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 – 4, 7 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cho ( Pub. No. US 20200235267 A1 ), hereinafter Cho.
PNG
media_image1.png
532
1429
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Cho teaches a light-emitting diode (LED) ( Cho, FIG. 4, 20; [0025], a light-emitting device 20 ), comprising:
a substrate ( Cho, FIG. 4, 200; [0025], a substrate 200 ), com a first surface and a second surface ( Cho, FIG. 4, 202, 204; [0025], a first surface 202 and a second surface 204 ) disposed opposite to the first surface;
a semiconductor stack layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, 240; [0025], a light-emitting stack 240 ), formed on the first surface ( Cho, FIG. 4, 204 ) of the substrate ( Cho, FIG. 4, 200 ) and configured to radiate light ( Cho, [0025], light-emitting stack 240 includes a first conductive semiconductor layer 242, a second conductive semiconductor layer 244, and an active layer 246 ); and
a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, 2200; [0012], dielectric-layer pair of the DBR structure 2200 ), formed on the second surface ( Cho, FIG. 4, 202 ) of the substrate ( Cho, FIG. 4, 200 ), wherein the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, 2200 ) comprises: a first material layer and a second material layer, and the first material layer and the second material layer are repeatedly stacked ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5; [0012], ratios of the first optical thickness of the first dielectric layer and the second optical thickness of the second dielectric layer; [0035], The DBR structure 2200 has a plurality of dielectric-layer pairs sequentially arranged outward from the first surface 202 of the substrate 200 to reflect light from the light-emitting stack 240, wherein each of the dielectric-layer pairs includes a first dielectric layer and a second dielectric layer respectively (not shown); [0036], As shown in FIG. 5, the DBR structure 2200 includes a plurality of dielectric-layer pairs, such as the 1st pair to the 23rd pair );
wherein optical thicknesses of the first material layer and the second material layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5; [0012], ratios of the first optical thickness of the first dielectric layer and the second optical thickness of the second dielectric layer ) are capable of:
reflecting light with any wavelength within a first wavelength range ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm; FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ) and having an incident angle within a first angle range ( Cho, FIG. 7, FIG. 8; [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree; FIG. 8 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 0 degree to 10 degree is about 100 % ), transmitting a part of light with any wavelength within the first wavelength range ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm ) and having an incident angle within a second angle range ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles ), where the first angle range ( Cho, FIG. 7, FIG. 8; [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree; FIG. 8 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 0 degree to 10 degree is about 100 % ) is less than the second angle range ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles ); and
reflecting light with at least one wavelength within a second wavelength range ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ) and having an incident angle of 0-10 degrees (°) ( Cho, [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree ), where a reflectivity of the light with the at least one wavelength within the second wavelength range ( Cho, [0038], 434 nm to 815 nm ) and having the incident angle of 0-10°( Cho, [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree ) is greater than or equal to 40% ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ); and
wherein the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, 2200 ) has a color, and wavelengths contained in the second wavelength range ( Cho, [0038], 434 nm to 815 nm ) are greater than or equal to a critical wavelength ( Cho, [0038], 434 nm ) of the color corresponding to the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, 2200 ) that is capable of passing through an automated optical inspection (AOI).
Regarding Claim 2, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 1, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the first wavelength range is from 400 nanometers (nm) to 480 nm ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm; FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ).
Regarding Claim 3, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 2, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the first angle range is from 0° to 10° ( Cho, FIG. 7, FIG. 8; [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree; FIG. 8 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 0 degree to 10 degree is about 100 % ), and the second angle range is from 10° to 60° ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles ).
Regarding Claim 4, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 3, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to the light with any wavelength within the first wavelength range and having the incident angle within the first angle range ( Cho, FIG. 8 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 0 degree to 10 degree is about 100 % ) is greater than or equal to 95% ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm; FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, … the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ); and
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to the part of light with any wavelength within the first wavelength range and having the incident angle within the second angle range ( Cho, FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles ) is less than or equal to 60% ( Cho, FIG. 8 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 45 degree to 55 degree is about 50% ).
Regarding Claim 7, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 1, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein when the color of the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, 2200 ) is green, the second wavelength range is from 570 nm to 585 nm ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ).
Regarding Claim 8, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 7, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, 2200 ) in response to the light with at least one wavelength in the second wavelength range and having the incident angle of 0-10° ( Cho, [0038], FIG. 7 … incident angle θ is 0 degree ) is greater than 40% ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ) .
Regarding Claim 9, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 4, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the reflectivity of the DBR stack structure ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5, 2200 ) in response to light within a wavelength range of 446 nm to 456 nm ( Cho, FIG. 8; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm ) and having the incident angle within at least a part of the second angle range is less than or equal to 60% ( Cho, FIG. 8, DBR structure 2200 shows that the reflectivity at wavelength 450 nm for incident angle θ from 45 degree to 55 degree is less than 60 % ).
Regarding Claim 10, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 1, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to light with any wavelength within a third wavelength range and having the incident angle of 0-10° is greater than 70% ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ).
Regarding Claim 11, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 10, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the third wavelength range is from 600 nm to 750 nm ( Cho, FIG. 7; [0038], As shown in FIG. 7, … In the DBR structure 2200, the wavelength range of which the reflectivity is greater than 90% is about 409 nm to 930 nm, and the reflectivity in the wavelength range of 434 nm to 815 nm is closer to 100% ).
Regarding Claim 12, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 1, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the first material layer is a titanium oxide layer and the second material layer is a silicon oxide layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, FIG. 5; [0035], wherein each of the dielectric-layer pairs includes a first dielectric layer and a second dielectric layer respectively (not shown) … the materials of the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer include titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2) ) .
Regarding Claim 13, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 1, on which this claim is dependent, Cho further teaches:
wherein the semiconductor stack layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, 240; [0025], a light-emitting stack 240 ) comprises: a first semiconductor layer, an active layer, and a second semiconductor layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, 242, 244, 246; [0025], light-emitting stack 240 includes a first conductive semiconductor layer 242, a second conductive semiconductor layer 244, and an active layer 246 ) sequentially stacked in that order on the first surface ( Cho, FIG. 4, 204 ) of the substrate ( Cho, FIG. 4, 200 ), a side of the semiconductor stack layer facing away from the first surface ( Cho, FIG. 4, 204 ) of the substrate ( Cho, FIG. 4, 200 ) comprises a first mesa ( Cho, FIG. 4, where 280 is placed on ) and a second mesa ( Cho, FIG. 4, where 260 is placed on );
wherein the first mesa ( Cho, FIG. 4, where 280 is placed on ) is disposed to expose the second semiconductor layer ( Cho, FIG. 4, 244 ) of the semiconductor stack layer, and the first mesa is provided with a first electrode ( Cho, FIG. 4, 280; [0025], second electrode 280 ) thereon; and
wherein the second mesa ( Cho, FIG. 4, where 260 is placed on ) is disposed to expose the first semiconductor layer (Cho, FIG. 4, 242 ) of the semiconductor stack layer, and the second mesa ( Cho, FIG. 4, where 260 is placed on ) is provided with a second electrode ( Cho, FIG. 4, 260; [0025], first electrode 260 ) thereon.
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.
Claims 5 – 6, 14 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho, in view of Wang ( Pub. No. CN 114373845 A ), herein after Wang.
Regarding Claim 5, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 4, on which this claim is dependent,
Cho fails to teach:
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to light within a wavelength range of 490 nm to 560 nm and having the incident angle within the first angle range is less than or equal to 25%.
However, Wang teaches:
Wang, FIG. 6, reflectivity R is below 30 % in the range of wavelength from 510 nm to 560 nm; page 11, line 8, “ as shown in FIG. 6, in order to ensure the 420nm to 480nm range in a portion of large angle light transmission effect, the thickness of the first reflecting film group 10 is not too thick, and at least in the range of 520nm to 600nm and the angle is 0 degrees to 10 degrees in the range of the light has a lower reflectivity. ”.
Cho and Wang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are forming light emitting diode (LED) using a distributed Bragg reflection structure (DBR). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho ( FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm ), to incorporate the teachings of Wang ( FIG. 6, reflectivity R is below 30 % in the range of wavelength from 510 nm to 560 nm; page 11, line 8, “ at least in the range of 520nm to 600nm and the angle is 0 degrees to 10 degrees in the range of the light has a lower reflectivity ” ), to implement “ wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to light within a wavelength range of 490 nm to 560 nm and having the incident angle within the first angle range is less than or equal to 25% ”, and therefore to ensure a transmission effect of some large angle light in the range of 420 nm to 480 nm. Furthermore, “ [W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. ” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 6, Cho and Wang teach the LED as claimed in claim 5, on which this claim is dependent,
Cho fails to teach:
wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to light within a wavelength range of 510 nm to 560 nm and having the incident angle within the first angle range is less than or equal to 25%.
However, Wang teaches:
Wang, FIG. 6, reflectivity R is below 30 % in the range of wavelength from 510 nm to 560 nm; page 11, line 8, “ as shown in FIG. 6, in order to ensure the 420nm to 480nm range in a portion of large angle light transmission effect, the thickness of the first reflecting film group 10 is not too thick, and at least in the range of 520nm to 600nm and the angle is 0 degrees to 10 degrees in the range of the light has a lower reflectivity. ”.
Cho and Wang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are forming light emitting diode (LED) using a distributed Bragg reflection structure (DBR). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho ( FIG. 3, FIG. 8; [0005], The reflectivity of the DBR structure 120 in the incident angle θ the ranging from 40 degrees to 65 degrees is lower than other incident angles; [0010], [0015], incident light wavelength is 450 nm ), to incorporate the teachings of Wang ( FIG. 6, reflectivity R is below 30 % in the range of wavelength from 510 nm to 560 nm; page 11, line 8, “ at least in the range of 520nm to 600nm and the angle is 0 degrees to 10 degrees in the range of the light has a lower reflectivity ” ), to implement “ wherein a reflectivity of the DBR stack structure in response to light within a wavelength range of 510 nm to 560 nm and having the incident angle within the first angle range is less than or equal to 25% ”, and therefore to ensure a transmission effect of some large angle light in the range of 420 nm to 480 nm. Furthermore, “ [W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. ” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 14, Cho teaches the LED as claimed in claim 13, on which this claim is dependent,
Cho fails to teach:
an insulated reflective layer, disposed to cover the first mesa and the second mesa of the semiconductor stacked layer, and to cover the first electrode and the second electrode.
However, Wang teaches:
an insulated reflective layer ( Wang, FIG. 1, 400; page 14, line 3, insulating layer 400 ), disposed to cover the first mesa and the second mesa of the semiconductor stacked layer, and to cover the first electrode and the second electrode ( Wang, FIG. 1, 300, 400, 500, 600; page 14, line 3, “ The insulating layer 400 is located on the semiconductor stack layer 300, and covers the first electrode 500, the second electrode 600, and the semiconductor stack layer 300. ” ).
Cho and Wang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are forming light emitting diode (LED) using a distributed Bragg reflection structure (DBR). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho ( FIG. 4 ), to incorporate the teachings of Wang ( FIG. 1, insulating layer 400 ), to implement “ an insulated reflective layer, disposed to cover the first mesa and the second mesa of the semiconductor stacked layer, and to cover the first electrode and the second electrode. ”, and therefore to isolate the first electrode and second electrode, and allow separated electrical connections for first electrode and second electrode.
Regarding Claim 15, Cho and Wang teach the LED as claimed in claim 14, on which this claim is dependent, Wang further teaches: further comprising:
a first solder pad ( Wang, FIG. 1, first bonding pad 700 ), disposed on a position of the insulated reflective layer ( Wang, FIG. 1, insulating layer 400 ) corresponding to the first electrode ( Wang, FIG. 1, first electrode 500 ), penetrating through the insulated reflective layer ( Wang, FIG. 1, insulating layer 400 ), and electrically connected to the first electrode ( Wang, FIG. 1, first electrode 500 ); and
a second solder pad ( Wang, FIG. 1, second bonding pad 800 ), disposed on a position of the insulated reflective layer ( Wang, FIG. 1, insulating layer 400 ) corresponding to the second electrode ( Wang, FIG. 1, second electrode 600 ), penetrating through the insulated reflective layer ( Wang, FIG. 1, insulating layer 400 ), and electrically connected to the second electrode ( Wang, FIG. 1, second electrode 600 ).
Regarding Independent Claim 16, Cho teaches a light-emitting device, comprising:
a packaging substrate ( Cho, FIG. 14, 430; [0046], a carrier 430 );
the LED as claimed in claim 1 ( as shown in claim 1, Cho maps the LED ), disposed on the packaging substrate ( Cho, FIG. 14, 40, 430; [0046], light-emitting device 40 is located on the carrier 430 ); and
Cho fails to teach:
an encapsulation layer, disposed to cover the LED.
However, Wang teaches:
an encapsulation layer ( Wang, FIG. 9, 3000; page 15, line 45, a package layer 3000 ), disposed to cover the LED ( Wang, FIG. 9, 2000; page 15, line 45, flip-chip light emitting diode 2000 ).
Cho and Wang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are forming light emitting diode (LED) using a distributed Bragg reflection structure (DBR). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho ( FIG. 4, light-emitting device ), to incorporate the teachings of Wang ( FIG. 9, package layer 3000, and flip-chip LED 2000 on the packaging substrate 1000 ), to implement the package of LED, and therefore to be used in a specific application, for instance, light bulb.
Regarding Claim 17, Cho and Wang teach the light-emitting device according to claim 16, Wang further teaches: further comprising:
a first bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the left ) and a second bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the right ); and
wherein the first bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the left ) and the second bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the right ) are electrically isolated from each other, and the first bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the left ) and the second bonding electrode ( Wang, FIG. 9, metal electrode layer 1100 on the right ) are disposed on the packaging substrate ( Wang, FIG. 9, package substrate 1000 ).
Regarding Claim 18, Cho and Wang teach the light-emitting device according to claim 16, Wang further teaches: further comprising:
wherein a refractive index of the encapsulation layer ( Wang, FIG. 9, package layer 3000; page 16, line 7, “ the refractive index of the packaging layer 3000 is different from the refractive index of the optical film stack 100, the packaging layer 3000 includes but is not limited to silica gel, the refractive index of the silica gel is between 1.41 to 1.53 ” ) is less than a refractive index of the DBR stack structure ( Wang, FIG. 9, optical film stack 100; page 9, line 20, “ the first material layer 11 preferably has a refractive index of 2.4 to 2.6 of the titanium oxide layer ”; page 13, line 36, “ Preferably, the first layer of the optical film stack 100 is the first layer of the first reflecting film group 10 and is a titanium oxide layer, which can prevent the light emitting diode in the invisible cutting process of the edge collapse problem, optical film stack 100 of the last layer is the last layer of the second reflecting film group 20 and is a titanium oxide layer, The titanium oxide layer has a relatively thin thickness and has a large refractive index, and has a larger refractive index difference with the packaging layer, which can further improve the reflection effect, reduce the front light leakage of the semiconductor light emitting device ” ).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Da-Wei Lee whose telephone number is 703-756-1792. The examiner can normally be reached M -̶ F 8:00 am -̶ 6:00 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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached at 571-272-2063. 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.
/DA-WEI LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/MARLON T FLETCHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights