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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on October 8, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 6, 2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: LIGHT EMITTING ELEMENT WITH A LARGE BRIGHTNESS DIFFERENCE
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.
Claims 1-18 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the surfaces" in lines: 15-16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “surfaces”
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the light emitted" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “light emitted”
Claim 4 recites the limitation " the lateral faces" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “lateral faces”
Claim 4 recites the limitation " the upper face" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “an upper face”
Claim 5 recites the limitation " the lateral faces" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “lateral faces”
Claim 5 recites the limitation " the upper face" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “an upper face”
Claim 10 recites the limitation " each of the first films", “each of the third films”, “each of the second films” and “each of the fourth films” in lines: 5, 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as " each of the plurality of first films", “each of the plurality of third films”, “each of the plurality of second films” and “each of the plurality of fourth films”
Claim 11 recites the limitation " each of the first films", “each of the third films”, “each of the second films” and “each of the fourth films” in lines: 5, 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as " each of the plurality of first films", “each of the plurality of third films”, “each of the plurality of second films” and “each of the plurality of fourth films”
Claim 12 recites the limitation " each of the first films", “each of the third films”, “each of the second films” and “each of the fourth films” in lines: 5, 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as " each of the plurality of first films", “each of the plurality of third films”, “each of the plurality of second films” and “each of the plurality of fourth films”
Claim 13, lines: 2-3, “the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film on the peripheral region…” it is unclear if the first protective film is disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film, or if it is the first reflecting film that is meant to be on the peripheral region. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as ” the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film is disposed on the peripheral region…”
Claim 14, lines: 2-3, “the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film on the peripheral region…” it is unclear if the first protective film is disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film, or if it is the first reflecting film that is meant to be on the peripheral region. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as ” the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film is disposed on the peripheral region…”
Claim 15, lines: 2-3, “the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film on the peripheral region…” it is unclear if the first protective film is disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film, or if it is the first reflecting film that is meant to be on the peripheral region. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as ” the first protective film is continuously disposed on the central region and the first reflecting film is disposed on the peripheral region…”
Claim 16 recites the limitation " the area" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “an area”
Claim 17 recites the limitation " the area" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “an area”
Claim 18 recites the limitation " the area" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as “an area”
Note: claims 2-18 inherit the deficiencies of independent claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 would be allowed if rewritten to overcome the 112 rejections above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art of record, Pfeuffer (US 2017/0084777), Morioka (US 2012/0012874), Saito (US 2015/0041836), fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination) the following limitations in combination with the rest of the claim:
Regarding Claim 1 (from which claims 2-18 depend), a first face that has a peripheral region, and a central region surrounded by the peripheral region in a plan view, wherein a surface roughness of the central region is higher than a surface roughness of the peripheral region…
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pfeuffer (US 2017/0084777) discloses (Fig. 3) a light emitting device with a first semiconductor layer 21, active zone 22, second semiconductor layer 23, first and second electrode layers 4, reflection layer 34. Pfeuffer does not disclose where the first semiconductor layer has a first face that has a peripheral region, and a central region surrounded by the peripheral region in a plan view, wherein a surface roughness of the central region is higher than a surface roughness of the peripheral region.
Morioka (US 2012/0012874) discloses (Fig. 1) a light emitting device 1 with a first semiconductor layer 3, light emitting layer 4, second semiconductor layer 5, first electrode 8, second electrode 9, reflection layer 2. Morioka does not disclose where the first semiconductor layer has a first face that has a peripheral region, and a central region surrounded by the peripheral region in a plan view, wherein a surface roughness of the central region is higher than a surface roughness of the peripheral region.
Saito (US 2015/0041836) discloses (Fig. 3) a light emitting element 1 with a first semiconductor 221, active layer 23, second semiconductor 212, a first electrode 710, second electrode 720, reflection layer 53, protection film 40. Saito does not disclose where the first semiconductor layer has a first face that has a peripheral region, and a central region surrounded by the peripheral region in a plan view, wherein a surface roughness of the central region is higher than a surface roughness of the peripheral region.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO G RAMALLO whose telephone number is (571)272-9227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 6pm.
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, William Partridge can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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.
/GUSTAVO G RAMALLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights