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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 11-19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng (US 20240213412) in view of Check (US 20230395747 )
Meng discloses
1. A light-emitting diode, comprising:
a semiconductor epitaxial stack layer, having a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other, and comprising a first conductivity type semiconductor layer (108), an active layer (107) and a second conductivity type semiconductor layer (106) sequentially stacked in a direction from the first surface to the second surface, wherein the first surface is a light-emitting surface (par. 22);
a current spreading layer (105), located on a side of the second surface of the semiconductor epitaxial stack layer, wherein the current spreading layer is formed as a pattern current spreading layer, the pattern current spreading layer defines a plurality of platform regions (“non-recess regions”), and recessed regions are defined around each of the plurality of platform regions (Figs. 2-8; par. 22, 40);
an ohmic contact layer (104), located on a side of the plurality of platform regions facing away from the second surface;
a light-transmissive dielectric layer (103), located on a side of the ohmic contact layer facing away from the semiconductor epitaxial stack layer, and filled into the recessed regions, wherein the light-transmissive dielectric layer has a plurality of openings (V1) to define a plurality of conductive through holes (par. 28, 34: reflection layer 102 is made of conductive metal and fills the through holes V1, therefore the openings V1 are conductive through holes); and
a reflecting layer (102), disposed on the light-transmissive dielectric layer, and filled into the plurality of conductive through holes (V1), wherein the reflecting layer is electrically connected to the ohmic contact layer (103) (Figs. 2-8; par. 22).
Meng further discloses that “the ohmic contact layer 104 has a patterned structure. The ohmic contact layer 104 may have a regular pattern or an irregular pattern” (par. 35) and the recess regions or non-recess regions may have a shape such as circular, semicircular, triangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, etc. such that when each of the non-recess regions have a shape, i.e. circular, the recess regions surround the circular non-recess regions (par. 40)
Meng fails to show multiple platform regions such that a distance between geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions within the plurality of platform regions is equal, the distance between the geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions within the plurality of platform regions is 1.2 to 3.2 times of a diameter of the circle
Check discloses an LED 10, 22 comprising a region current spreading layer 18 are provided as circular regions of decreasing diameter with distance away from the n-contact interconnects 52. In other embodiments, the regions of the current spreading layer 18 may embody other shapes, such as squares, ovals, rectangles, hexagons, octagons, etc. … FIG. 5A is a view of the LED chip 54 of FIG. 4 illustrating a pattern of various regions 18-1, 18-2 of the current spreading layer 18. Locations of the n-contact interconnects 52 are shown as larger areas that are devoid of the current spreading layer regions 18-1, 18-2. As illustrated, the regions 18-1 that are closest to the n-contact interconnects 52 have larger diameters than the regions 18-2 that are spaced farther from the n-contact interconnects 52. In this manner, increased current spreading and injection may be provided along edges of the p-type layer 26 of FIG. 2 that are near the n-contact interconnects 52 (Figs. 2-6, par. 52-53).
Furthermore, as seen in Fig. 4, the distance between geometric centers of two adjacent platform regions 18 being substantially equal and at least greater than a diameter of a platform region 18 as illustrated below.
PNG
media_image1.png
314
755
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to combine the teachings of Check and Meng by making a current spreading layer having circular platform regions in a light emitting diode assembly so that the spreading of the current yields the desired characteristics. It would have also been obvious that although silent to “equal” in distance between the geometric centers, the term “pattern” in both Meng and Check typically suggests repeating and equal distance between the elements. Furthermore, it has been recognized that rearrangement of parts, i.e. centers, is an obvious extension of the prior art; see MPEP 2144.04
wherein a cross-sectional shape of each of the plurality of platform regions is a circle or a regular polygon (Meng, par. 40; Check, Fig. 4-6, par. 52-53)
4.1, wherein the distance between the geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions within the plurality of platform regions is D, a circle is drawn with a geometric center of any one of the plurality of platform regions as a center and the distance D as a radius, geometric centers of 2k of the plurality of platform regions are located on the circle, and k is a natural number greater than or equal to 1 (Meng is silent to the arrangement of equal distance as recited; however, Figs. 4-5 of Check show a pattern in which the platforms are approximately equal to each other; thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to extend the prior art to clearly make the centers on a circle as desirable; furthermore, it has been recognized that rearrangement of parts, i.e. centers or through holes, is an obvious extension of the prior art; see MPEP 2144.04).
6.1, wherein a projection area of the plurality of platform regions on the second surface is 5% to 50% of a surface area of the current spreading layer (Meng, par. 22, 43: “the area of the second contacting surface 104b of the ohmic contact layer 104 accounts for 2% to 60% of the area of the second surface (S2)”).
7.1, Meng describes “non-recess region of the current spreading layer 105 has a thickness greater than a thickness of the recess region of the current spreading layer 105”.
Meng is silent to a depth of each of the recessed regions is ⅓ to ⅔ of a thickness of the current spreading layer. However, courts have recognized that changing size and shape is an obvious extension of the prior art. MPEP 2144.04. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to extend the prior art’s teachings to arrive at the design choice of desired depth of recessed regions.
8.1, wherein the plurality of platform regions are defined in the current spreading layer, a depth of each of the recessed regions is equal to a thickness of the current spreading layer (Meng, Fig. 2; Check, Fig. 2)
11.1, further comprising: a substrate (100), located on a side of the reflecting layer facing away from the second surface; a metal bonding layer (101), located between the substrate and the reflecting layer; and a second electrode (110), located on a side of the substrate facing away from the second surface, and electrically connected to the second conductivity type semiconductor layer (Meng, par. 22, 38: electrodes 109 and 110 are on top and bottom so as to achieve vertical flow of current through the semiconductor epitaxial structure, which inherently implies that electrical current flows between these electrodes to produce energy in terms of light; see attached NPL ”How does an LED work?” and associated Youtube video https://youtu.be/No8PZsLnjZU from the NPL)
12.1, Meng is silent to wherein a sidewall of each of the plurality of platform regions is a vertical sidewall. However, Meng in at least Fig. 2 and Check in Fig. 2 show the sidewalls are a slight incline from vertical. The courts have recognized that changing size and shape is an obvious extension of the prior art. MPEP 2144.04. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to extend the prior art’s teachings to arrive at the design choice of vertical wall.
13.1, wherein a sidewall of each of the plurality of platform regions is an inclined sidewall (Meng, Figs. 2-3; Check, Fig. 2).
14.13, Meng/Check discloses wherein an opening size of a side (that contacts the reflective interconnect 40 in Check, Fig. 2) of each of the plurality of platform regions facing away from the second surface (bottom surface of p-type layer 26) is smaller than a bottom size of a side (that contacts the p layer 26) of the plurality of platform regions proximate to the second surface (Check, Fig. 2, par. 52: “regions of the current spreading layer 18 are provided as circular regions of decreasing diameter with distance away from the n-contact interconnects 52”)
15.7, wherein the thickness of the current spreading layer is in a range of 0.02 μm to 1.5 μm (Meng, par. 26).
16.1, wherein a thickness of the light-transmissive dielectric layer is above 100 nm, and transmittance of the light-transmissive dielectric layer is at least 70% (Meng, par. 31).
17.1, wherein a cross-section area of the ohmic contact layer (104) is greater than a cross-section area the plurality of conductive through holes (V1) of the light-transmissive dielectric layer (Meng, Fig. 2, par. 36, 43).
18.1, wherein a reflectivity of the reflecting layer is above 70%, and a material of the reflecting layer comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of silver (Ag), nickel (Ni), aluminum (Al), rhodium (Rh), palladium (Pd), iridium (Ir), ruthenium (Ru), magnesium (Mg), titanium (Ti), chromium (Cr), zinc (Zn), platinum (Pt), gold (Au), and hafnium (Hf) (Meng, par. 28)
19. A light-emitting device, comprising a circuit board, and at least one light-emitting element located on the circuit board, wherein the at least one light-emitting element comprises the light-emitting diode as claimed in claim 1 (Check, par. 49)
21.1, wherein the current spreading layer comprises gallium phosphide (GaP) and has a doping concentration in a range of 5x1017 per cubic centimeter (5E17/cm3) to 5E18/cm3 (Meng, par. 26)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng (US 20240213412)/ Check (US 20230395747 ) further in view of Wang (CN 117276443 A)
Re claim 3.1, Meng discloses “preferably the current spreading layer 105 of material is GaP, the thickness is 0.02 to 1.5 microns, more preferably the thickness of the current spreading layer 105 is 0.02 to 0.8 microns … horizontal width size of the transparent dielectric layer 103 is 2 to 10 microns, more preferably 2 to 6 microns”,
Meng is silent to wherein the distance between the geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions within the plurality of platform regions is in a range of 10 μm to 30 μm.
Wang discloses in relation to Fig. 1 that is showing the current spreading layer 133 comprising holes 15 and surrounding platform regions. The distance between the geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions is approximately W2 (Fig. 2). Wang further discloses “Preferably, the distance W2 between the centers of two adjacent current expansion holes 1211 in the smallest repeating unit in the array is 10 μm to 20 μm.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to extend the prior art teachings to achieve desired characteristics. Furthermore, Meng’s teaching above implies that the dimensioning of the layers can be within the skills of one of ordinary skill in the art consistent with court holding; see MPEP 2144.04.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng (US 20240213412) / Check (US 20230395747 ) further in view of Lu (CN 117117057)
Re claim 9.1, further comprising a first electrode located on a side of the first surface and electrically connected to the first conductivity type semiconductor layer, wherein the first electrode comprises a pad electrode and expansion electrodes, the expansion electrodes are distributed on the side of the first surface, and when projected toward the first surface, projections of the expansion electrodes and the pad electrode do not overlap with a projection of the plurality of platform regions of the current spreading layer (Meng, par. 37: The first electrode 109 is disposed on the light exiting surface (i.e., the first surface (S1)) of the semiconductor epitaxial structure. In some embodiments, the first electrode 109 includes a pad electrode and an extension electrode (not shown)”; Fig. 1-4 show electrode 109 does not overlap the platform regions; Meng is silent to multiple expansion electrodes not overlapping a projection of platform regions; Lu discloses an LED structure comprising current spreading layer 122 having platform regions where contacts are made with the second semiconductor layer 113 of the epitaxial structure 110; Lu further discloses electrodes 150 are not entirely overlapped with these platform regions; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Lu to prevent current crowding and enable uniform current spreading).
10.9, wherein a minimum spacing distance between the projections of the expansion electrodes and projections of geometric centers of the plurality of platform regions is 1.2 to 3.2 times of a diameter of the circle (Meng is silent to the distance between projections of the expansion electrodes and the geometric centers of any two adjacent platform regions within the plurality of platform regions is 1.2 to 3.2 times of a diameter of the circle; Furthermore, as seen in Fig. 4, the distance between geometric centers of two adjacent platform regions 18 being substantially equal and at least greater than a diameter of a platform region 18 as discussed above; moreover, courts have recognized that changing size and shape is an obvious extension of the prior art. MPEP 2144.04. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to extend the prior art’s teachings to arrive at the design choice of circular regions having geometric centers that are 1.2-3.2 times of the circle diameter)
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng (CN 115986028 A) / Check (US 20230395747 ) in view of Wu (US 20040227146)
Re claim 20, Meng/Check disclose the LED chip 22 is arranged for flip-chip mounting and the p-contact 46 and n-contact 48 are configured to be mounted or bonded to a surface (par. 49)
Meng/Check is silent to wherein an electrode of the light-emitting diode is fixedly connected to a circuit layer of the circuit board through soldering, and another electrode of the light-emitting diode is connected to the circuit layer of the circuit board through a wire bonding process
Wu discloses a circuit board substrate 10 where LED 11 is mounted. [0004] FIG. 1 shows a prior art for mounting LEDs, such as LED 11, on a display panel. The LED 11 is mounted on a substrate 10, which is lined with printed circuits 101, 102. The top electrode of the LED 11 is wire bonded to circuit 101 with solder and the bottom electrode of LED 11 is soldered to the circuit 102.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Wu so that the circuit board can support the LED and enable connection of the LED with other circuit elements.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Check teaches away from the instant application.
In response to applicant's argument that Check is non-uniform gradient arrangements, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, it has been widely held that changing sizes and rearrangement or parts are obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04. Furthermore, KSR has held that “it is error to apply TSM test as rigid and mandatory formula that limits obviousness analysis … Common sense teaches, however, that familiar items may have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes, and in many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle … a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under §103 … If a person of ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation, §103 likely bars its patentability”.
With respect to the prior art, Check’s teachings suggest that the platform regions are well known to arranged equal distance from each other and each separation distance is at least a platform region’s diameter in length. Thus, it is believed that modifying Meng with Check’s and the court’s teachings would have been a predictable variation would also have been obvious to try.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN MAI whose telephone number is (571)272-8283. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/THIEN T MAI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights