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 .
Detailed Action
Specification Objection Withdrawal
Applicant’s amendment of the title of the invention is acknowledged. Thus, the objection to specification is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, 9, 11, 12 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2015/0228689) of record, in view of Victor (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0281099).
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses a solid-state imaging element comprising: a first light receiving pixel (38C) that receives visible light; a second light receiving pixel (38N) that receives infrared light; and a metal layer (34) provided to face at least one of a photoelectric conversion unit (140) of the first light receiving pixel and a photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel on an opposite side of a light incident side, the metal layer containing tungsten as a main component [0033].
Lenchenkov is silent with respect to “the metal layer has at least one gap within an area of the metal layer”.
FIG. 4 of Victor discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the metal layer (110) has at least one gap within an area of the metal layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Victor. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of precise light control, reduced glare, and focused illumination (common knowledge in the art).
Regarding Claim 2
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses the metal layer is provided to face the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel.
Regarding Claim 3
FIG. 4 of Victor discloses the metal layer is provided to face the photoelectric conversion unit (104) of the first light receiving pixel.
Regarding Claim 4
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses the metal layer is a multilayer [0033].
Regarding Claim 5
FIG. 4 of Victor discloses the metal layer (110) has the gap in plan view.
Regarding Claim 6
FIG. 3 of Victor discloses a semiconductor layer (102) in which the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel are provided; and a wiring layer (114) provided on a surface on an opposite side of a light incident side of the semiconductor layer and having a plurality of layers of wiring, wherein the metal layer (110) is provided on a light incident side of the plurality of layers of wiring in the wiring layer.
Regarding Claim 9
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses the wiring layer includes a lens (28) provided on a light incident side of the metal layer.
Regarding Claim 11
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses the wiring layer includes a high reflectance film (34U) arranged to cover a surface on the light incident side in the metal layer.
Regarding Claim 12
FIG. 3 of Victor discloses a semiconductor layer (102) in which the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel are provided; and a wiring layer (112) provided on a surface on an opposite side of a light incident side of the semiconductor layer and having a plurality of layers of wiring (114), wherein the metal layer is provided on the semiconductor layer.
Regarding Claim 16
FIG. 1 of Lenchenkov discloses an electronic device comprising: a solid-state imaging element (12); an optical system (16) that captures incident light from a subject and forms an image on an imaging surface of the solid-state imaging element; and a signal processing circuit (18) that perform processing on an output signal from the solid-state imaging element, wherein (FIG. 4) the solid-state imaging element includes a first light receiving pixel (38C) that receives visible light, a second light receiving pixel (38N) that receives infrared light, and a metal layer (34) provided to face at least one of a photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and a photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel on an opposite side of a light incident side, the metal layer containing tungsten as a main component [0033].
Lenchenkov is silent with respect to “the metal layer has at least one gap within an area of the metal layer”.
FIG. 4 of Victor discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the metal layer (110) has at least one gap within an area of the metal layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Victor. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of precise light control, reduced glare, and focused illumination (common knowledge in the art).
Claims 7 and 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov and Victor, in view of Yokogawa (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0244992) of record.
Regarding Claim 7
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor discloses Claim 6.
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor is silent with respect to “the wiring layer includes a plurality of pixel transistors respectively connected to the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel, and the metal layer is arranged not to overlap the pixel transistor in plan view”.
FIG. 10 of Yokogawa discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the wiring layer (101) includes a plurality of pixel transistors (TR) respectively connected to the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel, and the metal layer (RM) is arranged not to overlap the pixel transistor in plan view (FIG. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Yokogawa. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of improving sensitivity ([0004] of Yokogawa).
Regarding Claim 8
FIG. 10 of Yokogawa discloses the wiring layer (101) includes a plurality of pixel transistors respectively connected to the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel, and the metal layer (RM) is arranged to ride on an opposite side of a light incident side of the pixel transistor.
Claim 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov and Victor, in view of Adkisson (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0049330).
Regarding Claim 8
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor discloses Claim 6.
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor is silent with respect to “the wiring layer includes a plurality of pixel transistors respectively connected to the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel, and the metal layer is arranged to ride on an opposite side of a light incident side of the pixel transistor”.
FIG. 2 of Adkisson discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the wiring layer includes a plurality of pixel transistors (T) respectively connected to the photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and the photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel [0032], and the metal layer (M1) is arranged to ride on an opposite side of a light incident side of the pixel transistor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Adkisson. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of forming control circuit ([0069] of Adkisson).
Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov and Victor, in view of Adkisson, in view of Ma (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2018/0190701)
Regarding Claim 10
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor discloses Claim 6.
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor is silent with respect to “the metal layer includes a plurality of protrusion portions arranged on a surface on the light incident side of the metal layer, and a wall-shaped side wall portion protruding from a peripheral edge portion of the surface on the light incident side of the metal layer toward the light incident side of the semiconductor layer”.
FIG. 1 of Adkisson discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the metal layer (20) includes a wall-shaped side wall portion protruding from a peripheral edge portion of the surface on the light incident side of the metal layer toward the light incident side of the semiconductor layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Adkisson. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of enhancing light capture ([0002] of Adkisson).
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor and Adkisson is still silent with respect to “the metal layer includes a plurality of protrusion portions arranged on a surface on the light incident side of the metal layer”.
FIG. 3 of Ma discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the metal layer includes a plurality of protrusion portions arranged on a surface on the light incident side of the metal layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Ma. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner so that detection signals in different pixel regions are prevented from interfering with each other ([0032] of Ma).
Claim 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov and Victor, in view of Kitamura (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0140000) of record.
Regarding Claim 13
Lenchenkov as modified by Victor discloses Claim 1.
Lenchenkov is silent with respect to “the metal layer is connected to a ground potential”.
FIG. 1 of Kitamura discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the metal layer (114) is connected to a ground potential [0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Kitamura. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of reducing noise in photodiode ([0026] of Kitamura).
Claims 14 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lenchenkov, in view of Hynecek (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2018/0084164).
Regarding Claim 14
FIG. 4 of Lenchenkov discloses a solid-state imaging element comprising: a first light receiving pixel (38C) that receives visible light; a second light receiving pixel (38N) that receives infrared light; and a reflection layer (34) provided to face at least one of a photoelectric conversion unit of the first light receiving pixel and a photoelectric conversion unit of the second light receiving pixel on an opposite side of a light incident side.
Lenchenkov is silent with respect to the reflection layer is “an optical filter reflection layer” “has a reflectance of a given value or more” and “the optical filter reflection layer is provided as part of a wiring layer”.
FIG. 5 of Hynecek discloses a similar solid-state imaging element, wherein the reflection layer (411) is an optical filter reflection layer having a reflectance of a given value or more [0031]; and the optical filter reflection layer is provided as part of a wiring layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lenchenkov, as taught by Hynecek. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Lenchenkov in the above manner for purpose of only sensing light with the wavelength of interest and improving the efficiency of pixel ([0031] of Hynecek).
Regarding Claim 15
FIG. 1 of Kokubun discloses the optical filter reflection layer is provided over an entire pixel region.
Pertinent Art
US 20100110271, 20180019270, 20110049330, 20120112254, JP 3571909, JP 2558389.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG-BAI ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-3904. The examiner can normally be reached on 11am – 7pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chad Dicke can be reached on (571)270-7996. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHENG-BAI ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights