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 .
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 “projection” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: projection 32. 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. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Basin et al. (US 2011/0049545 A1).
Regarding claim 27, Basin et al. discloses an optoelectronic component comprising:
a semiconductor chip (10) and a cover body (30) arranged on an upper side of the semiconductor chip (10); and
a molded body (32) laterally surrounding the semiconductor chip and the cover body,
wherein the molded body is flush with the cover body (see Fig. 5) on a top face of the cover body or the molded body protrudes beyond the top face of the cover body, and
wherein the molded body is rough on its upper side (etched using high-velocity microbeads 36 in a process called microbead blasting, resulting in roughening, ¶0039).
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 17-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Basin et al. in view of Minamio et al. (US 2009/0086449 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Basin et al. discloses the method for producing an optoelectronic component, the method comprising:
introducing a semiconductor chip (10) and a cover body (30) , arranged on an upper side of the semiconductor chip, into a mold (32);
enclosing the semiconductor chip and the cover body in the mold with a molding compound (32, ¶0036), wherein side faces of the semiconductor chip, side faces of the cover body, and a top face of the cover body, which faces away from the semiconductor chip, are covered by the molding compound (Fig. 3);
at least partially curing the molding compound in order to form a molded body (¶0038);
removing the mold (Fig. 4, ¶0039); and
thinning the molded body by a jet/beam process (microbead blasting, ¶0039),
wherein the molded body is removed from the top face of the cover body, the molded body being flush with the top face or protruding beyond the latter after thinning (Fig. 5, ¶0040),
Basin et al. does not detail the mold having a projection on the top face of the cover body, and where the molded body has a cavity in a region of the projection after removing the mold.
Minamio et al. teaches an optical device with a molded body (15) including a cavity (30) where the side surface results in a projection (32, Figs. 4A and 4C).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the projection/recess-forming mold structure of Minamio et al. into the molding method of Basin et al. to control the thickness of the molded body above the cover body with a cavity region creating a preferable device based on wavelength (Minamio, ¶0037).
Regarding claim 18, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the jet/beam process comprises at least one of the following methods: sandblasting, wet blasting, bead blasting, C02 blasting, laser caving, or laser deflashing (see Basin microbead 36 blasting, Fig. 4, ¶0039).
Regarding claim 19, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the combination of Basin in view of Minamio results in a projection that has an extent in a lateral direction on a side that faces toward the top face, which corresponds to an edge length of the semiconductor chip and/or of the cover body.
Regarding claim 20, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the molded body protrudes beyond the top face after thinning so that the cavity is preserved in places.
Regarding claim 21, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein two or more semiconductor chips, each with a cover body on the upper side, are introduced into the mold.
Regarding claim 22, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 21, wherein each cover body is assigned a projection.
Regarding claim 23, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the molded body is roughened by the jet/beam process (see Basin microbead blasting, Fig. 4, ¶0039).
Regarding claim 24, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, Basin discloses a molded reflective silicone compound including filler particles such as SiO2 and TiO2 (¶0037).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a molded body having a matrix material and filler particles in a proportion of 80 wt.% or more, because Basin et al. expressly teaches a highly filled silicone molding compound within that range as a stable, reflective encapsulant. The claimed filler percentage would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization of the filler loading to achieve desired reflectivity, mechanical stability, and thermal performance.
Regarding claim 25, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 24, wherein the filler particles are exposed in places on the upper side of the molded body, because that is a natural result of filler substances being in the layer.
Regarding claim 26, Basin in view of Minamio disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the molded body is able to reflect radiation (Basin, see abstract).
Claims 28-30 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Basin et al. as applied to claim 27 above.
Basin et al. expressly discloses a reflective molded body comprising a silicone matrix material and filler particles such as silica and titanium dioxide. Basin et al. further teaches a highly filled molding compound with a filler proportion meeting or suggesting the claimed at-least-80 wt.% range.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use such a highly filled molded body because high filler loading is a known and predictable way to increase reflectivity and improve thermal/mechanical performance.
Regarding claim 29, although Basin et al. does not expressly state that filler particles are exposed at the upper side of the molded body, Basin et al. teaches a highly filled reflective silicone molding compound that is subsequently subjected to microbead blasting.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that such surface removal would expose filler particles in places on the upper side of the molded body, at least as a predictable result of blasting a filled composite.
Regarding claim 30, Basin et al. expressly discloses a reflective molding compound that reflects side light back into the LED and phosphor plate. Accordingly, the molded body is configured to reflect radiation as claimed.
Regarding claim 33, Basin et al. expressly teaches a phosphor plate arranged on the semiconductor chip, and a phosphor plate is a conversion element that converts emitted radiation to another wavelength.
Claims 31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Basin et al. as applied to claim 27 above, further in view of Minamio et al. (US 2009/0086449 A1).
Regarding claim 31, Basin et al teaches the optoelectronic component of claim 27. Basin et al. further teaches a molded LED/phosphor plate package in which a reflective molded body surrounds the chip and cover body and is thinned to expose the top surface.
Minamio et al. teaches forming a recess/cavity in resin using an upper mold projection, with the recess delimited by side surfaces including stepped and tapered portions.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the molded body of Basin et al. creating a recess as taught by Minamio et al. to form a controlled cavity around the cover body and to shape the molded body with oblique side faces, thereby achieving predictable optical and packaging benefits.
Regarding claim 32, Basin in view of Minamio et al. disclose the optoelectronic component of claim 31.
Basin et al. teaches surface blasting of a molded body, and Minamio et al. teaches a molded cavity with side surfaces formed by the resin.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to form the side faces of the cavity as rough surfaces as a result of molding and post-processing, particularly where the surface is shaped by a projection and subsequently exposed or modified by a material-removal step, because Basin teaches a roughen surface increases light extraction (¶0007).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Basin et al. as applied to claim 27 above, further in view of Basin ‘559 (US 2017/0133559 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Basin et al. discloses the optoelectronic component of claim 27.
Basin et al. discloses an optoelectronic device including a semiconductor light emitting element and a phosphor plate arranged above the semiconductor light emitting element, wherein the phosphor plate functions as a wavelength converting member attached to the light emitting device. (See Basin et al., e.g., Abstract, ¶¶ 0008-0011, 0032-0036, and FIGS. 1-6) Basin et al. further teaches that the wavelength converting structure is positioned relative to the semiconductor light emitting device so as to receive light emitted by the device and convert the wavelength of the emitted light.
Basin ‘559 discloses a lighting structure including a semiconductor light emitting device and a flat wavelength converting element attached to the semiconductor light emitting device, the flat wavelength converting element including a wavelength converting layer formed on a transparent layer. (See Basin ‘559, e.g., Abstract, ¶¶ 0009, 0032-0036, and FIGS. 3-4) The transparent layer serves as a carrier substrate for the wavelength converting layer, and the wavelength converting layer is arranged on the side facing toward the semiconductor light emitting device so as to absorb light emitted by the device and emit light of a different wavelength.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the wavelength converting structure of Basin et al. to include the carrier-supported wavelength converting element of Basin ‘559, in order to provide a more controlled and mechanically robust converter arrangement, improve handling and alignment, and facilitate efficient wavelength conversion in a compact light-emitting package. Such a modification would have yielded the claimed cover body comprising a carrier on which a converter is arranged on the side facing toward the semiconductor chip.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUE A PURVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1236. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0830 to 1630.
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.
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.
/SUE A PURVIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights