Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) below is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stettner (20140350836) in view of Wang (WO2022056939).
Referring to claims 1, 16, 19, and 20, Stettner shows A photodetector, comprising:
a microlens array (MLA) component (see figure 18 Ref 268);
a photodiode array (PDA) component (see figure 18 Ref 260); and
light blocking material (see figure 17 Ref 232 covering the detector array with a transparent window held between the covers 232). However Stettner fails so show the light blocking material is applied at a first distal end of the MLA component and a second distal end of the MLA component, the light blocking material covering a portion of a top surface of the MLA component and at least a portion of an edge face of the MLA component.
Wang shows a similar device that includes the light blocking material is applied at a first distal end of the MLA component and a second distal end of the MLA component, the light blocking material covering a portion of a top surface of the MLA component and at least a portion of an edge face of the MLA component (see figure 12 Ref 232 and 270 also see the copied portion of the provided translation
“It should be noted that a light-shielding layer 270 is also disposed between the first lead 2311 of the fingerprint sensor 220 and the microlens array 211 . The light-shielding layer 270 can not only block stray light, but also block the lead protective glue 232 spread to the microlens array 211 , thereby affecting the light guiding effect of the microlens array 211”)
It would have been obvious to include the light blocking material that is applied as claimed and taught by Wang because this allows the light blocking material to serve as blocking stray light also to protect leads from the detector and readout as taught by Wang.
Referring to claim 2, Stettner shows the MLA component is arranged on top of the PDA component (see figure 18).
Referring to claim 3, the combination of Stettner and Wang shows the light blocking material is applied to a first distal end of the PDA component and a second distal end of the PDA component (see figure 10 Ref 232 and 270 of Wang also see Stettner figure 17 Ref 232 on the first and second distal end of the PDA component).
Referring to claim 4, Stettner shows a first portion of the light blocking material is applied to the first distal end of the PDA component and the first distal end of the MLA component, and
wherein a second portion of the light blocking material is applied to the second distal end of the PDA component and the second distal end of the MLA component (see Stettner figure 17 Ref 232 over 64 and 66).
Referring to claim 5, Stettner shows the light blocking material covers at least a portion an edge face of the PDA component (see figure 17 Ref 232 in relation to 64).
Referring to claim 9, Stettner in view of Wang shows the light blocking material covers a trench feature located between the MLA component and the PDA component (see Wang figure 12 Ref 232).
Referring to claim 10, Stettner in view of Wang shows a light blocking material, obviously the light blocking material will block short wave IR.
Referring to claim 11, Stettner in view of Wang shows the light blocking material comprises an adhesive material (see Wang figure 12 Ref 232 also see the translated portion of the specification shown in the rejection of claim 1).
Referring to claim 13, Stettner shows the light blocking material comprises a solid structure (see figure 17 Ref 232).
Referring to claim 14, Stettner shows MLA component comprises a pixel region between the first distal end of the MLA component and the second distal end of the MLA component; and wherein the light blocking material does not cover the pixel region (see figure 17 note Ref 232 and 66).
Referring to claim 15, Stettner in view of Wang shows an interposer component to which the PDA component is attached, wherein the light blocking material is in contact with the interposer component. (see figure 12 Ref 232 and 221). It would have been obvious to include the light blocking material in contact with the interposer because this allows light to be blocked from the interposer as shown by Wang.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stettner (20140350836) in view of Wang (WO2022056939) and Harwit (20040146245).
Referring to claim 6, Stettner fails to show but Harwit shows the light blocking material is disposed in a gap between the MLA component and the PDA component (see figure 2 note the block next to the standoff Ref 700 that attaches the standoff to the MLA also see figure 1 Ref 600). It would have been obvious to include the material in the gap between the MLA and PDA because this allows the MLA to include a standoff distance from the PDA as taught by Harwit.
Referring to claim 7, Stettner fails to show but Harwit shows a portion of the light blocking material is in contact with a standoff disposed between the MLA component and the PDA component (see figure 2 Ref 700 and figure 1 Ref 600). It would have been obvious with the light blocking material in contact with the standoff because it allows for a fixed gap between the MPA and PDA as shown by Harwit.
Referring to claim 8, Stettner in view of Harwit renders obvious the standoff comprises a photolithographic polymer. It would have been obvious to include a standoff comprising a photolithographic polymer because this is an extremely common material to make a standoff out of, the examiner is taking official notice and relevant sources can be provided.
Claim(s) 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stettner (20140350836) in view of Wang (WO2022056939) and Van Berkel (5451766).
Referring to claims 12 and 18, Stettner fails to show but Van Berkel shows the adhesive material comprises an ultraviolet (UV) curable polymer (see column 4 lines 31-53). It would have been obvious to include the UV curable polymer as shown by Van Berkel because this is an extremely common material used in optics manufacturing and adds no new or unexpected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUKE D RATCLIFFE whose telephone number is (571)272-3110. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/LUKE D RATCLIFFE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645