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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed 11/6/2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive, the rejection has been updated to address the newly amended limitations.
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, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al (U.S. Pub #2022/0199670), in view of Ogino et al (U.S. Pub #2020/0127032).
With respect to claim 1, Jang teaches a photoelectric conversion device that comprises a first surface (Fig. 3C, upper side) where light enters and a second surface (Fig. 3C, lower side) on an opposite side of the first surface, wherein a semiconductor layer comprising (1) a pixel region (Fig. 3C, APS) including a plurality of photoelectric conversion elements and (2) a light-shielded region (Fig. 3C, OB) light-shielded by a light-shielding layer (Fig. 3C, 231 and Paragraph 61) is arranged between the first surface and the second surface,
wherein the light-shielding layer is arranged between the first surface and the semiconductor layer (Fig. 3C, 100 and Paragraph 38),
wherein a wiring structure (Fig. 3C, 112) including a pad electrode is arranged between the second surface and the semiconductor layer,
wherein in an orthogonal projection (Fig. 3B) with respect to the first surface, at least a part of the light-shielding layer is arranged between the pixel region and the pad electrode,
wherein the semiconductor layer comprises (1) a third surface (Fig. 3C, lower surface of 100) in contact with the wiring structure and (2) a fourth surface (Fig. 3C, upper surface of 100) on an opposite side of the third surface,
wherein an opening (Fig. 3C, opening for 330) extending from the first surface to the pad electrode;
wherein the light shielding layer (Fig. 3C, 231) is arranged within an insulating film (Fig. 3C, 312) included in a structure arranged between the first surface and the semiconductor layer, and
wherein in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a part of the insulating film is arranged between the opening and the light shielding layer (Fig. 3C, a portion of film 232 is between the outer edge of 231 and the opening for 330; see also Fig. 3A, the space between OB and EXP).
Jang does not teach
a trench structure extending from the third surface toward the fourth surface are further arranged,
wherein the trench structure includes a portion arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region,
wherein in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the portion is arranged so as to overlap the light shielding layer.
Ogino teaches
a trench structure (Fig. 2, 230) extending from the third surface toward the fourth surface,
the trench structure includes a portion arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region (Fig. 2, 220), and
in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the portion is arranged so as to overlap the light shielding layer (Fig. 2, 230 overlaps with 333).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure between the third and fourth surfaces of Jang as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 2, Jang does not teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the trench structure intermittently or continuously surrounds the opening.
Ogino teaches in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the trench structure (Fig. 3, 230) intermittently or continuously surrounds the opening (Fig. 3, 400).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure intermittently or continuously surrounds the opening of Jang as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 3, Jang does not teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a virtual straight line connecting the opening and the pixel region without passing through the portion does not exist.
Ogino teaches that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a virtual straight line connecting the opening (Fig. 2-3, 400) and the pixel region (Fig. 2, 220) without passing through the portion (Figs. 2-3, 230) does not exist.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure such that a virtual straight line connecting the opening and the pixel region without passing through the portion does not exist as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 4, Jang does not teach that the trench structure includes a trench closest to the opening among a plurality of trenches provided in the light-shielded region of the semiconductor layer.
Ogino teaches that the trench structure (Fig. 2, 230) includes a trench closest to the opening (Fig. 2, 400) among a plurality of trenches provided in the light-shielded region of the semiconductor layer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure such that a trench closest to the opening among a plurality of trenches provided in the light-shielded region as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 6, Jang does not teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the trench structure is arranged so as to entirely overlap the light-shielding layer.
Ogino teaches that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the trench structure (Fig. 2, 230) is arranged so as to entirely overlap the light-shielding layer (Fig. 2, the opening 400 in layer 333 is formed inward of trench 230, hence the trench is completely covered/overlapping with the layer 333).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure arranged so as to entirely overlap the light-shielding layer of Jang as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 15, Jang does not teach that the trench structure extends through the semiconductor layer.
Ogino teaches that the trench structure (Fig. 2, 230) extends through the semiconductor layer (Fig. 2, 200).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure in the semiconductor layer of Jang as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 16, Jang teaches that the wiring structure includes a gate electrode (Fig. 3C, TG and Paragraph 46) of a transistor arranged in each of the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements.
With respect to claim 17, Jang does not teach that the trench structure is filled with an insulator.
Ogino teaches that the trench structure is filled with an insulator (Paragraph 99).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a trench structure in the semiconductor layer of Jang as taught by Ogino in order to suppress static electricity in the semiconductor layer (Paragraph 99).
With respect to claim 18, Jang teaches Equipment comprising: the photoelectric conversion device according to claim 1 (Paragraph 4); and a processing device configured to process a signal output from the photoelectric conversion device (Paragraph 27).
With respect to claim 19, Jang and Ogino teaches that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a part of the insulating film is arranged between the opening and the portion (Fig. 3C of Jang, the insulating film is directly abutting the opening, and in Fig. 2 of Ogino the portion 230 is positioned a distance away from the opening 400; hence in the combination/modification of Jang and Ogino the insulating film will be between the opening and the portion).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang and Ogino, in view of Park et al (U.S. Pub #2013/0323875).
With respect to claim 5, Jang does not teach that in the semiconductor layer, a peripheral region not covered with the light-shielding layer is further arranged between an end portion of the semiconductor layer and the light-shielded region, and in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the pad electrode is arranged in the light-shielded region.
Park teaches that in the semiconductor layer, a peripheral region (Fig. 6, 120) not covered with the light-shielding layer is further arranged between an end portion of the semiconductor layer and the light-shielded region, and in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the pad electrode (Fig. 6, 111) is arranged in the light-shielded region (Fig. 6, 122a and Paragraph 107).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the peripheral region such that the light blocking layer is not formed thereon as taught by Park in order to allow peripheral circuit isolation trenches to be formed to suppress interference and noise (Paragraph 148).
Claims 7-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang and Ogino, in view of Mizuta et al (U.S. Pub #2015/0008555).
With respect to claim 7, Jang does not teach a light-shielding pattern configured to reflect light exiting from the opening is arranged in the wiring structure, and the light-shielding pattern is arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region.
Mizuta teaches a light-shielding pattern (Fig. 11D, PG-h) configured to reflect light exiting from the opening is arranged in the wiring structure (Fig. 11D, 52), and the light-shielding pattern is arranged at least between an opening (Fig. 11D, PK) and a pixel region (Fig. 11D, 43).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a light shield pattern in the wiring structure of Jang and Ogino as taught by Mizuta in order to reflect incident light and to reduce a flare component on the pixel region (Paragraph 104).
With respect to claim 8, Jang, Ogino, and Mizuta teaches that in the orthogonal projection (Fig. 4 of Mizuta) with respect to the first surface, the light-shielding pattern surrounds the opening.
With respect to claim 9, Jang, Ogino, and Mizuta teaches that in the orthogonal projection (Fig. 20-20B of Mizuta) with respect to the first surface, a portion of the light-shielding pattern arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region includes a portion overlapping the pad electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a light shield pattern in the wiring structure of Jang as taught by Mizuta in order to reflect incident light and to reduce PID (Paragraph 181).
With respect to claim 10, Jang, Ogino, and Mizuta teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a portion of the light-shielding pattern arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region includes a portion overlapping the trench structure (Fig. 2-3 of Ogino, the portions surrounding the opening with overlapping in the horizontal direction in area between the opening and the pixel region).
With respect to claim 11, Jang, Ogino, and Mizuta teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, a portion of the light-shielding pattern arranged at least between the opening and the pixel region includes a portion overlapping the light-shielding layer (Fig. 2 of Ogino, the light shielding layer overlapping the entire region between the opening and pixel region, hence the light shielding layer will overlap the light shielding pattern of Mizuta).
With respect to claim 12, Jang, Ogino, and Mizuta teach that in the orthogonal projection with respect to the first surface, the light-shielding pattern includes a wiring pattern closest to the opening among wiring patterns arranged in the wiring structure (Fig. 2 of Ogino discloses other wiring pattern 205-211 further away from the opening).
With respect to claim 14, Jang, Ogino, does not teach a drive circuit configured to drive the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements is arranged in a region of the light-shielded region between the trench structure and the pixel region.
Mizuta teaches a drive circuit configured to drive the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements is arranged in a region of the light-shielded region between the trench structure and the pixel region (Paragraph 50 and 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a drive circuit in the region of the light-shielded region between the trench structure and the pixel region of Jang and Ogino as taught by Mizuta in order to implement the imaging circuit (Paragraph 50 and 62).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang and Ogino, in view of Ishino (U.S. Pub #2020/0343280).
With respect to claim 13, Jang does not teach a photoelectric conversion element different from the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements is arranged in a region of the light-shielded region between the trench structure and the pixel region.
Ishino teaches a photoelectric conversion element (Fig. 10, 284 and Paragraph 129) different from the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements is arranged in a region of the light-shielded region between the trench structure and the pixel region.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to provide a different photoelectric conversion element as taught by Ishino in order to provide isolation in the structure (Paragraph 129).
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 BENJAMIN P SANDVIK whose telephone number is (571)272-8446. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10-6.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at (571)-272-1945. 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.
/BENJAMIN P SANDVIK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812