DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Response to Amendment/Restriction
Applicant’s election of Group I, Species 3 (Figure 5), and claims 16-24 in the reply filed on September 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Further, as set forth in the Restriction Requirement on July 22, 2026, claim 18 is directed to a further embodiment as disclosed in [0061] and [0062], claim 19 is directed to a further embodiment as disclosed in [0055], and claim 24 is directed to a further embodiment as disclosed in [0058] and [0059].
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 16-17 and 21-23 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. As to claim 16, the limitations “light emitting elements”, “a light emitting element”, “adjacent light emitting elements”, and “at least some of the structures” are recited multiple times without proper antecedent basis. It is not clear whether they refer the same or different light emitting elements and structures. Thus, the limitations render the claims indefinite and clarification is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0118777 A1 to Seo et al. (“Seo”).
As to claim 16, Seo discloses a method for producing an array of light emitting elements, the method comprising: providing a growth substrate (31, 32); applying a mask (33) having a plurality of apertures (H) to the growth substrate (31, 32); growing structures (35a) into the apertures (H); and processing at least some of the structures (35a) into light emitting elements (35), wherein adjacent apertures (H) are arranged at a first distance (between 33a) to each other, wherein adjacent light emitting elements (35) are arranged at a second distance (at e2) to each other, wherein the second distance (at e2) is greater than the first distance (between 33a), wherein at least some of the structures (35a) are reduced in area (e2) and the reduced structures (35a) are processed into light emitting elements (35), and wherein the structures (35a) are reduced in area by material removal (See Fig. 3, Fig. 7, ¶ 0085, ¶ 0087, ¶ 0091, ¶ 0097, ¶ 0123, ¶ 0124, ¶ 0127, ¶ 0129). As to claim 17, Seo further discloses only some of the structures (35a) are processed into light emitting elements (35) (See Fig. 7). As to claim 21, Seo further discloses wherein at least one (at e2) of the structures (35a), which is not processed into a light emitting element (35), is arranged between two adjacent light emitting elements (35) (See Fig. 7).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0118777 A1 to Seo et al. (“Seo”) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0130887 A1 to Yu et al. (“Yu”). The teaching of Seo has been discussed above. As to claim 22, although Seo discloses the light emitting elements (35) (See Fig. 7), Seo does not further disclose wherein at least one of the structures, which is not processed into a light emitting element, is processed into a light detecting element. However, Yu does disclose a light detecting element (¶ 0109 detector) is formed with the light emitting elements (570) (See Fig. 5, ¶ 0109). In view of teaching of Yu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Seo to have wherein at least one of the structures, which is not processed into a light emitting element, is processed into a light detecting element because a fully integrated solution to include a complete set of components with light source, analog signal processing, light detection, CMOS control circuit, SOS circuit all-in-one sapphire platform to achieve high-performance low-cost mixed-signal optical links is obtained (See ¶ 0109). As to claim 23, although Seo discloses the light emitting elements (35) (See Fig. 7), Seo does not further disclose wherein at least one of the structures, which is not processed into a light emitting element, is processed into a non-optical electronic element.
However, Yu does disclose a non-optical electronic element (530, 540, 550, 560) is formed with the light emitting elements (570) (See Fig. 5, ¶ 0109). In view of teaching of Yu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Seo to have wherein at least one of the structures, which is not processed into a light emitting element, is processed into a non-optical electronic element because a fully integrated solution to include a complete set of components with light source, analog signal processing, light detection, CMOS control circuit, SOS circuit all-in-one sapphire platform to achieve high-performance low-cost mixed-signal optical links is obtained (See ¶ 0109).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12-6.
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, JOSHUA BENITEZ can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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.
/DAVID CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights