding claim 4, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
The method of claim 1, wherein defining the emitter size of the light-emitting device comprises defining the emitter size of the light-emitting device by applying at least one fabrication process to the layered structure outside the light-emitting layer.
Regarding claim 5, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
The method of claim 4, wherein the fabrication process comprises at least one of: etching; band-gap tuning; or impurity diffusion.
Regarding claim 6, Teng teaches intermixing to modify the bandgap in patterned areas through a thermal process, which inherently extracts desired elements (at least [0132]):
The method of claim 4, wherein the fabrication process comprises inducing elemental diffusion in the layered structure to widen a band gap of the light-emitting layer by: increasing a temperature of the material; and extracting an element from at least one layer included in the layered structure as a result of the increased temperature.
Regarding claim 7, Teng teaches ([0085] – [0093]):
The method of claim 1, wherein the light-emitting layer is disposed between semiconductor layers included in the layered structure.
Regarding claim 8, Teng teaches ([0095] – [0097]):
The method of claim 7, wherein defining the emitter size of the light-emitting device comprises tuning a band gap of at least one of the layers included in the layered structure via quantum-well intermixing (QWI).
Regarding claim 9, Teng teaches ([0040], [0124]):
The method of claim 7, wherein the light-emitting layer and the semiconductor layers are collectively sized at 50 microns or less.
Regarding claim 10, Teng teaches intermixing to modify the bandgap in patterned areas through a thermal process, inducing a disordering of the heterostructure (at least [0132]):
The method of claim 1, wherein causing the material to disorder the regions of the light-emitting layer comprises at least one of: inducing vertical disordering of the material within the light-emitting layer to achieve lateral carrier confinement in at least one layer included the layered structure; or inducing lateral disordering of the material within the light-emitting layer to achieve lateral carrier confinement in at least one layer included the layered structure.
Regarding claim 11, Teng teaches ([0018] – [0019]):
The method of claim 1, wherein the material comprises a dielectric.
Regarding claim 12, Teng teaches intermixing to modify the bandgap in patterned areas ([0112] – [0118]):
The method of claim 1, wherein causing the material to disorder the regions of the light-emitting layer comprises sharpening a band-gap profile of an edge of at least one layer included in the layered structure.
Regarding claim 13, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
The method of claim 1, further comprising: removing semiconductor material from an edge of at least one layer included in the layered structure; and causing the material to disorder the edge to reduce non-radiative losses.
Regarding claim 14, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
The method of claim 1, further comprising: causing selective area growth at an edge of at least one layer included in the layered structure; and causing the material to disorder the edge to reduce non-radiative losses.
Regarding claim 16, Teng teaches (FIG. 6A – 6I):
A light-emitting device comprising:
a layered structure comprising a light-emitting layer disposed between semiconductor layers ([0085] – [0093]);
material selectively applied to the layered structure (FIG. 6C); and
an emitter whose size is defined by regions of the light-emitting layer that are disordered by the material (at least [0099] – [0104], [0132]).
Regarding claim 17, Teng teaches intermixing to modify the bandgap in patterned areas through a thermal process, inducing a disordering of the heterostructure, which must be either vertical or lateral (at least [0132]):
The light-emitting device of claim 16, wherein the regions of the light-emitting layer are either vertically disordered or laterally disordered by the material.
Regarding claim 18, Teng teaches ([0085] – [0093]):
The light-emitting device of claim 16, wherein the light-emitting layer is disposed between semiconductor layers included in the layered structure.
Regarding claim 19, Teng teaches ([0095] – [0097]):
The light-emitting device of claim 16, wherein at least one of the layers included in the layered structure has a band gap that is tuned via quantum-well intermixing (QWI).
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 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.
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 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teng et al. (US 2005/0153473).
Regarding claim 15, Teng teaches light emitting structures, but fails to expressly disclose the intended use of:
The method of claim 1, further comprising implementing the light-emitting device in an artificial-reality device dimensioned to be worn by a user.
However, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). An intended use or purpose usually will not limit the scope of the claim because such statements usually do no more than define a context in which the invention operates." Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Although "[s]uch statements often.., appear in the claim's preamble," In re Stencel, 828 F.2d 751,754 (Fed. Cir. 1987), a statement of intended use or purpose can appear elsewhere in a claim. See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) art recognized suitability for an intended purpose.
Regarding claim 20, Teng teaches a light emitting structure (FIG. 6A – 6I):
A system comprising:
a light-emitting device incorporated in the artificial-reality device, the light-emitting device comprising:
a layered structure comprising a light-emitting layer disposed between semiconductor layers ([0085] – [0093]);
material selectively applied to the layered structure (FIG. 6C); and
an emitter whose size is defined by regions of the light-emitting layer that are disordered by the material (at least [0099] – [0104], [0132]).
Teng fails to expressly disclose the specific intended use of an artificial-reality device dimensioned to be worn by a user.
However, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). An intended use or purpose usually will not limit the scope of the claim because such statements usually do no more than define a context in which the invention operates." Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Although "[s]uch statements often.., appear in the claim's preamble," In re Stencel, 828 F.2d 751,754 (Fed. Cir. 1987), a statement of intended use or purpose can appear elsewhere in a claim. See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) art recognized suitability for an intended purpose.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CORY W ESKRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)272-0543. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 - 5.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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.
/CORY W ESKRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights