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
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(s) 1-9, 11-12, 14-17, 19, 21, 23 and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al., US 2017/0090058.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses (figs. 3-13 and related text) a micro-light emitting diode (LED) structure, comprising: a substrate (310); a plurality of micro-LEDs (320) formed above the substrate (310), wherein each of the plurality of micro-LEDs comprises: a metal layer (317) formed above the substrate; and a light emitting layer (solid black bar [0040]) formed above the metal layer (317); an insulating layer (1310) continuously covering the plurality of micro-LEDs (320) and including a plurality of openings (fig. 13A) each exposing a portion of the light emitting layer of a corresponding micro-LED; (320) a transparent conductive layer (1320) above the insulating layer and electrically connected to the light emitting layer of each corresponding micro-LED via the openings of the insulating layer [0054]; and a light-isolating wall (1335/1337) formed on the transparent conductive layer (fig. 13C) between adjacent micro-LEDs (320), the light-isolating wall being formed of non-transparent material or metal (micro reflector 1335 metal [0054]).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses (fig. 15) a plurality of micro-lenses (1570) formed above plurality of micro-LEDs (320).
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses each micro-lens (1570) is vertically aligned with a corresponding micro-LED (320, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses a transparent isolation layer (1560) above the plurality of micro-LEDs (320), and formed between the plurality of micro-lenses (1570) and the plurality of micro-LEDs (320, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 5, Chen discloses the transparent isolation layer (1560) includes an exposed surface formed between adjacent micro-lenses (1570) and not covered by the plurality of micro-lenses (1570, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 6, Chen discloses a profile of the light emitting layer vertically projected on a top surface of the substrate is surrounded by a profile of the metal layer vertically projected on the top surface of the substrate (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 7, Chen discloses the insulating layer includes at least one protrusion (L-shape 1310) protruding in a direction away from the substrate (310), the protrusion surrounding at least one of the plurality of openings of the insulating layer (1310, fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 8, Chen discloses the insulating layer (1310) includes at least one step structure corresponding to the metal layer (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 9, Chen discloses the plurality of micro-LEDs are arranged side by side (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 11, Chen discloses a height of the light-isolating wall (1335/1337) is greater than a height of the adjacent micro-LEDs (320).
Regarding claim 12, Chen discloses the light isolating light-isolating wall (1335/1337) is formed under the exposed surface of the transparent isolation layer (1560, fig. 15).
Regarding claim 14, Chen discloses wherein the plurality of micro-LEDs are configured to emit light having different colors ([0037]).
Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses the plurality of micro-LEDs are arranged in an array ([0040]).
Regarding claim 16, Chen discloses the plurality of micro-LEDs is configured to emit light with a color selected from red, green, blue, yellow (RGB [0034]).
Regarding claim 17, Chen discloses a pixel is formed by an array of the plurality of micro-LEDs [0034].
Regarding claim 19, Chen discloses the plurality of micro-LEDs are formed to have the same size (fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses a drive circuit (315) configured to control the plurality of micro- LEDs [0040]; and an interconnection layer electrically connected to the metal layer (317) of each of the plurality of micro-LEDs [0040].
Regarding claim 23, Chen discloses the insulating layer (1310) is formed at least at a sidewall of one of the plurality of micro-LEDs (320, fig. 13A).
Regarding claim 32, Chen discloses a bottom of the light-isolating wall (1335/1337) is lower than a bottom surface of the light emitting layer (solid black bar [0040], fig. 13C).
Regarding claim 33, Chen discloses a bottom of the transparent conductive layer (1320) is lower than a bottom surface of the light emitting layer (solid black bar [0040], fig. 13C ).
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) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view Hiroyama, 2009/0166644.
Regarding claim 13, Chen does not disclose the plurality of micro-LEDs are configured to emit light having the same color.
Hiroyama discloses the plurality of micro-LEDs are configured to emit light having the same color ([0089], white light) in order to provide a monolithic light emitting device that is excellent in color tone stability [0010].
Chen and Hiroyama are analogous art because they both are directed light emitting device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen with the specific features as taught by Hiroyama because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chen to include the micro-LEDs as taught by Hiroyama in order to provide a monolithic light emitting device that is excellent in color tone stability [0010].
Claim(s) 22, 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view Hsia et al., US 20120181568.
Regarding claim 22, Chen does not disclose the metal layer contacts an entirety of a bottom surface of the light emitting layer.
Hsia discloses (fig. 5 and related text) a metal (136) contacts (electrical) an entirety of a bottom surface of the light emitting layer (112) in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Chen and Hsia are analogous art because they both are directed light emitting device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen with the specific features as taught by Hsia because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chen to include the metal layer as taught by Hsia in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Regarding claim 24, Chen does not disclose the insulating layer is further formed on a surface of the sidewall of the metal layer.
Hsia discloses the insulating layer (140) is formed on a surface of the sidewall of the metal layer (136, fig. 5) in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Chen and Hsia are analogous art because they both are directed light emitting device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen with the specific features as taught by Hsia because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chen to include the insulating layer as taught by Hsia in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Regarding claim 25, Chen as modified by Hsia discloses the insulating layer (140, Hsia) is further formed on the substrate (126) at a side of the metal layer (136).
Regarding claim 26, Chen does not disclose the light emitting layer comprises multiple layers.
Hsia discloses a light emitting layer comprising multiple quantum layers ([00100]) in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Chen and Hsia are analogous art because they both are directed light emitting device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen with the specific features as taught by Hsia because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chen to include the multiple quantum layers as taught by Hsia in order to make LED packaging structures and methods that are capable of providing electrical connections for LEDs with a small form factor while reducing manufacturing time and cost [0002].
Claim(s) 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Regarding claims 29-31, Chen does not disclose a size of a top surface area of the metal layer is greater than a size of a bottom surface area of the light emitting layer, a size of a top surface area of the metal layer is the same as a size of a bottom surface area of the light emitting layer or the openings of the insulating layer exposes an entirety of a top surface of the light emitting layer
Parameters such as size of layer, surface area or surface structure in the art of semiconductor are subject to routine experimentation an optimization to achieve the desired device characteristic during fabrication.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, on the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adjust the structure of Chen as claimed in order to design a light emitting device that requires such specific requirement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9, 11-28 and 29-33 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
/SAMUEL A GEBREMARIAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights