DETAILED ACTION
This correspondence is in response to the communications received 08/28/2025. Claims 1-6, 13, 19, 23, and 27 have been amended. Claims 1-27 are pending.
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 23, and 27 overcome the claim objections outlined in the previous Office Action. The previous claim objections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 overcomes the 112(b) rejections regarding the front and back surface sides of the semiconductor substrate outlined in the previous Office Action. The specified 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 2 and 3 overcome the 112(b) rejections outlined in the previous Office Action. The 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 23 overcomes the 112(b) rejections regarding the front and back surface sides of the semiconductor substrate and the basis of the photoelectric conversion outlined in the previous Office Action. The specified 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/28/2025 with regard to the claim interpretation have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The original interpretation of the "separation region 150" was described as to reconcile the claim language and the figures. Newly amended claim 1 similarly requires "a separation region that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate". The only element shown in Figs. 4-9 that could be formed in a shape in which "a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate" is "metal film 154" as both the "fixed charge film 152" and the "insulating film 153" extend continuously horizontally on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate. In the previous Office Action, 154 and the "void 155" formed in 154 are interpretated as being the only elements 150 consists of, however newly amended claim 1 also requires "wherein the shape of the separation region is … made of a same material throughout", therefore 150 consists only of 154. Furthermore, in order to satisfy the above width requirement, only the portion of 155 between the front surface side and the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate are to be considered part of 150. Otherwise, as seen in Figs. 4-9, the portion of 154 above the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate would constitute a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate wider than a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate. Therefore, the claim interpretation stands.
With regard to reading the specification into the claims, when the claims are unclear, the specification is able to be used as context for the claim analysis. See MPEP 2173.02 II. Furthermore, “A claim, although clear on its face, may also be indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty. In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235-36, 169 USPQ 236, 239 (CCPA 1971); In re Cohn, 438 F.2d 989, 169 USPQ 95 (CCPA 1971); In re Hammack, 427 F.2d 1378, 166 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1970). For example, a claim with a limitation of "the clamp means including a clamp body and first and second clamping members, the clamping members being supported by the clamp body" was determined to be indefinite because the terms "first and second clamping members" and "clamp body" were found to be vague in light of the specification which showed no "clamp member" structure being "supported by the clamp body." In re Anderson, 1997 U.S. App. Lexis 167 (Fed. Cir. January 6, 1997) (unpublished). In Cohn, a claim was directed to a process of treating an aluminum surface with an alkali silicate solution and included a further limitation that the surface has an "opaque" appearance. Id. The specification, meanwhile, associated the use of an alkali silicate with a glazed or porcelain-like finish, which the specification distinguished from an opaque finish. Cohn, 438 F.2d at 993, 169 USPQ at 98. Noting that no claim may be read apart from and independent of the supporting disclosure on which it is based, the court found that the claim was internally inconsistent based on the description, definitions and examples set forth in the specification relating to the appearance of the surface after treatment, and therefore indefinite”, MPEP 2173.03.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to newly presented limitations claims 1 and 23 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
For the purposes of this examination, the “separation region” is interpreted as being disposed exclusively between the front surface and the back surface and consisting of only 155 and the portion of 154 between the front surface and the back surface of 110 (“The separation region 150 can be formed by embedding a metal film of W, aluminum (Al), or the like in a groove portion formed through the semiconductor substrate 110”, [0052]).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 11 recites "a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate", however "a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate" has already been introduced in line 6. The second instance of "a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate" should instead be written as "the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 10 and 23 and the claims that depend therefrom 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate" in lines 11-13. The portion of the shapes to which the widths are referring to is unclear. For the purposes of examination, the "width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate" will be interpretated as the “width of the shape nearest to and parallel to the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate” and the “width on the back surface side” will be interpretated as the “width of the shape nearest to and parallel to the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate”.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate" in lines 11-13. The portion of the shapes to which the widths are referring to is unclear. For the purposes of examination, the "width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate" will be interpretated as the “width of the shape nearest to and parallel to the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate” and the “width on the back surface side” will be interpretated as the “width of the shape nearest to and parallel to the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 and the claim that depends therefrom are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Newly amended claim 1 recites "a separation region … is formed in a shape …
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout”. Claim 12 recites “wherein the separation region further includes an insulating film”. Claim 1 requires that the separation region is made of a same material throughout, while claim 12 requires that the separation region further includes an insulating film in addition to the metal film required in claim 11. Claim 12 is therefore in improper dependent form for failing to include all the limitations of the claims upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Applicant’s Claim to Figure Comparison
It is noted that this comparison is merely for the benefit of reviewers of this office action during prosecution, to allow for an understanding of the examiner’s interpretation of the Applicant’s independent claims as compared to disclosed embodiments in Applicant’s Figures. No response or comments are necessary from Applicant.
PNG
media_image1.png
484
569
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, the applicant discloses in Fig. 3, a light receiving element, comprising:
Pixels (100, [0039]) having photoelectric conversion units (101), each photoelectric conversion unit being disposed in a semiconductor substrate (110) to perform photoelectric conversion of incident light;
a wiring region (120) having a wiring layer (122-124) that is connected to each photoelectric conversion unit to transmit a signal and an insulating layer (121) that insulates the wiring layer, the wiring region being disposed adjacent to a front surface of the semiconductor substrate (bottom of 110) which is a surface opposite to a back surface of the semiconductor substrate (top of 110) which is a surface on which the incident light is incident in the semiconductor substrate; and
a separation region (150) that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels (150 is between two 110 elements), is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate (150 extends the height of 110) and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (150 is wider at the top than the bottom, see Figs. 4-6), and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other (150 is between two 101 elements),
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout (as seen in Fig. 4, 150 consists of 155 and is integrally formed and made of a same material throughout).
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 1-4, 6-8, 11, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 10,741,607 B2, hereinafter "Yoon") in view of Han et al. (US 10,991,742 B2, hereinafter “Han”).
PNG
media_image2.png
597
523
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Fig. 5B of Yoon discloses a light receiving element, comprising:
pixels (“a pixel Pb”, where Pb includes all of the active region elements in 101 including 130a disposed between 160/162, portions of additional pixels are shown to the left and right sides in Fig. 5B) having photoelectric conversion units (“a photodiode 130a”), each photoelectric conversion unit being disposed in a semiconductor substrate (“a first substrate 101 … 101 may be, for example, a semiconductor substrate”, col. 5, lines 45-48), to perform photoelectric conversion of incident light (“photodiode 130 may be disposed within the first substrate 101, and may absorb incoming light as a photoelectric conversion element to generate and accumulate electric charges corresponding to intensity of the light”, col. 10, lines 54-57, 130a is a specific embodiment of 130);
a wiring region (the region under 101 that includes wiring layers such as 110, 150, 140 constitutes a wiring region, see Fig. 5b, hereinafter “WR”) having a wiring layer (“pixel gate layers 110”) that is connected to each photoelectric conversion unit (as seen in Fig. 5B, 110 is connected to 130a, duplicating Pb would thus necessarily require 110 to be connected to each 130a) to transmit a signal (“storage node regions 105” and “first vias 150” transmit a signal) and an insulating layer (“a first interlayer insulating layer 120”, col 14, line 16) that insulates the wiring layer (120 is an insulating material that surrounds 110), the wiring region being disposed adjacent to a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate which is a surface opposite to a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate which is a surface on which the incident light is incident in the semiconductor substrate (light would be incident on the top of Pb as orientated in Fig. 5B, therefore the top surface of 130a is a back surface side of 101 and the bottom surface of 130a is a front surface side of 101, thus top and bottom surfaces of 130a are opposite, and as seen in Fig. 5B, 110 is adjacent to the front surface of 130a); and
a separation region (“pixel vias 160” form a separation region) that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate (160 is in 101) at a boundary between the pixels (Fig. 5B shows 160 between two other adjacent pixels), is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate (160 pierces through 101).
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “a separation region that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate, and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout.”
PNG
media_image3.png
419
632
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 12-19 of Han teach a separation region (“buried conductive layer 134”, 134 of Han is equivalent to 160 of Yoon) that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 has a shape in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of “semiconductor substrate 110” is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of 110, where 110 of Han is equivalent to 101 of Yoon), and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 is integrally formed of a single piece and is made of the same material throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a separation region that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate, and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout” as taught by Han in the system of Yoon for the purpose of forming a pixel isolation structure that minimizes obstructing incident light while mitigating signal cross-talk between pixels.
PNG
media_image4.png
814
603
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Fig. 3 of Yoon teaches (“FIGS. 5A and 5B are enlarged views of region P of FIG. 3.”, col. 10, lines 31-33) a separation region … separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other (photodiodes 130 are separated by pixel isolation regions 165, 130 in Fig. 3 of Yoon is equivalent to 130a in Fig. 5B of Yoon, 165 in Fig. 3 of Yoon is equivalent to 160 in Fig. 5B of Yoon)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a separation region … separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other” as taught by Fig. 3 of Yoon in combination with Fig. 5B of Yoon and Han for the purpose of reducing crosstalk between adjacent pixels.
Regarding claim 2, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 1, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region is formed in a wall shape (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 is in a wall shape) which surrounds the photoelectric conversion unit (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 surrounds “photodiode region 122”, 122 of Han is equivalent to 130a of Yoon) and is formed in a shape in which a width of the shape in a direction parallel to the surface of the semiconductor substrate is wider on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate than on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 is and is formed in a shape in which a width of the shape in a direction parallel to the surface of the semiconductor substrate is wider on the front surface side of 110 than on the back surface side of 110).
Regarding claim 3, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 1, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the shape of the separation region on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is a wiring region adjacent portion (after substitution of 134 of Han for 160 of Yoon, the bottom portion of 134 of Han that is adjacent to WR of Yoon is a wiring region adjacent portion) and wherein the wiring region adjacent portion is disposed adjacent to the wiring region (the wiring region adjacent portion of 134 of Han is disposed adjacent to the WR of Yoon).
Regarding claim 4, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 3, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region including the wiring region adjacent portion is formed to have a cross section of a reverse taper shape (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 including the wiring region adjacent portion is formed to have a cross section of a reverse taper shape).
Regarding claim 6, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 3, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate (“and an element isolation trench (not illustrated) is formed in the semiconductor substrate 110 using the mask pattern as an etch mask”, col. 16, lines 54-56, Fig. 12 shows 110 being etched from the front side).
It is noted that the limitation of “wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate” is considered to be a process limitation, and since the current claim is directed to a device structure, this limitation is considered a “product by process” feature, wherein the claim is directed to the product, and no matter how the structure is actually made, it is the final product which must be determined in a claim directed to an product, and not the patentability of the process. MPEP 2113, I. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 7, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 1, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region is formed in a shape adjacent to the wiring layer (after substitution of 134 of Han for 160 of Yoon, the bottom portion of 134 of Han is adjacent to the WR of Yoon).
Regarding claim 8, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 7, Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses a wiring layer protective film disposed between the separation region and the wiring layer (a portion of 120 is between 160 and 110),
wherein the separation region is adjacent to the wiring layer via the wiring layer protective film (after substitution of 134 of Han for 160 of Yoon, the bottom portion of 134 of Han is adjacent to the WR of Yoon, 134 of Han is adjacent to 110 of Yoon via a portion of 120, see Fig. 5B).
Regarding claim 9, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 1, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region is formed to be disposed in a groove portion formed in the semiconductor substrate (“the insulating liner 132 and the buried conductive layer 134 formed on the inner wall of the pixel trench 130T may be referred to as the pixel element isolation film 130”, col. 17, lines 47-50, further as seen in Fig. 19, 130T is a groove in 110).
Regarding claim 10, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 9, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region is disposed in the groove portion having a shape in which the width on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than the width on the back surface side thereof (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 has a shape in which the width on the front surface side of 110 is wider than the width on the back surface side thereof).
Regarding claim 11, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose discloses the light receiving element according to claim 9, Figs. 12-19 of Han further disclose wherein the separation region is formed by disposing a metal film in the groove portion (“the buried conductive layer 134 may include … a metal”, col. 4 lines 59-60, 134 of Han is equivalent to pixel vias 160 of Fig. 5B of Yoon).
Regarding claim 12, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose discloses the light receiving element according to claim 11, Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses wherein the separation region further includes an insulating film disposed between the semiconductor substrate and the metal film (“pixel via insulating layers 162”, 162 is adjacent to 160, but as discussed in the 112(d) rejection, 162 cannot be included in the separation region)
Regarding claim 14, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 1, Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by a photodiode (“photodiode 130a”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 10,741,607 B2, hereinafter “Yoon”) in view of Han et al. (US 10,991,742 B2, hereinafter “Han”) in view of Wang et al. (US 9,484,376 B2, hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 5, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 3.
Figs. 12-19 of Han fail to disclose “wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a cross section of a hemispherical shape.”
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Wang teaches wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a cross section of a hemispherical shape (as seen in Fig. 4, the bottom 101B of the first isolation region 101 has a hemispherical shape using the Applicant’s definition presented in Applicant’s Fig. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a cross section of a hemispherical shape.” taught by Wang in the system taught by Yoon in combination with Han for the purpose of widening the separation region to further isolate neighboring pixels to prevent crosstalk.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 10,741,607 B2, hereinafter “Yoon”) in view of Han et al. (US 10,991,742 B2, hereinafter “Han”) in view of Lim (US 8,796,799 B2, hereinafter “Lim”).
Regarding claim 13, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 12.
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “wherein the separation region includes the insulating film formed to have a shape in which a film thickness on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is thicker than a film thickness on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate.”
PNG
media_image5.png
459
572
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, Lim teaches a similar light receiving element in Fig. 4D wherein the separation region includes the insulating film formed to have a shape in which a film thickness on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is thicker than a film thickness on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (“interlayer dielectric layer 34” as seen in Fig. 4D is thicker in the horizontal direction on its lowermost side than it is in the horizontal direction on its uppermost side).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the separation region includes the insulating film formed to have a shape in which a film thickness on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is thicker than a film thickness on the back surface side thereof.” as taught by Lim in the system of Yoon in combination with Han for the purpose of maximizing the thickness of material between adjacent pixels while allowing for the largest possible opening to the photelectric conversion units.
Claims 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 10,741,607 B2, hereinafter “Yoon”) in view of Han et al. (US 10,991,742 B2, hereinafter “Han”) in view of Kai et al. (US 7,459,327 B2, hereinafter “Kai”) in view of Sakata et al. (US 10,192,920 B2, hereinafter “Sakata”).
Regarding claim 15, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han disclose the light receiving element according to claim 14.
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by the photodiode that multiplies charges generated through photoelectric conversion of the incident light with a high reverse bias voltage.”
Yoon discloses the overall physical construction which is similar to the Applicant’s structure. Yoon does not disclose the type of photoelectric conversion unit, which the secondary reference is utilized to disclose. The organic photodiode type device is known in the art as an obvious variant to the avalanche type photoelectric conversion unit. Therefore, the following elements are to be substituted to create an avalanche type photoelectric conversion unit in the physical construction as shown in the Yoon reference.
Kai teaches a similar light receiving element wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by the photodiode that multiplies charges generated through photoelectric conversion of the incident light with a high reverse bias voltage (Kai teaches “frame transfer type solid state imager 1” however Kai mentions “the present invention can be applied of course to … intensified solid-state imagers such as avalanche type devices” col. 7, lines 32-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by the photodiode that multiplies charges generated through photoelectric conversion of the incident light” as taught by Kai in the system of Yoon in combination with Han for the purpose of increasing the signal intensity produced by low intensity light.
Sakata teaches a similar light receiving device wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by the photodiode that multiplies charges generated through photoelectric conversion of the incident light with a high reverse bias voltage(“an avalanche multiplication region (AM) may be formed between P type semiconductor region 14 and N type semiconductor region 13, depending on a bias voltage (reverse bias voltage to photoelectric conversion layer PD) to P+ type semiconductor region 10”, col 5, lines 6-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the photoelectric conversion unit is constituted by the photodiode that multiplies charges generated through photoelectric conversion of the incident light with a high reverse bias voltage” as Sakata in the system of Yoon in combination with Han and Kai for the purpose of increasing the signal intensity produced by low intensity light.
Regarding claim 16, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata disclose the light receiving element according to claim 15.
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction constituted by a p-type semiconductor region and an n-type semiconductor region.”
PNG
media_image6.png
481
680
media_image6.png
Greyscale
However, Sakata teaches a similar light receiving element in Fig. 1 wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction (“an avalanche multiplication region (AM) may be formed between P type semiconductor region 14 and N type semiconductor region 13”, col. 5, lines 6-8) constituted by a p-type semiconductor region (14) and an n-type semiconductor region (13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction constituted by a p-type semiconductor region and an n-type semiconductor region” as taught by Sakata in the system of Yoon in combination with Kai for the purpose of increasing the signal intensity produced by low intensity light.
Regarding claim 17, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata discloses the light receiving element according to claim 16. Sakata further discloses wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes a cathode region constituted by the n- type semiconductor region (13 is a cathode).
Regarding claim 18, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata discloses the light receiving element according to claim 17. Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes the cathode region disposed on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate (the substituted cathode region from Sakata is disposed on the front surface side of 101 of Fig. 5B of Yoon).
Regarding claim 19, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata discloses the light receiving element according to claim 15, Figs. 12-19 of Han further discloses wherein the separation region includes a wiring region adjacent portion (after substitution of 134 of Han for 160 of Yoon, the bottom portion of 134 of Han that is adjacent to WR of Yoon is a wiring region adjacent portion) adjacent to the wiring region (the wiring region adjacent portion of 134 of Han is disposed adjacent to the WR of Yoon) and is formed to have a width wider than the width on the back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (as seen in Fig. 19, the width of the bottom portion of 134 is formed to have a width wider than the width on the back surface side of 110), and wherein the wiring region adjacent portion is disposed in a region closer to the wiring region than to a region in which the charges are multiplied in the photodiode (after substitution of 134 of Han for 160 of Yoon, the bottom portion of 134 of Han is closer to the WR of Yoon than to the majority of where light impinges upon 130a of Yoon).
Regarding claim 20, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata discloses the light receiving element according to claim 19.
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction constituted by a p-type semiconductor region and an n-type semiconductor region, and
wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a height lower than that of a region of the pn junction from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate.”
However, Sakata teaches a similar light receiving element in Fig. 1 wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction (“an avalanche multiplication region (AM) may be formed between P type semiconductor region 14 and N type semiconductor region 13”, col. 5, lines 6-8) constituted by a p-type semiconductor region (14) and an n-type semiconductor region (13), and
wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a height lower than that of a region of the pn junction from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate (107 and the bottom of 160 and 162 surrounded by 107 of Fig. 5B of Yoon are below a portion of 13 and 14 of Sakata which are substituted for 130a of Fig. 5B of Yoon, and therefore have a lower height from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein, in the photoelectric conversion unit, the generated charges are multiplied in a pn junction constituted by a p-type semiconductor region and an n-type semiconductor region, and
wherein the separation region includes the wiring region adjacent portion formed to have a height lower than that of a region of the pn junction from the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate” as taught by Sakata in the system of Yoon in combination with Han and Kai for the purpose of increasing the signal intensity produced by low intensity light and maximizing the exposed area of the PN junction.
Regarding claim 21, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata disclose the light receiving element according to claim 15.
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes an anode region disposed in the vicinity of the separation region on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate.
However, Sakata teaches a similar light receiving element in Fig. 1 wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes an anode region disposed in the vicinity of the separation region on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate (“P type semiconductor region 14” is an anode, substituting “N type semiconductor region 13” and 14 of Sakata for 130a of Fig. 5B of Yoon would result in 14 being in the vicinity of 160, 162, and 107 of Yoon on the front surface side of 101 also of Yoon).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes an anode region disposed in the vicinity of the separation region on the front surface side of the semiconductor substrate” as taught by Sakata in the system of Yoon in combination with Han and Kai for the purpose of providing electrical signal access to the device for basic functionality.
Regarding claim 22, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han, Kai, and Sakata discloses the light receiving element according to claim 21. Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses wherein the wiring region includes the wiring layer which is disposed in the vicinity of the separation region (110 is in the vicinity of 160, 162 and 107) and is connected to the anode region (110 is connected to 14 substituted in from Sakata).
Claims 23-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 10,741,607 B2, hereinafter "Yoon") in view of Han et al. (US 10,991,742 B2, hereinafter “Han”) in view of Na et al. (US 10,418,407 B2, hereinafter “Na”).
Regarding claim 23, Fig. 5B of Yoon discloses electronic equipment, comprising:
pixels (“a pixel Pb”, where Pb includes all of the active region elements in 101 including 130a disposed between 160/162, portions of additional pixels are shown to the left and right sides in Fig. 5B) having photoelectric conversion units (“a photodiode 130a”), each photoelectric conversion unit being disposed in a semiconductor substrate (“a first substrate 101 … 101 may be, for example, a semiconductor substrate”, col. 5, lines 45-48), to perform photoelectric conversion of incident light (“photodiode 130 may be disposed within the first substrate 101, and may absorb incoming light as a photoelectric conversion element to generate and accumulate electric charges corresponding to intensity of the light”, col. 10, lines 54-57, 130a is a specific embodiment of 130);
a wiring region (the region under 101 that includes wiring layers such as 110, 150, 140 constitutes a wiring region, see Fig. 5b, hereinafter “WR”) having a wiring layer (“pixel gate layers 110”) that is connected to each photoelectric conversion unit (as seen in Fig. 5B, 110 is connected to 130a, duplicating Pb would thus necessarily require 110 to be connected to each 130a) to transmit a signal (“storage node regions 105” and “first vias 150” transmit a signal) and an insulating layer (“a first interlayer insulating layer 120”, col 14, line 16) that insulates the wiring layer (120 is an insulating material that surrounds 110), the wiring region being disposed adjacent to a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate which is a surface opposite to a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate which is a surface on which the incident light is incident in the semiconductor substrate (light would be incident on the top of Pb as orientated in Fig. 5B, therefore the top surface of 130a is a back surface side of 101 and the bottom surface of 130a is a front surface side of 101, thus top and bottom surfaces of 130a are opposite, and as seen in Fig. 5B, 110 is adjacent to the front surface of 130a);
a separation region (“pixel vias 160” form a separation region) that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate (160 is in 101) at a boundary between the pixels (Fig. 5B shows 160 between two other adjacent pixels), is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate (160 pierces through 101).
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “a separation region that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate, and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout; and
a processing circuit that performs processing for a signal generated based on an output of the photoelectric conversion.”
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 12-19 of Han teach a separation region (“buried conductive layer 134”, 134 of Han is equivalent to 160 of Yoon) that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 has a shape in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of “semiconductor substrate 110” is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of 110, where 110 of Han is equivalent to 101 of Yoon), and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout (as seen in Fig. 19, 134 is integrally formed of a single piece and is made of the same material throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a separation region that is disposed in the semiconductor substrate at a boundary between the pixels, is formed in a shape which penetrates the semiconductor substrate and in which a width of the shape on a front surface side of the semiconductor substrate is wider than a width of the shape on a back surface side of the semiconductor substrate, and separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other,
wherein the shape of the separation region is integrally formed and is made of a same material throughout” as taught by Han in the system of Yoon for the purpose of forming a pixel isolation structure that minimizes obstructing incident light while mitigating signal cross-talk between pixels.
However, Fig. 3 of Yoon teaches (“FIGS. 5A and 5B are enlarged views of region P of FIG. 3.”, col. 10, lines 31-33) a separation region … separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other (photodiodes 130 are separated by pixel isolation regions 165, 130 in Fig. 3 of Yoon is equivalent to 130a in Fig. 5B of Yoon, 165 in Fig. 3 of Yoon is equivalent to 160 in Fig. 5B of Yoon)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a separation region … separates the photoelectric conversion units from each other” as taught by Fig. 3 of Yoon in combination with Fig. 5B of Yoon and Han for the purpose of reducing crosstalk between adjacent pixels.
PNG
media_image7.png
301
427
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 31A of Na teaches a processing circuit (“pixel transistors 3120”) that performs processing for a signal generated on the basis of the photoelectric conversion (“3120 includes first and second readout transistors 3122 and 3124 for collecting carriers from the readout terminals 3152 and 3162”, col. 68, lines 53-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a processing circuit that performs processing for a signal generated on the basis of the photoelectric conversion” as taught by Na in the system of Yoon and for the purpose of processing the output generated by a light receiving element.
Regarding claim 24, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han and Fig. 31A of Na disclose the electronic equipment according to claim 23, Fig. 5B of Yoon further discloses wherein the photoelectric conversion unit performs photoelectric conversion of the incident light that is incident on it (“130 … may absorb incoming light as a photoelectric conversion element to generate and accumulate electric charges corresponding to intensity of the light”, col. 10, lines 54-57).
Fig. 5B of Yoon fails to disclose “the incident light being obtained by light emitted from a light source being reflected by a subject, and
wherein the processing circuit performs the processing for measuring a distance to the subject by measuring a time from radiation of the light from the light source to generation of the signal.”
Firstly, Fig. 31A of Na teaches the incident light being obtained by light emitted from a light source being reflected by a subject (3100 in Fig. 31A is a “ToF (time-of-flight) receiver unit”, ToF is understood in the art as the time it takes light to be emitted, reflected, and then detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “the incident light being obtained by light emitted from a light source being reflected by a subject” as taught by Fig. 31A of Na in the system of Yoon in combination with Han and Na for the purpose of producing a ToF measurement.
Secondly, Fig. 32 of Na teaches wherein the processing circuit performs the processing for measuring a distance to the subject by measuring a time from radiation of the light from the light source to generation of the signal (“the DSP module 3220 may process the data stored into the memory module 3210 to determine and filter depth information from the ToF measurements”, col. 72, lines 6-8)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the processing circuit performs the processing for measuring a distance to the subject by measuring a time from radiation of the light from the light source to generation of the signal” as taught by Fig. 32 of Na in the system of Yoon in combination with Han and Na for the purpose of using the results of a ToF measurement to calculate the distance to a subject.
Regarding claim 25, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han and Fig. 31A of Na disclose the electronic equipment according to claim 23, Fig. 31A of Na further discloses wherein the processing circuit performs the processing for detecting an amount of change in the signal (“3120 in ToF receiver units 3100 of FIGS. 31A … can be controlled to select a suitable total capacitance value for a target integration time”, col. 71, lines 23-26, as pixel output is measured in amounts of charge, changes in signal are therefore measured through changes in capacitance, and integration time).
Regarding claim 26, Yoon in combination with Figs. 12-19 of Han and Fig. 31A of Na disclose the electronic equipment according to claim 25, Fig. 31A of Na further discloses wherein the processing circuit detects the amount of change by comparing with a predetermined threshold v