DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
Amendment filed 30 March 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-4, 7, 9-11, 16-18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Examiner notes that the amendments fail to properly show all revisions to the claims as required by 37 C.F.R. 1.121(c). For example, the amendments at lines 16 and 25 of claim 17 fail to show revisions to the word “between,” instead omitting the word entirely. Applicant is reminded that all amendments must be submitted with markings to indicate changes that have been made. See MPEP 714.
Drawings
The amendments to the drawings were received on 30 March 2026. These amendments to the drawings are acceptable.
The drawings are objected to because there are two unlabeled features located above filtering layer (545) in FIGs. 16A and 16B. 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.
Specification
The amendments to the specification were received on 30 March 2026. These amendments to the specification are acceptable.
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 1-9, 11-15, and 17-20 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 first transfer gate electrode disposed on the semiconductor substrate between the first photodiode and the first floating diffusion region.” It is unclear how the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is between the first photodiode (PD1) and the first floating diffusion region (141). As best understood by Examiner, the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is above the first photodiode (PD1) and adjacent to the first floating diffusion region (141).
Claims 1 and 11 recite the limitation, “a second transfer gate electrode disposed on the semiconductor substrate between the second photodiode and the second floating diffusion region.” It is unclear how the second transfer gate electrode (131b) is between the second photodiode (PD2) and the second floating diffusion region (145). As best understood by Examiner, the second transfer gate electrode (131b) is above the second photodiode (PD2) and adjacent to the second floating diffusion region (145).
Claim 1 recites the limitation, “the first well impurity region [ ] not vertically overlapping the first photodiode.” It is unclear how the first well impurity region (121) does not vertically overlap the first photodiode (PD1). As best understood by Examiner, the first well impurity region (121) overlaps the first photodiode (PD1).
Claim 11 recites the limitation, “a first transfer gate electrode disposed in the semiconductor substrate of between the first photodiode and the first floating diffusion region.” It is unclear how the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of between [sic] the first photodiode (PD1) and the first floating diffusion region (141). As best understood by Examiner, the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100).
Claim 17 recites the limitation, “a first transfer gate electrode disposed in the semiconductor substrate of the first photodiode and the first floating diffusion region.” It is unclear how the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first photodiode (PD1) and the first floating diffusion region (141). As best understood by Examiner, the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100).
Claim 17 recites the limitation, “a second transfer gate electrode disposed on the semiconductor substrate the second photodiode and the second floating diffusion region.” It is unclear how the second transfer gate electrode (131b) is disposed on the second floating diffusion region (145). As best understood by Examiner, the second transfer gate electrode (131b) is disposed proximate to the second floating diffusion region (145).
Claims 2-9, 12-15, and 18-20 are rejected for merely containing the flaws of the parent claim.
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, 3-5, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0378865, hereinafter Zhang ‘865) in view of Lee et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0190709, hereinafter Lee ‘709), both of record.
With respect to claim 1, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches (FIG. 8) an image sensor substantially as claimed, comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (100) comprising a first region (left PR) and a second region (right PR) ([0069, 0073]);
a first photodiode (left 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR) ([0069]);
a second photodiode (right 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR) ([0069]);
an isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) penetrating the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first photodiode (left PR) and the second photodiode (right PR) ([0075, 0088]);
a first floating diffusion region (left FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR) ([0092]);
a first transfer gate electrode (left TGE1) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first photodiode (left 110) and the first floating diffusion region (left FD) ([0089]);
a second floating diffusion region (right FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR) ([0092]);
a second transfer gate electrode (right TGE1) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second photodiode (right 110) and the second floating diffusion region (right FD) ([0089]);
a first charge storage region (left SD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR) ([0093]);
a second charge storage region (right SD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR) ([0093]);
a first switching element (left TGE2) on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first floating diffusion region (left FD) and the first charge storage region (left SD) ([0089]);
a second switching element (right TGE2) on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second floating diffusion region (right FD) and the second charge storage region (right SD) ([0089]);
a first well impurity region (left 120) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first charge storage region (left SD) and the first photodiode (left 110), the first well impurity region vertically overlapping the first charge storage region and not vertically overlapping the first photodiode (see interpretation provided in the above 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of the claim) ([0092]); and
a second well impurity region (right 120) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second charge storage region (right SD) and the second photodiode (right 110), the second well impurity region overlapping a portion of the second photodiode ([0092]).
Thus, Zhang ‘865 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of the second well impurity region not encompassing the second floating diffusion region.
However, Lee ‘709 teaches (FIG. 5A) an image sensor comprising a well impurity region (115) not encompassing a floating diffusion region (120) ([0051, 0058, 0060]) so that said well impurity region does not interfere with a photodiode ([0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the second well impurity region of Zhang ‘865 not encompassing the second floating diffusion region as taught by Lee ‘709 so that said second well impurity region does not interfere with the photodiode.
With respect to claim 3, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches wherein the isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) vertically extends from a first surface (10a) of the semiconductor substrate (100) toward a second surface (10b) of the semiconductor substrate opposite to the first surface ([0075, 0088]).
With respect to claim 4, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches wherein, when viewed in plan, the isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) surrounds each of the first region (left PR) and the second region (right PR) ([0075, 0088]).
With respect to claim 5, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches wherein each of the first transfer gate electrode (left TGE1) and the second transfer gate electrode (right TGE1) vertically penetrates a portion of the semiconductor substrate (100) ([0089]).
With respect to claim 7, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches (FIG. 2A) further comprising: a source follower transistor (AX) that is configured to amplify a signal detected from the first floating diffusion region (FD); and a selection transistor (SX) that is configured to control a connection between the source follower transistor and an output line (VOUT) ([0040]).
With respect to claim 9, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches further comprising a color filter (C/F) on both of the first region (left PR) and the second region (right PR) ([0071]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee (US Patent Application Publication 2006/0138494, hereinafter Lee ‘494) of record.
With respect to claim 2, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 teach the device as described in claim 1 above with the exception of the additional limitation wherein a width of the second photodiode is less than a width of the first photodiode.
However, Lee ‘494 teaches (FIG. 4) a width of a second photodiode (104) being less than a width of a first photodiode (110) to provide for differing sensitivity and dynamic range, wherein wider photodiodes generally have greater sensitivity and narrower photodiodes generally have greater dynamic range ([0046]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed a width of the second photodiode of Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 less than a width of the first photodiode as taught by Lee ‘494 to provide for differing sensitivity and dynamic range.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Uchida et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0266221, hereinafter Uchida ‘221) of record.
With respect to claim 6, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 teach the device as described in claim 1 above with the exception of the additional limitation further comprising a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region.
However, Uchida ‘221 teaches (FIG. 73) an image sensor comprising a capacitor (613) connected to a floating diffusion region (FD′) to increase the floating diffusion capacity ([0582]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 further comprising a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region as taught by Uchida ‘221 to increase the floating diffusion capacity.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jin (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0366504, hereinafter Jin ‘504) of record.
With respect to claim 8, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 teach the device as described in claim 1 above with the exception of the additional limitation further comprising a reset transistor connected to the first charge storage region and to the second charge storage region.
However, Jin ‘504 teaches (FIG. 9A) an image sensor comprising a reset transistor (defined at RG1 and RG2) connected to a first charge storage region (262) and to a second charge storage region (272) ([0048, 0109, 0113]) to provide a reset signal to said first charge storage region and to said second charge storage region ([0113]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘709 further comprising a reset transistor connected to the first charge storage region and to the second charge storage region as taught by Jin ‘504 to provide a reset signal to said first charge storage region and to said second charge storage region.
Claims 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 in view of Lee ‘494.
With respect to claim 10, Zhang ‘865 teaches (FIG. 8) an image sensor substantially as claimed, comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (100) comprising a first region (left PR) and a second region (right PR), the semiconductor substrate having a first conductivity type ([0069, 0073]);
a first photodiode (left 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR), the first photodiode having a second conductivity type ([0069]);
a second photodiode (right 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR), the second photodiode having the second conductivity type ([0069]);
an isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) penetrating the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first photodiode (left PR) and the second photodiode (right PR) ([0075, 0088]);
a first charge storage region (left SD) on the first region (left PR), the first charge storage region having the second conductivity type ([0093]);
a second charge storage region (right SD) on the second region (right PR), the second charge storage region having the second conductivity type ([0093]);
a first well impurity region (left 120) in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first charge storage region (left SD) and the first photodiode (left 110), the first well impurity region having the first conductivity type and overlapping a portion of the first photodiode ([0092]);
a second well impurity region (right 120) in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second charge storage region (right SD) and the second photodiode (right 110), the second well impurity region having the first conductivity type and overlapping a portion of the second photodiode ([0092]); and
wherein the first photodiode (left 110) and the second photodiode (right 110) are laterally spaced apart from each other by the isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) ([0069, 0075, 0088]).
Thus, Zhang ‘865 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of wherein a width of the second photodiode is less than a width in a first direction of the first photodiode in the first direction, wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate.
However, Lee ‘494 teaches (FIG. 4) a width of a second photodiode (104) being less than a width in a first direction of a first photodiode (110) in the first direction, wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate (101) to provide for differing sensitivity and dynamic range, wherein wider photoelectric conversion elements generally have greater sensitivity and narrower photoelectric conversion elements generally have greater dynamic range ([0046]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed a width of the second photodiode of Zhang ‘865 less than a width in a first direction of the first photodiode in the first direction, wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate as taught by Lee ‘494 to provide for differing sensitivity and dynamic range.
With respect to claim 16, Zhang ‘865 teaches wherein, when viewed in plan, the pixel isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) surrounds each of the first region (left PR) and the second region (right PR) ([0075, 0088]).
Claims 11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘494 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Lee ‘709.
With respect to claim 11, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘494 teach the device as described in claim 10 above, with primary reference Zhang ‘865 teaching the additional limitations further comprising: a first floating diffusion region (left FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR) and spaced apart from the first charge storage region (left SD); a first transfer gate electrode (left TGE1) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of between the first photodiode (left 110) and the first floating diffusion region (left FD); a second floating diffusion region (right FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR) and spaced apart from the second charge storage region (right SD); and a second transfer gate electrode (right TGE1) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second photodiode (right 110) and the second floating diffusion region (right FD) ([0089, 0092-0093]).
Thus, Zhang ‘865 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of wherein the first floating diffusion region and the first transfer gate electrode are spaced apart from the first well impurity region, and wherein the second floating diffusion region and the second transfer gate electrode are spaced apart from the second well impurity region.
However, Lee ‘709 teaches (FIG. 5A) an image sensor comprising a floating diffusion region (120) and a transfer gate electrode (TG) spaced apart from a well impurity region (115) ([0051, 0058, 0060]) so that said well impurity region does not interfere with a photoelectric conversion element ([0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the first floating diffusion region and the first transfer gate electrode, and the second floating diffusion region and the second transfer gate electrode of Zhang ‘865 and Lee ‘494 spaced apart from the first well impurity region and spaced apart from the second well impurity region, respectively, as taught by Lee ‘709 so that said first and second well impurity regions do not interfere with the photodiodes.
With respect to claim 13, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches further comprising a first switching element (left TGE2) between the first floating diffusion region (left FD) and the first charge storage region (left SD) ([0089]).
With respect to claim 14, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches further comprising a second switching element (right TGE2) between the second floating diffusion region (right FD) and the second charge storage region (right SD) ([0089]).
With respect to claim 15, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches wherein each of the first transfer gate electrode (left TGE1) and the second transfer gate electrode (right TGE1) vertically penetrates a portion of the semiconductor substrate (100) ([0089]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865, Lee ‘494, and Lee ‘709 as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Uchida ‘221.
With respect to claim 12, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865, Lee ‘494, and Lee ‘709 teach the device as described in claim 11 above with the exception of the additional limitation further comprising a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region.
However, Uchida ‘221 teaches (FIG. 73) an image sensor comprising a capacitor (613) connected to a floating diffusion region (FD′) to increase the floating diffusion capacity ([0582]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865, Lee ‘494, and Lee ‘709 further comprising a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region as taught by Uchida ‘221 to increase the floating diffusion capacity
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang ‘865 in view of Jin ‘504, Uchida ‘221, and Kuroda et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2008/0303930, hereinafter Kuroda ‘930).
With respect to claim 17, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches (FIG. 8) an image sensor substantially as claimed, comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (100) comprising a first region (left PR) and a second region (right PR), the semiconductor substrate having a first conductivity type ([0069, 0073]);
a first photodiode (left 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR), the first photodiode having a second conductivity type ([0069]);
a second photodiode (right 110) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR), the second photodiode having the second conductivity type ([0069]);
an isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) penetrating the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first photodiode (left PR) and the second photodiode (right PR) ([0075, 0088]);
a first floating diffusion region (left FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR), the first floating diffusion region having the second conductivity type ([0092]);
a first transfer gate electrode (left TGE1) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first photodiode (left 110) and the first floating diffusion region (left FD) ([0089]);
a first charge storage region (left SD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the first region (left PR), the first charge storage region having the second conductivity type ([0093]);
a first switching element (left TGE2) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first floating diffusion region (left FD) and the first charge storage region (left SD) ([0089]);
a second floating diffusion region (right FD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR), the second floating diffusion region having the second conductivity type ([0092]);
a second transfer gate electrode (right TGE1) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) the second photodiode (right 110) and the second floating diffusion region (right FD) ([0089]);
a second charge storage region (right SD) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) of the second region (right PR), the second charge storage region having the second conductivity type ([0093]);
a second switching element (right TGE2) disposed on the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second floating diffusion region (right FD) and the second charge storage region (right SD) ([0089]);
a first well impurity region (left 120) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the first charge storage region (left SD) and the first photodiode (left 110), the first well impurity region having the first conductivity type and overlapping a portion of the first photodiode ([0092]); and
a second well impurity region (right 120) disposed in the semiconductor substrate (100) between the second charge storage region (right SD) and the second photodiode (right 110), the second well impurity region having the first conductivity type and overlapping a portion of the second photodiode ([0092]),
wherein the second charge storage region (right SD) is adjacent to a first portion of the isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) ([0075, 0088, 0093]).
Thus, Zhang ‘865 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of:
a conductive line connecting the first charge storage region and the second charge storage region; and
a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region,
wherein the first charge storage region is adjacent to a first portion of the isolation structure.
However, Jin ‘504 teaches (FIG. 10A) a conductive line connecting a first charge storage region (262) and a second charge storage region (272) to share a common signal from one of a source follower transistor (SF), selection transistor (SEL), and reset transistor (RS) ([0113]).
Further, Uchida ‘221 teaches (FIG. 73) an image sensor comprising a capacitor (613) connected to a floating diffusion region (FD′) to increase the floating diffusion capacity ([0582]).
Still further, Kuroda ‘930 teaches (FIGs. 3 and 4) photodiodes (42) arranged with mirror symmetry to increase the degree of liberty in arranging amplifier transistors and/or reset transistors in each of unit cells ([0044]). When applied to the image sensor of Zhang ‘865, this would result in arranging the first region (left PR) to have mirror symmetry with the second region (right PR) that has the second charge storage region (right SD) adjacent to a first portion of the isolation structure (105, 130, and 140) such that the first charge storage region (left SD) would also be adjacent to a first portion of the isolation structure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865 further comprising a conductive line connecting the first charge storage region and the second charge storage region as taught by Jin ‘504 to share a common signal from one of a source follower transistor, selection transistor, and reset transistor; to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865 further comprising a capacitor connected to the second floating diffusion region as taught by Uchida ‘221 to increase the floating diffusion capacity; and to have formed the first charge storage region of Zhang ‘865 adjacent to a first portion of the isolation structure as taught by Kuroda ‘930 to increase the degree of liberty in arranging amplifier transistors and/or reset transistors in each of unit cells.
With respect to claim 18, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches (FIG. 2A) further comprising: a source follower transistor (AX) that is configured to amplify a signal detected from the first floating diffusion region (FD); and a selection transistor (SX) that is configured to control a connection between the source follower transistor and an output line (VOUT) ([0040]).
With respect to claim 19, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865, Jin ‘504, Uchida ‘221, and Kuroda ‘930 teach the device as described in claim 17 above, but primary reference Zhang ‘865 does not explicitly teach the additional limitation further comprising a reset transistor connected in common to the first charge storage region and the second charge storage region.
However, Jin ‘504 teaches (FIG. 9A) an image sensor comprising a reset transistor (defined at RG1 and RG2) connected in common to a first charge storage region (262) and a second charge storage region (272) ([0048, 0109, 0113]) to provide a reset signal to said first charge storage region and said second charge storage region ([0113]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the image sensor of Zhang ‘865, Jin ‘504, Uchida ‘221, and Kuroda ‘930 further comprising a reset transistor connected in common to the first charge storage region and the second charge storage region as taught by Jin ‘504 to provide a reset signal to said first charge storage region and said second charge storage region.
With respect to claim 20, as best understood by Examiner, Zhang ‘865 teaches further comprising a color filter (C/F) on both of the first region (left PR) and the second region (right PR) ([0071]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the drawings and the specification are sufficient to overcome the prior objection to the drawings made in the non-final rejection filed 29 December 2025. The prior objection to the drawings has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 30 March 2026 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1-9 and 11-15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amendments to 1 and 11 overcome the outstanding rejections. Examiner respectfully disagrees. It remains unclear how the first transfer gate electrode (131a) is between the first photodiode (PD1) and the first floating diffusion region (141), and how the second transfer gate electrode (131b) is between the second photodiode (PD2) and the second floating diffusion region (145) for the reasons set forth above in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1-9 and 11-15.
Applicant’s amendments to claim 17 are sufficient to overcome the prior 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 17-20 made in the non-final rejection filed 29 December 2025. The prior 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 17-20 have been withdrawn. However, the amendments to claim 17 raise new matters of indefiniteness.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim(s) 1 and 17 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.
Applicant's arguments filed 30 March 2026 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (remarks, p. 20) that the first photodiode area (104) and the second photodiode area (110) of Lee ‘494 are formed in different epitaxial layers and cannot be relied upon to allegedly teach or suggest at least the claimed, “wherein a width of the second photodiode is less than a width in a first direction of the first photodiode in the first direction,” “wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate,” and, “wherein the first photodiode and the second photodiode are laterally spaced apart from each other by the isolation structure.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, Applicant misrepresents the elements of Lee ‘494 that the Office action cites as corresponding to the first photodiode and the second photodiode. Lee ‘494 teaches (FIG. 4) a first photodiode (110) and a second photodiode (104), wherein a width of the second photodiode is less than a width in a first direction of the first photodiode in the first direction, wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate (101) to provide for differing sensitivity and dynamic range, wherein wider photoelectric conversion elements generally have greater sensitivity and narrower photoelectric conversion elements generally have greater dynamic range ([0046]).
Although the first (110) and the second (104) photodiodes of Lee ‘494 may be formed in different epitaxial layers, this does not preclude Lee ‘494 from teaching, “wherein a width of the second photodiode (104) is less than a width in a first direction of the first photodiode (110) in the first direction,” and, “wherein the first direction is parallel to a top surface of the semiconductor substrate (101),” as claimed. Lee ‘494 is in the same field of endeavor of image sensors as Zhang ‘865, and one of ordinary skill in the art could apply the teachings of Lee ‘494 to the image sensor of Zhang ‘865 with a reasonable expectation of success.
Second, the limitation, “wherein the first photodiode and the second photodiode are laterally spaced apart from each other by the isolation structure,” is addressed by the primary reference Zhang ‘865.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher M. Roland whose telephone number is (571)270-1271. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-7:00PM Eastern.
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, Yara Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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.
/C.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights