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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 21 recites the new limitation “the first layer, the second layer, the third layer, and the fourth layer are configured to absorb greater than 90% of light in their respective wavelength bands so that their overlapping with each other is minimized.” This limitation lacks support in the disclosure. The instant specification (see para. [0040]) discloses that the absorption of each layer is on the order of 80-85%, which does not encompass the claimed 90% absorption. Thus, the limitation has introduced new matter to the claim. The Examiner suggests amending the claim to instead require 80-85% absorption.
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.
Claim 21 is 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 21 recites the new limitation “the first layer, the second layer, the third layer, and the fourth layer are configured to absorb greater than 90% of light in their respective wavelength bands so that their overlapping with each other is minimized.” The underlined portion of the limitation is indefinite. The claim is unclear as to what overlapping is supposedly being minimized, and how the overlapping is related to the absorption percentage claimed.
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 1-2 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansson (US 2010/0102409), Kamp et al. (“Kamp” US Pub. 2022/0165923), Park et al. (“Park” US 2022/0102573), Yang et al. (“Yang” US 2006/0216859), and Munshi et al. (“Munshi” US 2022/0352398).
Regarding claim 1, Hansson discloses:
A charge-coupled device (CCD) (10-13, Figure 1) comprising:
a primary device (11-13) configured to capture visible light (para. [0047]-[0049]) and comprising:
a first layer (13) comprising a first semiconductor material (para. [0052]); and
a second layer (12, upper portion) comprising a second semiconductor material (para. [0052]); and
a secondary device (10) configured to capture near-infrared (IR) light (para. [0051], red sensor layer 10 can be a layer sensitive to red and infrared light) and comprising:
a third layer (10, upper portion) comprising a third semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and positioned such that the second layer (12, upper portion) is between the first layer (13) and the third layer (10, upper portion, see Figure 1); and
a fourth layer (10, lower portion) comprising a fourth semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and positioned such that the third layer (10, upper portion) is between the second layer (12, upper portion) and the fourth layer (10, lower portion, see Figure 1),
wherein the CCD (10-13) is absent a reflector that is tuned to a band or is a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) (layers 10-13 are light absorbing/sensing layers and thus are not designed as reflectors tuned to a band or a DBR).
Hansson does not disclose:
a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer positioned on the first layer and comprising a fluoride material.
Kamp discloses:
a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer (22-1, 22-2) positioned on the first layer (12, shown in Figure 1) and comprising a fluoride material (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Kamp into the teachings of Hansson to include a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer positioned above the first layer and comprising a fluoride material for the purpose of reducing reflection or refraction of light at an interface without abrupt changes of indices of refraction, such materials include magnesium fluoride and cerium fluoride (Kamp, para. [0051]).
In the event that Hansson does not disclose that the image sensor of Figure 1 is absent a reflector, which the examiner does not concede, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a reflector is not an essential component to a CCD, as disclosed by Munshi (para. [0159]): “in [a] photodetector…the reflective layer is not essential”).
Hansson, Kamp, and Munshi do not explicitly disclose that the first AR coating layer and the first layer, the first layer and the second layer, the second layer and the third layer, or the third layer and the fourth layer are bonded together with epoxy.
However, Park discloses a light detecting device 200, in Figure 4, with a first light absorbing layer 230 (para. [0078]) that absorbs light in the visible range (para. [0078]), and a second layer (210) bonded to the first layer (230) via an adhesive (211).
One having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the addition of an epoxy adhesive layer between layers of the device would improve mechanical stability of the device by adhering layers together that would otherwise not adhere will together. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to improve the device using the known technique of adhesive layers, to achieve the predictable result of avoiding delamination of layers in the device. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Additionally, while Park does not explicitly disclose that the adhesive is an epoxy material, Yang discloses that epoxy is a commonly used adhesive in the art (see Yang, para. [0018]), and the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose is prima facie obvious. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 2, Hansson does not disclose:
[The CCD of claim 1], wherein the first AR coating layer comprises:
a first sub-layer comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2); and
a second sub-layer positioned between the first sub-layer and the first layer and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3).
Kamp discloses:
The CCD of claim 1, wherein the first AR coating layer (22-1, 22-2) comprises:
a first sub-layer (22-1) comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2) (para. [0056]); and
a second sub-layer (22-2, para. [0056]) positioned between the first sub-layer (22-1) and the first layer (12, shown in Figure 1) and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Kamp into the teachings of Hansson to include wherein the first AR coating layer comprises: a first sub-layer comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2); and a second sub-layer positioned between the first sub-layer and the first layer and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) for the purpose of reducing reflection or refraction of light at an interface with magnesium fluoride and cerium fluoride (Kamp, para. [0051]).
Regarding claim 5, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 1, wherein the primary device (11-13) is further configured to capture near-IR light (para. [0044] discloses that the device of Figure 1 is designed to receive light from a top side thereof, and since the primary device, 11-13, is above the secondary device 10, which is sensitive to near-IR light, see above, and thus receives light prior to the secondary device, the primary device must also capture near-IR light, or else no near-IR light would be sensed by the secondary device layers below the primary device layers, the examiner notes that “captures” here is interpreted to mean that the primary device allows passage of near IR light through its layers in order for the secondary device to detect the near IR light).
Regarding claim 6, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 1, wherein the CCD (Figure 1) is configured to capture light with wavelengths in a 300-2,000 nanometer (nm) range (para. [0047]-[0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 1, wherein the primary device (11-13) further comprises a fifth layer (12, lower portion),
wherein the fifth layer (12, lower portion) comprises a fifth semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and wherein the fifth layer is positioned between the second layer (12, upper portion) and the third layer (10, upper portion, see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 8, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 7, wherein the primary device (11-13) further comprises a sixth layer (11, upper portion),
wherein the sixth layer (11, upper portion) comprises a sixth semiconductor material (para. [0052]), and wherein the sixth layer (11, upper portion) is positioned between the fifth layer (12, lower portion) and the third layer (10, upper portion, see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 9, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 8, wherein the primary device (11-13) further comprises a seventh layer (11, lower portion), wherein the seventh layer (11, lower portion) comprises a seventh semiconductor material (para. [0052]), and wherein the seventh layer (11, lower portion) is positioned between the sixth layer (11, upper portion) and the third layer (10, upper portion, see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 1, wherein the CCD is configured to function as a camera (para. [0002], [0043]).
Claims 21-22 and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansson (US 2010/0102409), Kamp et al. (“Kamp” US Pub. 2022/0165923), and Munshi et al. (“Munshi” US 2022/0352398).
Regarding claim 21, Hansson discloses:
A charge-coupled device (CCD) (Figure 1) comprising:
a primary device (layers 12 and 13, Figure 1) comprising:
a first layer (13, para. [0044]) comprising a first semiconductor material (para. [0045]) and configured to:
receive light; form a first electrical signal based on a first portion of the light that absorbs in the first layer (13, para. [0072] discloses that read out layers may be present); and transmit a first remaining portion of the light (element 13 absorbs only UV light, so light with longer wavelengths than UV light is transmitted through); and
a second layer (12, para. [0044]) comprising a second semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and configured to:
receive the first remaining portion from the first layer (13); form a second electrical signal based on a second portion of the first remaining portion that absorbs in the second layer (12, para. [0072] discloses that read out layers may be present); and transmit a second remaining portion of the first remaining portion (element 12 senses/absorbs blue light, so light with longer wavelengths than blue light is transmitted through; and
a secondary device (layers 10 and 11, Figure 1) configured to capture near-infrared (IR) light (para. [0051], layer 10 is sensitive to both red and infrared light) and comprising:
a third layer (11, para. [0044]) comprising a third semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and configured to:
receive the second remaining portion from the second layer (12); form a third electrical signal based on a third portion of the second remaining portion that absorbs in the third layer (11, para. [0072] discloses that read out layers may be present); and transmit a third remaining portion of the second remaining portion (element 11 absorbs green light, so light with longer wavelengths than green light is transmitted through);
and a fourth layer (10, para. [0044]) comprising a fourth semiconductor material (para. [0052]) and configured to:
receive the third remaining portion from the third layer (11); and form a fourth electrical signal based on a fourth portion of the third remaining portion that absorbs in the fourth layer (10, para. [0072] discloses that read out layers may be present),
wherein the CCD is absent a reflector that is tuned to a band or is a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) (no reflector layer tuned to a band or a DBR is present in Figure 1), and
wherein the first layer (13), the second layer (12), the third layer (11), and the fourth layer (10) are configured to absorb greater than 90% of light in their respective wavelength bands so that their overlapping with each other is minimized (Hansson discloses the same structure and materials of the first through fourth layers as required by the claim, i.e. semiconductor materials sequentially stacked, thus would perform the function of absorbing at least 90% of the light in their respective wavelength bands, which would result in minimal bandgap overlap).
Hansson does not disclose:
a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer positioned on the first layer and comprising a fluoride material.
Kamp discloses:
a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer (22-1, 22-2) positioned on the first layer (12, shown in Figure 1) and comprising a fluoride material (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Kamp into the teachings of Hansson to include a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer positioned above the first layer and comprising a fluoride material for the purpose of reducing reflection or refraction of light at an interface without abrupt changes of indices of refraction, such materials include magnesium fluoride and cerium fluoride (Kamp et al., para. [0051]).
In the event that Hansson does not disclose that the image sensor of Figure 1 is absent a reflector, which the examiner does not concede, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a reflector is not an essential component to a CCD, as disclosed by Munshi (para. [0159]): “in [a] photodetector…the reflective layer is not essential”).
It is the Examiner’s position that the new limitation “wherein the first layer, the second layer, the third layer, and the fourth layer are configured to absorb greater than 90% of light in their respective wavelength bands so that their overlapping with each other is minimized” is a functional limitation of the apparatus claimed. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. See MPEP 2114(I) and 2112.01.
Regarding claim 22, Hansson does not disclose:
[The CCD of claim 21], wherein the first AR coating layer comprises:
a first sub-layer comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2); and
a second sub-layer positioned between the first sub-layer and the first layer and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3).
Kamp discloses:
The CCD of claim 21, wherein the first AR coating layer (22-1, 22-2) comprises:
a first sub-layer (22-1) comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2) (para. [0056]); and
a second sub-layer (22-2, para. [0056]) positioned between the first sub-layer (22-1) and the first layer (12, shown in Figure 1) and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Kamp into the teachings of Hansson to include wherein the first AR coating layer comprises: a first sub-layer comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2); and a second sub-layer positioned between the first sub-layer and the first layer and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) for the purpose of reducing reflection or refraction of light at an interface without abrupt changes of indices of refraction, such materials include magnesium fluoride and cerium fluoride (Kamp et al., para. [0051]).
Regarding claim 24, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 21, wherein the primary device (12, 13) is configured to capture visible light and near-infrared (IR) light with wavelengths in a 300-1,000 nanometer (nm) range (para. [0047], layer 13 absorbs UV light which has wavelengths in the 100-400 nanometer range).
Regarding claim 25, Hansson discloses:
The CCD of claim 21, wherein the secondary device is configured to capture near-infrared (IR) light with wavelengths in a 1,000-2,000 nanometer (nm) range.
Regarding claim 26, Hansson discloses:
The CCD (Figure 1) of claim 21, wherein the secondary device (layers 10 and 11) is configured to capture near- infrared (IR) light with wavelengths in a 1,000-2,000 nanometer (nm) range (para. [0051] discloses that layer 10 may be a layer sensitive to both infrared light and red light, which will capture light in the infrared wavelength range and red wavelength range which together is 620-2,500 nm).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (“Park” US 2022/0102573), Huang et al. (“Huang” US Patent No. 11,862,938), Kang (US 2008/0157254), Ettenberg (US Patent No. 9,935,151), Hsu (US 2010/0212729), and Munshi et al. (“Munshi” US 2022/0352398).
Regarding claim 16, Park discloses:
A charge-coupled device (CCD) comprising:
a primary device comprising:
a first layer (440, Figure 12) consisting of gallium phosphide (para. [0107] discloses 440 as being composed of Ga and P, further discussed above under Response to Arguments) (GaP);
a second layer (421) positioned below the first layer, directly connected to the first layer (440, shown in Figure 12), and consisting of indium gallium phosphide (para. [0108] discloses 421 as being composed of In, Ga, and P) (InGaP);
a third layer (430) positioned below the second layer (421, shown in Figure 12), directly connected to the second layer (421, shown in Figure 12), and consisting of gallium arsenide (para. [0110] discloses 430 as being composed of Ga and As) (GaAs);
a fourth layer (422) positioned below the third layer (430, shown in Figure 12), directly connected to the third layer (430, shown in Figure 12), consisting of indium phosphide (para. [0111] discloses 442 as being composed of In and P) (InP).
wherein the CCD is absent a reflector that is tuned to a band or is a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) (Park does not disclose that the image sensor of Figure 9 comprises or includes a reflector tuned to a band or a DBR, and thus is absent a reflector tuned to a band or a DBR).
Park does not disclose:
a fifth layer positioned below the fourth layer, directly connected to the fourth layer, and consisting of indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP);
a secondary device comprising:
a sixth layer positioned below the fifth layer and consisting of gallium antimonide (GaSb); and
a seventh layer positioned below the sixth layer, directly connected to the sixth layer, and consisting of indium arsenide (InAs).
Huang discloses:
a fifth layer (upper portion of lower S1, below active layer 20, Table 5, Figure 10a, col 15 lines 59-67) positioned below the fourth layer (upper S1 in Figure 10a), directly connected to the fourth layer, and consisting of indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP) (in Table 5);
a secondary device comprising:
a sixth layer (middle portion of lower S1, below active layer 20, Table 5, col 15 lines 59-67) positioned below the fifth layer (shown in Figure 10a, the fifth layer is the upper portion of the lower S1) and consisting of gallium antimonide (GaSb) (in Table 5);
and a seventh layer (lower portion of S1 below active layer 20, Table 5, col 15 lines 59-67) positioned below the sixth layer (shown in Figure 10a, lower portion of S1 is below the middle portion of S1), directly connected to the sixth layer, and consisting of indium arsenide (InAs) (in Table 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Huang into the teachings of Park to include a fifth layer positioned below the fourth layer and comprising indium gallium arsenide phosphide (InGaAsP); a sixth layer positioned below the fifth layer and comprising gallium antimonide (GaSb); and a seventh layer positioned below the sixth layer and comprising indium arsenide (InAs) because adjusting concentrations, or the stoichiometric balance, of III-V semiconductor materials within layers of a device sensitive to light changes lattice constants of said layers, thus tuning the layers’ bandgaps to be sensitive to certain wavelengths of light (as discussed Huang in column 9, lines 10-16) in order to improve photoelectronic conversion efficiency (Kang, para. [0029]).
In the event that Park does not disclose that the image sensor of Figure 10a is absent a reflector, which the examiner does not concede, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a reflector is not an essential component to a CCD, as disclosed by Munshi (para. [0159]): “in [a] photodetector…the reflective layer is not essential.”
Park does not explicitly disclose that the third layer is lattice matched to the second layer, and that the fifth layer is lattice matched to the fourth layer.
However, Ettenberg discloses a light sensitive device with lattice matched III-V semiconductor layers (see col. 1 lines 24-27 and col. 3 lines 8-14, and Figure 1A). Hsu also discloses a solar cell using III-V compounds and lattice-matched layers in order to avoid dislocation. As such, it is a well-known technique in the art to lattice match adjacent layers in light sensitive device in order to avoid dislocation that reduces the efficiency of the device (Hsu, para. [0012], [0083]). One having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the lattice matching of layers in the device would improve efficiency of the device. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to improve the device using the known technique of lattice matching adjacent layers to achieve the predictable result of avoiding dislocations. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, Huang, Kang, and Munshi as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Kamp.
Regarding claim 17, Kamp discloses:
a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer positioned above the first layer (12, para. [0054]) and comprising:
a first sub-layer (22-1, para. [0056], Figure 1) comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2) (para. [0051]); and
a second sub-layer (22-2, para. [0056], Figure 1) positioned between the first sub-layer (22-1) and the first layer (12, para. [0054]) and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) (para. [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Kamp into the teachings of Park and Huang to include a first anti-reflective (AR) coating layer in the primary device (of Park) positioned above the first layer and comprising: a first sub-layer comprising magnesium fluoride (MgF2); and a second sub-layer positioned between the first sub-layer and the first layer and comprising cerium fluoride (CeF3) for the purpose of reducing reflection or refraction of light at an interface with magnesium fluoride and cerium fluoride (Kamp, para. [0051]).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Huang as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Jin et al. (“Jin” US 2015/0107582).
Regarding claim 19, Park does not explicitly disclose:
[The CCD of claim 16, wherein the primary device further comprises] a gradient-index (GRIN) coating layer or a nano-structure coating layer.
Jin discloses a GRIN coating layer (para. [0084], [0095]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a GRIN coating as taught by Jin into the teachings of the primary device of Park for the purpose of higher performance of the device due to an anti-reflective GRIN coating layer (para. [0095]).
Regarding claim 20, Park does not explicitly disclose:
[The CCD of claim 16, wherein the secondary device further comprises] a gradient-index (GRIN) coating layer or a nano-structure coating layer.
Jin discloses a GRIN coating layer (para. [0084], [0095]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a GRIN coating as taught by Jin into the teachings of the secondary device of the combination of Park and Huang for the purpose of higher performance of the device due to an anti-reflective GRIN coating layer (para. [0095]).
Claims 4 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hansson, Kamp, Munshi as applied to claims 2 and 22 above, and further in view of Or-Bach et al. (“Or-Bach” US Patent No. 11,043,523) and Brophy et al. (“Brophy” US 2016/0085944).
Regarding claim 4, Or-Bach discloses:
The CCD (Figure 5B) of claim 2, wherein the secondary device (1706, 1732 page 73, column 9, lines 54-57) further comprises a second AR coating layer (1732, silicon dioxide layer, page 73, column 9, lines 59-60).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Or-Bach into the teachings of Hansson and Kamp to include wherein the secondary device (of Hansson) further comprises a second AR coating layer positioned on the third layer (of Hansson) for the purpose of increasing imaging efficiency due to greater light transmission via the antireflective coatings (Brophy, para. [0008]).
Regarding claim 23, Or-Bach discloses:
The CCD (Figure 5B) of claim 22, wherein the secondary device (1706, 1732, page 73, column 10, lines 26-27) further comprises a second AR coating layer (1732, silicon dioxide layer, page 73, column 10, lines 29-30) configured to pass the second remaining portion after the second layer (n+ Si layer of 1704, Figure 5B) transmits the second remaining portion and the third layer (p+ Si layer of 1706, Figure 5B) receives the second remaining portion.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Or-Bach into the teachings of Hansson and Kamp to include wherein the secondary device (of Hansson) further comprises a second AR coating layer (Or-Bach) configured to pass the second remaining portion after the second layer transmits the second remaining portion and the third layer receives the second remaining portion (the second and third layer are taught by Hansson) for the purpose of increasing imaging efficiency due to greater light transmission via the antireflective coatings (Brophy, para. [0008]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, Huang, Kang, Munshi, and Kamp as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Or-Bach and Brophy.
Regarding claim 18, Or-Bach discloses:
a second AR coating layer (1732, silicon dioxide layer, page 73, column 9, lines 59-60) … comprising silicon dioxide (SiO2) (column 9, lines 59-60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the teachings of Or-Bach into the teachings of Park, Kang, Huang, and Kamp to include the CCD of claim 17, further comprising a second AR coating layer (positioned between the fifth layer and the sixth layer of Park and Huang) and comprising silicon dioxide (SiO2) for the purpose of for the purpose of increasing imaging efficiency due to greater light transmission via the antireflective coatings (Brophy, para. [0008]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 16, and 21, filed October 28 2025, with respect to the 112(b) rejections of claims 1, 16, and 21 have been fully considered and overcome the 112(b) rejection. The 112(b) rejections of claims 1, 16, and 21 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 16, and 21 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Genevieve G Bullard-Connor whose telephone number is (571)270-0609. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-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, Dale Page can be reached at 5712707877. 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.
/Genevieve G Bullard-Connor/Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899