DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application No. 18/113,923 filed on February 24, 2023.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/20/2026 responding to the Office action mailed on 12/22/2025 has been entered. The present Office action is made with all the suggested amendments being fully considered. Accordingly, pending in this Office action are claims 21-40.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the recitation in claims 27 and 40 that the first layer 165 covers a side surface of each of the blue color filter 170-2 and the green color filter 170-1, must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 27-29 and 40 are 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 claims contain 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. Claims 27 and 40 recite the following limitations:
wherein the first layer 165 covers a side surface of each of the blue color filter 170-2 and the green color filter 170-1.
However, as the figures show, the first layer 165 does not cover any side surface of the blue color filter layer 170-2.
The specification as originally filed fails to describe how to achieve this configuration, and does not describe any patterning, etching, lithography process, or techniques for achieving the first layer 165 covering a side surface of the blued color filter 170-2.
According to the Federal Circuit, drawings alone may not provide a written description of an invention where the drawings fail to show all the claimed limitations and where there is no discussion of the particular features shown in the drawings. Lockwood v. Am. Airlines, Inc. 107 F.3d 1565, 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1997). The written description requirement demands that the specification clearly allow persons of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that the inventor invented what is claimed. Ariad Pharm, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (en banc).
The specification at paragraph [0059] of the published application US 2024/0072081, simply describes that the color filter cover layer 165 may be arranged to conformally cover a portion of an upper surface and a side surface of each of a plurality of color filters 170. The claims exceed the scope of what is actually described in the specification as originally filed, and the claims fail to comply with the written description requirement.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 21-24, 26, 30-34, and 36-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasano (US 2008/0265349) in view of Bak (US 2023/0154955).
Regarding Claim 21, Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches an image sensor comprising:
a substrate 16 comprising a first surface 16a and a second surface 16b opposing the first surface 16a (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a first photoelectric conversion device (PD) 17c in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a second PD 17b in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a blue color filter 21c on the first PD 17c comprising a top surface 21cT and a bottom surface 21cB opposing the top surface 21cT of the blue color filter 21c (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a green color filter 21b on the second PD 17b comprising a top surface 21bT and a bottom surface 21bB opposing the top surface 21bT of the green color filter 21b (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a first layer 30 on the top surface 21cT of the blue color filter 21c and the top surface 21bT of the green color filter 21b, the first layer 30 covering at least a portion of a side surface of at least one of the blue color filter 21c and/or the green color filter 21b (see, e.g., par. 0150);
a second layer 22 on the first layer 30 (see, e.g., par. 0109); and
a plurality of microlenses 23 on the second layer 22 (see, e.g., par. 0110),
wherein:
a bottom surface 21bB of the green color filter 21b is spaced apart from the second surface 16b of the substrate 16,
the top surface 21cT of the blue color filter 21c and the top surface 21bT of the green color filter 21b are disposed at different vertical levels relative to each other, and
a height db of the green color filter 21b in the vertical direction Z is greater than a height dc of the blue color filter 21c in the vertical direction Z (see, e.g., par. 0109),
the image sensor is configured to receive light 24 on the second surface 16b of the substrate 16.
Kasano does not teach a fence between the blue color filter and the green color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction.
Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), in similar image sensors to Kasano, on the other hand, teaches a fence ARD between the blue color filter 130 and the green color filter 130 and overlapping an isolation structure 116 in a vertical direction, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions 114 from each other (see, e.g., pars. 0039, 0051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include in Kasano’s device, a fence between the blue color filter and the green color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction, as taught by Bak, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions from each other.
Regarding Claim 22, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 21. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches:
a third PD 17a in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106); and
a red color filter 21a on the third PD 17a comprising a top surface 21aT and a bottom surface 21aB opposing the top surface 21aT of the red color filter 21a (see, e.g., par. 0111),
wherein the first layer 30 is on the top surface 21aT of the red color filter 21a.
Regarding Claim 23, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 22. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches that the first layer 30 covers at least a portion of a side surface of the red color filter 21a.
Regarding Claim 24, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 23. Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), teaches a metal layer 122a between the second surface of the substrate 112 and the fence ARD (see, e.g., pars. 0048, 0054).
Regarding Claim 26, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 23. Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), teaches that the isolation structure 116 is between the first PD 114 and the second PD 114, and wherein the isolation structure 116 is in contact with the second surface of the substrate 112 (see, e.g., par. 0048).
Regarding Claim 30, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 26. Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), teaches that the isolation structure 116 penetrates the substrate 112.
Regarding Claim 31, Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches an image sensor comprising:
a substrate 16 comprising a first surface 16a and a second surface 16b opposing the first surface 16a (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a first photoelectric conversion device (PD) 17c in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a second PD 17b in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a first color filter 21c on the first PD 17c comprising a top surface 21cT and a bottom surface 21cB opposing the top surface 21cT of the first color filter 21c (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a second color filter 21b on the second PD 17b comprising a top surface 21bT and a bottom surface 21bB opposing the top surface 21bT of the second color filter 21b (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a first layer 30 on the top surface 21cT of the first color filter 21c and the top surface 21bT of the second color filter 21b, the first layer 30 covering at least a portion of a side surface of at least one of the first color filter 21c and/or the second color filter 21b (see, e.g., par. 0150);
a second layer 22 on the first layer 30 (see, e.g., par. 0109); and
a plurality of microlenses 23 on the second layer 22 (see, e.g., par. 0110),
wherein:
a distance d2 from the second surface 16b of the substrate 16 to a bottom surface of the first layer 30 on the second PD 17b in the vertical direction Z perpendicular to the second surface 16b of the substrate 16 is greater than a distance d1 from the second surface 16b of the substrate 16 to the bottom surface of the first layer 30 on the first PD 17c in the vertical direction Z,
the top surface 21cT of the first color filter 21c and the top surface 21bT of the second color filter 21b are disposed at different vertical levels relative to each other, and
the image sensor is configured to receive light 24 on the second surface 16b of the substrate 16.
Kasano does not teach a fence between the first color filter and the second color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction.
Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), in similar image sensors to Kasano, on the other hand, teaches a fence ARD between the first color filter 130 and the second color filter 130 and overlapping an isolation structure 116 in a vertical direction, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions 114 from each other (see, e.g., pars. 0039, 0051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include in Kasano’s device, a fence between the first color filter and the second color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction, as taught by Bak, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions from each other.
Regarding Claim 32, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 31. Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), teaches that the fence ARD is configured to block light traveling between adjacent pixels (see, e.g., par. 0039).
Regarding Claim 33, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 32. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches that the first color filter 21c is a blue color filter (see, e.g., par. 0111).
Regarding Claim 34, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 32. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches that the second color filter 21b is a green color filter (see, e.g., par. 0111).
Regarding Claim 36, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 35. Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), teaches a metal layer 122a between the second surface of the substrate 112 and the fence ARD (see, e.g., pars. 0048, 0054).
Regarding Claim 37, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 34. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches:
a third PD 17a; and
a red color filter 21a on the third PD 17a (see, e.g., par. 0111),
wherein the first layer 30 is disposed on the top surface of the red color filter 21a, and the second layer 22 is disposed on the first layer 30.
Regarding Claim 38, Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches an image sensor comprising:
a substrate 16 comprising a first surface 16a and a second surface 16b opposing the first surface 16a (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a first photoelectric conversion device (PD) 17c in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a second PD 17b in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a third PD 17a in the substrate 16 (see, e.g., par. 0106);
a blue color filter 21c on the first PD 17c comprising a top surface 21cT and a bottom surface 21cB opposing the top surface 21cB of the blue color filter 21c (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a green color filter 21b on the second PD 17b comprising a top surface 21bT and a bottom surface 21bB opposing the top surface 21bT of the green color filter 21b (see, e.g., par. 01111);
a red color filter 21a on the third PD 17a comprising a top surface 21aT and a bottom surface 21aB opposing the top surface 21aT of the red color filter 21a (see, e.g., par. 0111);
a first layer 30 on the top surfaces 21cT/21bT/21aT of the blue color filter 21c, the green color filter 21b, and the red color filter 21a, the first layer 30 covering at least a portion of a side surface of at least one of the blue color filter 21c, the green color filter 21b, and/or the red color filter 21a (see, e.g., par. 0150);
a second layer 22 on the first layer 30 (see, e.g., par. 0109); and
a plurality of microlenses 23 on the second layer 22 (see, e.g., par. 0110),
wherein:
the top surfaces 21cT/21bT/21aT of the blue color filter 21cT, the green color filter 21bT, and the red color filter 21aT are disposed at different vertical levels dc/db/da relative to each other,
a height hb of the second layer 22 on the second PD 17b in the vertical direction Z is greater than a height ha of the second layer 22 on the third PD 17a in the vertical direction Z, and
the image sensor is configured to receive light 24 on the second surface 16a of the substrate 16.
Kasano does not teach a fence between the blue color filter and the green color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction.
Bak (see, e.g., Fig. 3B), in similar image sensors to Kasano, on the other hand, teaches a fence ARD between the blue color filter 130 and the green color filter 130 and overlapping an isolation structure 116 in a vertical direction, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions 114 from each other (see, e.g., pars. 0039, 0051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include in Kasano’s device, a fence between the blue color filter and the green color filter and overlapping an isolation structure in a vertical direction, as taught by Bak, to reduce the potential crosstalk between adjacent color filters and to isolate the photoelectric conversion regions from each other.
Regarding Claim 39, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claim 38. Bak (see, e.g., Figs. 2, 3B), teaches that the fence ARD is disposed between adjacent ones of the blue color filter 130, the green color filter 130, and the red color filter 130 (see, e.g., par. 0052).
Claims 25 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasano (US 2008/0265349) in view of Bak (US 2023/0154955) and further in view of Noudo (US 2024/0429254).
Regarding Claims 25 and 35, Kasano and Bak teach all aspects of claims 23 and 32. Kasano (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Annotated Fig. 7), teaches that the first layer 30 comprises silicon nitride (see, e.g., par. 0152). Kasano is silent with respect to the claim limitation that the first layer comprises silicon oxide.
Noudo (see, e.g., Figs. 37-38), in similar image sensors to Kasano/Bak, on the other hand, teaches that the first layer 24 comprises silicon oxide, silicon nitride, etc., to form a protective film having a refractive index lower than that of the color filters 22 (see, e.g., par. 0127).
Kasano and Bak disclose the claimed invention except for the use of silicon nitride instead of silicon oxide for the first layer. Noudo (see, e.g., Figs. 37-38), in similar image sensors to Kasano/Bak, on the other hand, teaches that the first layer 24 comprises silicon oxide, silicon nitride, etc., to form a protective film having a refractive index lower than that of the color filters 22 (see, e.g., par. 0127). Therefore, because these protective materials were art-recognized equivalents at the time of the invention, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute silicon oxide for silicon nitride since the substitution would yield predictable results. See Supreme Court decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. _, 82 YSPQ2d 1385 (2007).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nelson Garces whose telephone number is (571)272-8249. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wael Fahmy can be reached on (571)272-1705. 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.
/Nelson Garces/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights