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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/18/2026 has been entered.
Acknowledgement
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the present application. Claims 1 and 18 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 and 19-20 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. Specifically, the arguments are moot in view of the new prior art Kim et al. (US 20200396388 A1; hereinafter "Kim’88") relied upon in this office action.
Claims 14-18 are indicated allowable in this Office action as none of the closest art teaches an image sensor including a first width of a first cross section of the first micro lens cut along a diagonal direction toward the second sub-pixel being smaller than a second width of a second cross section of the first micro lens cut along an orthogonal direction toward another first micro lens adjacent thereto, in view all the other limitations cited in claim 14.
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) 1-6, 10, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonakdar et al. (US 20210242262 A1; hereinafter “Bonakdar”) in view of Kim et al. (US 20200396388 A1; hereinafter "Kim’88").
In re claim 1, Bonakdar discloses an image sensor (figs. 6-7) comprising:
unit pixels 614, 612 (¶31-33), each of the unit pixels including a first sub-pixel 614(1) and a second sub- pixel 612(1) adjacent to the first sub-pixel in a plan view of the image sensor; and
a lens array including
a first sub-lens area (e.g., area occupied by lens 760(1); hereinafter “Lens_Area1”) on the first sub-pixel 614(1) of each unit pixel (¶35) and a second sub-lens area (e.g., area occupied by lens 770(1); hereinafter “Lens_Area2”) on the second sub-pixel of each unit pixel 612(1) (¶36),
the first sub-lens area including a first micro lens 760(1), and
the second sub-lens area including a second micro lens 770(1), and
the first micro lens 760(1) including a depression 766 defined in a central area thereof (¶35).
Bonakdar does not expressly disclose:
a lens array including a base layer, the first sub-lens area on the base layer and the second sub-lens area on the base layer,
the base layer, the first sub- lens area, and the second sub-lens area are integral and formed of a same material,
the first micro lens contacting the second micro lens.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’88 discloses an image sensor (figs. 1-2), comprising:
a lens array 232, 231 including a base layer (e.g., a preliminary lens layer shown as having thicknesses T1, T2; ¶58. Hereinafter “Lens_base”), a first sub-lens area 232 on the base layer and a second sub-lens area 231 on the base layer,
the base layer (Lens_base), the first sub- lens area 232, and the second sub-lens area 231 are integral and formed of a same material (¶58),
the first micro lens 323 contacting the second micro lens 231.
It 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 to employ the teachings of Kim’88 into the sensor of Bonakdar in order to obtain precise image information within a short time, utilizing an auto-focusing function having difference in thickness, distance, or depth of the micro lens array layer (¶2-8,58 of Kim’88).
In re claim 2, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 1.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 1, wherein a size of a planar shape of an outer boundary of the first micro lens 760(1) is greater than a size of a planar shape of an outer boundary of the second micro lens 770(1).
In re claim 3, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 2.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 2, wherein a line extending along a summit of the first micro lens 760(1) defines a closed curve in the plan view of the image sensor.
In re claim 4, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 3.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 3, wherein the first micro lens 760(1) includes a first portion (e.g. a left portion) at one side around the depression 766 and a second portion (e.g. a right portion) at the other side around the depression 766.
In re claim 5, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 4.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 4, wherein a vertical dimension of a summit of each of the first portion and the second portion 762 is equal to or smaller than a vertical dimension of a summit of the second micro lens (i.e., a summit of 770(1)) (¶35).
In re claim 6, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 4.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 4, wherein a shape of the first portion (i.e. a left portion of 760(1)) and a shape of the second portion (i.e. a right portion of 760(1)) are symmetrical with each other with respect to the depression 766.
In re claim 10, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 1.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 1, wherein the lens array includes a base face 659 (¶31) which an outer boundary of the first micro lens 760(1) and an outer boundary of the second micro lens 770(1) are on, the depression 766 is on the base face.
In re claim 13, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 1.
Bonakdar further discloses in (figs. 6-7), the image sensor of claim 1, wherein the second micro lens 770(1) is free of a depression in a central area thereof.
In re claim 19, Bonakdar discloses an image sensor (figs. 6-7) comprising:
a plurality of unit pixels 614, 612 (¶31-33),
each of the unit pixels including a first sub-pixel 614 and a second sub-pixel 612 adjacent to the first sub-pixel in a plan view of the image sensor,
an area size of a second sub-pixel 612 being smaller than an area size of the first sub-pixel 614 in the plan view; and
a lens array 760, 770 including a first sub-lens area (e.g., area occupied by lens 760(1); hereinafter “Lens_Area1”) on the first sub-pixel 614(1) of each unit pixel and a second sub-lens area (e.g., area occupied by lens 770(1); hereinafter “Lens_Area2”) on the second sub-pixel 612(1) of each unit pixel,
the first sub-lens area including a plurality of first micro lenses 760(1) having two lenses (¶35), and the second sub-lens area including a second micro lens 770(1), and
a number of the second micro lenses 770(1) included in the second sub-lens area being smaller than a number of the plurality of first micro lenses 760(1) included in the first sub-lens area.
Bonakdar does not expressly disclose:
a lens array including a base layer, the first sub-lens area on the base layer and the second sub-lens area on the base layer,
the base layer, the first sub- lens area, and the second sub-lens area are integral and formed of a same material,
the first micro lens contacting the second micro lens.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim’88 discloses an image sensor (figs. 1-2), comprising:
a lens array 232, 231 including a base layer (e.g., a preliminary lens layer shown as having thicknesses T1, T2; ¶58. Hereinafter “Lens_base”), a first sub-lens area 232 on the base layer and a second sub-lens area 231 on the base layer,
the base layer (Lens_base), the first sub- lens area 232, and the second sub-lens area 231 are integral and formed of a same material (¶58),
the first micro lens 323 contacting the second micro lens 231.
It 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 to employ the teachings of Kim’88 into the sensor of Bonakdar in order to obtain precise image information within a short time, utilizing an auto-focusing function having difference in thickness, distance, or depth of the micro lens array layer (¶2-8,58 of Kim’88).
Claim(s) 7 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonakdar in view Kim’88, as applied to claim 6 and 19 above, respectively and further in view of Hsieh et al. (US 20220271079 A1; hereinafter “Hsieh”).
In re claim 7, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 1.
Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, does not expressly disclose wherein curvature radii of cross sections of the first portion, the second portion, and the second micro lens are equal each other.
In the same field of endeavor, Hsieh discloses an image sensor (Figs. 12A-12B) wherein curvature radii of cross sections of a first portion 1202A and a second portion 1202A of a first micro lens over a first sub-pixel 202A, and a second micro lens 1202B over a second sub-pixel 202B are equal each other (¶59-60, 22).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Hsieh into Bonakdar/Kim’88 to provide for an increase in uniformity of the radiation on the top surface of the sensor elements (¶66 of Hsieh).
In re claim 20, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 19.
Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, does not expressly disclose wherein the plurality of first micro lenses and the second micro lens have a same shape and a same size.
In the same field of endeavor, Hsieh discloses an image sensor (Figs. 12A-12B),
wherein a plurality of first micro lenses 1202A, 1202A over a first sub-pixel 202A and a second micro lens 1202B over a second sub-pixel 202B have a same shape and a same size (¶59-60, 22).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Hsieh into Bonakdar to provide for an increase in uniformity of the radiation on the top surface of the sensor elements (¶66 of Hsieh).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonakdar in view Kim’88, as applied to claim 6 and 19 above, respectively and further in view of Ichimura et al. (US 20120326011 A1; hereinafter “Ichimura”).
In re claim 8, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 4.
Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, does not expressly disclose wherein a summit outer area between an outer boundary and the summit of the first micro lens and a summit inner area between the summit and the depression have different radii of curvature.
In the same field of endeavor, Ichimura discloses an image sensor (Figs. 7),
wherein a summit outer area between an outer boundary and the summit of the first micro lens 15-1 (a summit outer area is an outer area between outer boundary of a first portion of the first micro lens 15-1 from the summit to the leftmost point of the first micro lens 15-1) and a summit inner area between the summit and the depression 16-1 have different radii of curvature (¶41-44, 72-73).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Ichimura into Bonakdar/Kim’88 to provide for a higher condensing ratio (¶72-73 of Ichimura).
In re claim 9, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim and Ichimura, discloses the image sensor of claim 8.
Ichimura further discloses in fig. 7, wherein the summit outer area has a same radius of curvature as a radius of curvature of the second micro lens (e.g., a radius of curvature of an outer portion of a second micro lens 15-2).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonakdar in view of Kim’88, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Jang et al. (US 20210197506 A1; hereinafter “Jang”).
In re claim 11, Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, discloses the image sensor of claim 1.
Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88, does not expressly disclose wherein the depression includes a hole, and a planar shape of the hole has a closed curve.
In the same field of endeavor, Jang discloses an image sensor (Fig. 1),
wherein a depression between adjacent micro lenses 4, 6 includes a hole 21, and a planar shape of the hole 21 has a closed curve (¶39-41).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Jang into Bonakdar to reduce reflection in the microarray lenses (¶42 of Jang).
In re claim 12, Bonakdar (figs. 6-7), as modified by Kim’88 and Jang (fig. 1), discloses the image sensor of claim 11, wherein the first micro lens (Bonakdar: 760(1)) includes a first portion (e.g. a left portion) at one side around the hole (Jang: 21), and a second portion (e.g. a right portion of 760(1) of Bonakdar) at the other side around the hole (Jang: 21).
Furthermore, Jang discloses the dimensions of the air gaps can be modified and increase to further reduce reflection in the microarray lenses (¶46). Therefore, one 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 to employ the teachings of Jang and form the first portion and the second portion of micro lenses being spaced apart from each other by a diameter of the hole to further reduce reflection in the microarray lenses (¶46).
Bonakdar, as modified by Kim’88 and Jang, does not expressly disclose a cross section of the first portion, a cross section of the second portion, and a cross section of the second micro lens have a same shape and a same size.
In the same field of endeavor, Hsieh discloses an image sensor (Figs. 12A-12B) wherein a cross section of a first portion 1202A and a second portion 1202A of a first micro lens over a first sub-pixel 202A, and a cross section of the second micro lens 1202B over a second sub-pixel 202B have a same shape and a same size (¶59-60, 22).
It 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 to employ the teachings of Hsieh into Bonakdar/Kim/Jang to provide for an increase in uniformity of the radiation on the top surface of the sensor elements (¶66 of Hsieh).
Allowable Subject Matter
-Claims 14-18 are allowed.
Closest prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not expressly disclose an image sensor including a first width of a first cross section of the first micro lens cut along a diagonal direction toward the second sub-pixel being smaller than a second width of a second cross section of the first micro lens cut along an orthogonal direction toward another first micro lens adjacent thereto.
Dependent claims 15-18 are indicated allowable based on their dependency on claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NILUFA RAHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8926. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm 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, Yara J. 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.
/NILUFA RAHIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights