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 .
For all the claims, the Examiner notes that:
1) Recognizing another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
2) A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6, 13 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 claim(s) contains 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.
Claim 6 recites matter that was described in Fig. 2 however parent claim 1 is based on Fig. 4 which is a different embodiment than Fig. 2 thus the Examiner asks if this is new matter, and requests the Applicant to show support in the specification.
Claim 13 recites matter that was described in Fig. 2 however parent claim 9 is based on Fig. 4 which is a different embodiment than Fig. 2 thus the Examiner asks if this is new matter, and requests the Applicant to show support in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iguchi (US 20050194654 A1)
In regard to claim 1 Iguchi teaches a photodiode [see paragraph 0050, see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array”, see also Fig. 8] semiconductor stack comprising:
an absorption layer [“the absorption layer 3: n-type InGaAs”];
a photon trap layer [“the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 26: n-type InGaAs”] to absorb [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”] at least some photons that are not absorbed in the absorption layer;
a substrate, wherein the substrate [“the substrate 2: n-type InP”] is positioned [see Fig. 7] between the photon trap layer and the absorption layer; and
a cathode layer [“the n-electrode 8: AuGeNi”], wherein the photon trap layer is positioned [see Fig. 7] between the substrate and the cathode layer.
In regard to claim 2 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is doped [“the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 26: n-type InGaAs”] to cause photon carriers to be recombined [see that the photogenerated carriers recombine using SRH or Auger recombination] in the photon trap layer.
In regard to claim 3 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is to reduce a number of times [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”] that multiple photons make round trips in the photodiode semiconductor stack.
In regard to claim 4 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is formed of a common material [see claim 1 same material InGaAs] as the absorption layer.
In regard to claim 5 Iguchi teaches further comprising: a p-doped semiconductor [see Fig. 7 “the p-region 5: Zn-diffused”] area, wherein light is to enter [ see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array”] into the photodiode semiconductor stack through the p-doped semiconductor area.
In regard to claim 6 Iguchi teaches further comprising: a doped layer [“the buffer layer 30: n-type InP”] positioned between the photon trap layer and the absorption layer, wherein the doped layer is to avoid diffusion [see band gap of 30] of carriers from the photon trap layer to the absorption layer.
Claim(s) 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iguchi (US 20050194654 A1)
In regard to claim 9 Iguchi teaches a photodiode [see paragraph 0050, see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array”, see also Fig. 8] module comprising:
a p-doped semiconductor area [see Fig. 7 “the p-region 5: Zn-diffused”], wherein light is to be received into the photodiode [see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array”] module through the p-doped semiconductor area;
an absorption layer [“the absorption layer 3: n-type InGaAs”];
a photon trap layer [“the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 26: n-type InGaAs”], the absorption layer being positioned [see Fig. 7] between the p-doped semiconductor area and the photon trap layer, the photon trap layer to absorb [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”] at least some photons from the light that the absorption layer does not absorb to reduce [see that the photogenerated carriers recombine using SRH or Auger recombination, thus helping recovery] a recovery time of the photodiode module;
a substrate [“the substrate 2: n-type InP”] positioned between the photon trap layer and the absorption layer; and
a cathode layer [“the n-electrode 8: AuGeNi”], wherein the photon trap layer is positioned [see Fig. 7] between the substrate and the cathode layer.
In regard to claim 10 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is doped [“the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 26: n-type InGaAs”] to cause photon carriers to be recombined [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”, see that the photogenerated carriers recombine using SRH or Auger recombination] in the photon trap layer.
In regard to claim 11 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is to reduce a number of times [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”] that multiple photons make round trips in the photodiode semiconductor stack.
In regard to claim 12 Iguchi teaches wherein the photon trap layer is formed of a common material [see claim 9 same material InGaAs] as the absorption layer.
In regard to claim 13 Iguchi teaches further comprising: a doped layer [“the buffer layer 30: n-type InP”] positioned between the photon trap layer and the absorption layer, wherein the doped layer is to avoid diffusion [see band gap of 30] of carriers from the photon trap layer to the absorption layer.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iguchi (US 20050194654 A1) in view of Kusakabe (US 5569942 A). Chen (CN-86204468 see PTO-892 filed 10/30/2025) is provided as evidence for claim 17.
In regard to claim 16 Iguchi teaches a photodiode [see paragraph 0050, see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array”, see also Fig. 8] module comprising:
a front side illuminated photodiode [see “FIG. 7 is a cross-sectional view of a below-type front-illuminated-type photodiode array” “the p-region 5: Zn-diffused”] semiconductor structure having an absorption layer [“the absorption layer 3: n-type InGaAs”];
a photon trap layer [“the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 26: n-type InGaAs”] positioned with respect to the front side illuminated photodiode semiconductor structure to reduce [see Fig. 7 see paragraph 0041 “Because the band gap is smaller than the energy of the incoming lightwave, the leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer absorbs the incoming lightwave having that wavelength. That is, the leakage-lightwave-absorbin- g layer absorbs the leakage lightwave to attenuate it”, see that the photogenerated carriers recombine using SRH or Auger recombination, thus helping recovery] a recovery time of the photodiode module;
a substrate [“the substrate 2: n-type InP”] positioned between the photon trap layer and the front side illuminated photodiode semiconductor structure; and
a cathode layer [“the n-electrode 8: AuGeNi”], wherein the photon trap layer is positioned [see Fig. 7] between the substrate and the cathode layer,
but does not state avalanche .
See Iguchi “the p-region 5: Zn-diffused; the window layer 4: n-type InP”.
See Kusakabe “The feature and advantages of the avalanche photo-diode according to the present invention” “Turning to FIG. 6, another APD according to a second embodiment of the invention is illustrated” “an n.sup.- -InP window layer 206” “a guard ring 210 is formed by introducing, for instance, Be by using ion implantation technique” “a p.sup.+ -type photo-incident region 211 is selectively formed by diffusing Zn” “an n.sup.+ -InP multiplication layer 205” “an n-InGaAsP intermediate layer 204” “a first n.sup.- -InGaAs photo-absorbing layer 203”.
Thus, 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 modify Iguchi to include avalanche multiplication.
Thus it would be obvious to combine the references to arrive at the claimed invention.
The motivation is that avalanche multiplication is well known to a person of ordinary skill in the art as a technique to multiply the photogenerated carriers to obtain a higher signal to obtain better detection.
In regard to claim 17 Iguchi and Kusakabe as combined does not state in Fig. 7 wherein the photon trap layer has a thickness that is higher than a carrier diffusion length of the photon trap layer.
However see Iguchi paragraph 0067 Example 1 “an n-type InGaAs leakage-lightwave-absorbing layer 25 (thickness: 3 .mu.m, Si-doped, and n=1.times.10.sup.18 cm.sup.-3)”. See that Iguchi desires to absorb light, see paragraph 0044-0046 thickness discussion.
See that a person of ordinary skill in the art is aware that carrier diffusion length reduces with increasing doping concentration, as evidence see Chen “Because high base doping concentration, the surface concentration is generally between 1018 cm and 3 above the base area and in minority carrier diffusion length becomes very short”.
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 use “wherein the photon trap layer has a thickness that is higher than a carrier diffusion length of the photon trap layer”, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233
In regard to claim 18 Iguchi and Kusakabe as combined teaches [see claim 16 same material InGaAs] wherein the photon trap layer is formed of a common material as the absorption layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
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 SITARAMARAO S YECHURI whose telephone number is (571)272-8764. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 PM.
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, Britt D Hanley can be reached at 571-270-3042. 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.
/SITARAMARAO S YECHURI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights