DETAILED ACTION
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance.
Claim 17 recites in part “wherein a bottom surface of the third dielectric layer is vertically offset from a top surface of the first dielectric layer by a distance equal to the thickness of the second dielectric layer”.
To elaborate briefly on the above, the instant case is a child of an allowed case (S/N 17/197,291). The above limitations are effectively similar in scope to the allowable subject matter of the parent case’s claim 17, and thus are indicated as allowable for similar reasons.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Claim 7 recites in part “a reflector disposed within the interconnect dielectric structure and directly underlying the image sensor element, wherein the reflector is arranged between a first level of conductive wires in the plurality of conductive wires and the front-side of the substrate, wherein first distance between opposing sidewalls of the reflector is greater than a second distance between opposing sidewalls of the active layer”. The totality of the limitations are not taught in the cited prior art, when taken in combination with the rest of claim 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 of this title, 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 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-2018/0350865) by Huang et al (“Huang”) in view of (US-2022/0302200) by Ge et al (“Ge”).
Regarding claim 10, Huang discloses in FIGs. 3-4 and related text, e.g., an integrated circuit (IC), comprising:
a first IC die (402) comprising a first substrate (404) and a first interconnect structure (410) overlying the first substrate;
a second IC die (416) overlying the first IC die, wherein the second IC die comprises a second substrate (302) and a second interconnect structure (206) underlying the second substrate, wherein the first and second IC dies contact at a bond interface (412) between the first and second interconnect structures;
a plurality of image sensor elements (320) disposed within the second substrate;
a grid structure (FIG. 2, 228) overlying the plurality of image sensor elements, wherein each image sensor element is spaced laterally between sidewalls of the grid structure (see FIGs. 3 & 4); and
an anti-reflective coating (ARC) structure (316, par. 61) disposed between the second substrate and the grid structure (see FIG. 3).
Huang does not disclose “wherein the ARC structure comprises a first dielectric layer, a second dielectric layer, and a third dielectric layer each with an index of refraction that is different from one another, wherein the second dielectric layer overlies the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer overlies the second dielectric layer, and wherein the first dielectric layer comprises a first metal oxide and the second dielectric layer comprises a second metal oxide different from the first metal oxide, and wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with both the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer”.
Ge discloses in FIG. 1 and related text, e.g., “wherein the ARC structure (FIG. 1; par. 5) comprises a first dielectric layer (bottom “H layer”; see par. 26, which teaches that there can be any arrangement of layers, as described in par. 26; in the instant case, Ta2O5), a second dielectric layer (second from bottom “H layer”; see par. 26; in the instant case, TiO2), and a third dielectric layer (third from bottom “L layer”; see par. 26; in the instant case SiO2; same as layer 180 in FIG. 1H), wherein the second dielectric layer overlies the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer overlies the second dielectric layer (see FIG. 1), and wherein the first dielectric layer comprises a first metal oxide and the second dielectric layer comprises a second metal oxide different from the first metal oxide (as described above), and wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with both the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer (first of all, it is necessary to ascertain the broadest reasonable interpretation of introduced terms; the term “interface” according to the august Webster dictionary means “to connect by means of an interface”; it is important to note that “interface” does not mean “direct interface”; for example, an app on the phone can be used to control the spin speed of a clothes dryer; the phone app interfaces with the motor inside the dryer, but not directly; it goes to a wireless received inside dryer, then it goes to computer interface inside dryer, and only then the signal goes to the motor, to control speed; this was a long way to say that term “interface” does not require direct contact; there can be intermediaries; second of all, as can be clearly seen in Ge’s reference, “second dielectric layer” is in the chain of interconnections both with “first” and “third” layers and thus it interfaces - indirectly, through intermediaries - just like in our “phone app” and “clothes dryer motor” example; thus meeting limitations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Huang with “wherein the ARC structure comprises a first dielectric layer, a second dielectric layer, and a third dielectric layer each with an index of refraction that is different from one another, wherein the second dielectric layer overlies the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer overlies the second dielectric layer, and wherein the first dielectric layer comprises a first metal oxide and the second dielectric layer comprises a second metal oxide different from the first metal oxide, and wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with both the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer” as taught by Ge, in order to achieve a particular optical performance, in accordance with specific design parameters (see par. 5; Ge makes clear that there are a multitude of possible goals that could be achieved by using his layer arrangements).
Regarding claim 11, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the first metal oxide is tantalum oxide and the second metal oxide is titanium oxide (as explained in claim 10).
Regarding claim 12, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein a first index of refraction of the first dielectric layer is less than a second index of refraction of the second dielectric layer, wherein a third index of refraction of the third dielectric layer is less than the second index of refraction (per Applicant’s own disclosure, the above order of layers that are taught by Ge (Ta2O5, TiO2 and SiO2), meets the above cited requirements for index of refraction).
Regarding claim 13, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the ARC structure further comprises a passivation layer (Ge, FIG. 1, bottom L layer; it reads on “passivation” layer, because it is located on very surface of substrate; hence, it passivates surface of the substrate, by definition) disposed between the first dielectric layer and the second substrate (as shown in FIG. 1), wherein an index of refraction of the passivation layer is equal to the third index of refraction (the L layer can be SiO2, as was explained in claim 10; hence, the 2 SiO2 layers will have same index of refraction; thus meeting limitations).
Regarding claim 14, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein a thickness of the third dielectric layer (par. 71; 100-200nm; 200nm, in the instant case, for example) is greater than a thickness of second dielectric layer (par. 90; 10-50 nm; 50nm in the instant case, for example), wherein the thickness of the second dielectric layer is greater than a thickness of the passivation layer (par. 134; 5-300nm; 5nm, in the instant case, for example).
Regarding claim 15, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the second index of refraction is within a range of about 2.4 to 2.6 and the third index of refraction is less than about 1.55 (the materials cited in claim 10 meet those limitations).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-2018/0350865) by Huang et al (“Huang”) in view of (US-2022/0302200) by Ge et al (“Ge”) as applied to claim(s) above, and further in view of (US-2019/0096929) by Chiang et al (“Chiang”).
Regarding claim 16, the combined device of Huang and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., substantially the entirety of claimed subject matter, including further comprising: a first isolation structure (FIG. 3, 326) extending from a front-side surface of the second substrate to a first point above the front-side surface (see FIGs. 3-4), wherein each image sensor element is spaced laterally between sidewalls of the first isolation structure (see FIGs. 3-4).
Huang and Ge do not disclose “a second isolation structure extending from a back-side surface of the second substrate to a second point below the back-side surface, wherein the second point is below the first point such that the second isolation structure contacts the first isolation structure”.
Chiang discloses in FIG. 4 and related text, e.g., “a second isolation structure (FIG. 4, 113/112) extending from a back-side surface (it is backside surface, because that is the surface that lens 118 in FIG. 1; also, see Title) of the second substrate (it is second substrate in combined device) to a second point below the back-side surface (see FIG. 4), wherein the second point (the lowest point where 113 reaches) is below the first point (the highest point that “first isolation structure” (302) reaches) such that the second isolation structure (113/112) contacts the first isolation structure (302)”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the device of Huang and Ge with “a second isolation structure extending from a back-side surface of the second substrate to a second point below the back-side surface, wherein the second point is below the first point such that the second isolation structure contacts the first isolation structure” as taught by Chiang, in order to provide better isolation between pixels.
Claims 1-6 & 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-2019/0148434) by Hsu et al (“Hsu”) in view of (US-2020/0395393) by Cheng et al (“Cheng”) and further in view of (US-2022/0302200) by Ge et al (“Ge”).
Regarding claim 1, Hsu discloses in FIG. 1H and related text, e.g., a pixel sensor (see FIG. 1H), comprising:
a substrate (110) having a front-side (bottom) opposite a back-side (top);
an image sensor element comprising an active layer (118) disposed within the substrate; and
an anti-reflective coating (ARC) structure (170) overlying the back-side of the substrate.
Hsu does not disclose “wherein the active layer comprises germanium”.
Hsu also does not disclose “wherein the ARC structure comprises a first dielectric layer overlying the back-side of the substrate, a second dielectric layer overlying the first dielectric layer, and a third dielectric layer overlying the second dielectric layer, wherein a first index of refraction of the first dielectric layer is less than a second index of refraction of the second dielectric layer, and wherein a third index of refraction of the third dielectric layer is less than the first index of refraction, wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the second dielectric layer”.
Cheng discloses in FIG. 1A and related text, e.g., “wherein the active layer (102) comprises germanium” (par. 70).
Ge discloses in FIG. 1 and related text, e.g., “wherein the ARC structure (FIG. 1; par. 5) comprises a first dielectric layer (bottom “H layer”; see par. 26, which teaches that there can be any arrangement of layers, as described in par. 26; in the instant case, Ta2O5) overlying the back-side of the substrate (“base substrate”; it is a “back-side of the substrate in a combined device, because the cited layers of Ge are part of optical path, same as layer 170 of Hsu), a second dielectric layer (second from bottom “H layer”; see par. 26; in the instant case, TiO2) overlying the first dielectric layer, and a third dielectric layer (third from bottom “L layer”; see par. 26; in the instant case SiO2; same as layer 180 in FIG. 1H) overlying the second dielectric layer, wherein a first index of refraction of the first dielectric layer is less than a second index of refraction of the second dielectric layer, and wherein a third index of refraction of the third dielectric layer is less than the first index of refraction (per Applicant’s own disclosure, the above order of layers that are taught by Ge (Ta2O5, TiO2 and SiO2), meets the above cited requirements for index of refraction), wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the first dielectric layer (first of all, it is necessary to ascertain the broadest reasonable interpretation of introduced terms; the term “interface” according to the august Webster dictionary means “to connect by means of an interface”; it is important to note that “interface” does not mean “direct interface”; for example, an app on the phone can be used to control the spin speed of a clothes dryer; the phone app interfaces with the motor inside the dryer, but not directly; it goes to a wireless received inside dryer, then it goes to computer interface inside dryer, and only then the signal goes to the motor, to control speed; this was a long way to say that term “interface” does not require direct contact; there can be intermediaries; second of all, as can be clearly seen in Ge’s reference, “second dielectric layer” is above “top surface of the first dielectric layer” and it interfaces with it indirectly, through intermediaries, just like in our “phone app” and “clothes dryer motor” example; thus meeting limitations) and the third dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the second dielectric layer (same as in previous example; “third” is above “top surface of the second”; thus interfaces; thus meeting limitations)”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Hsu with “wherein the active layer comprises germanium” as taught by Cheng and with “wherein the ARC structure comprises a first dielectric layer overlying the back-side of the substrate, a second dielectric layer overlying the first dielectric layer, and a third dielectric layer overlying the second dielectric layer, wherein a first index of refraction of the first dielectric layer is less than a second index of refraction of the second dielectric layer, and wherein a third index of refraction of the third dielectric layer is less than the first index of refraction, wherein the second dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer interfaces with a top surface of the second dielectric layer” as taught by Ge,
in order to allow of absorption of light of particular wavelength (par. 5; Cheng teaches that use of Germanium allows for that) and
in order to achieve a particular optical performance, in accordance with specific design parameters (see par. 5; Ge makes clear that there are a multitude of possible goals that could be achieved by using his layer arrangements), respectively.
Regarding claim 2, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the first dielectric layer, the second dielectric layer, and the third dielectric layer each comprise a dielectric material different from one another (see Ge’s teachings in claim 1; 3 different materials are taught).
Regarding claim 3, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein a thickness of the first dielectric layer (par. 71; 80-120 nm) is greater than a thickness of the second dielectric layer (par. 90; 10-50 nm), and wherein a thickness of the third dielectric layer (par. 71; 100-200 nm) is greater than the thickness of the first dielectric layer (hence, limitations are met, at least by overlapping range).
Regarding claim 4, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the image sensor element is configured to generate electrical signals from near infrared (NIR) radiation (see pars. 5 & 11 of Cheng).
Regarding claim 5, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the first dielectric layer comprises tantalum oxide, the second dielectric layer comprises titanium oxide or silicon carbide, and the third dielectric layer comprises silicon dioxide (see Ge’s teachings in claim 1; the specified materials are taught).
Regarding claim 6, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., further comprising:
an isolation structure (Hsu, FIG. 1H, S) disposed within the substrate, wherein the isolation structure extends from the back-side of the substrate to the front-side of the substrate (see FIG. 1H), and wherein the image sensor element is spaced laterally between sidewalls of the isolation structure (see FIG. 1H).
Regarding claim 8, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., further comprising: a grid structure (FIG. 1H, 190) overlying the ARC structure; a
light filter (FIG. 1H, 220R/G/B) overlying the grid structure; and
a micro-lens (FIG. 1H, 230) overlying the light filter.
Regarding claim 9, the combined device of Hsu, Cheng and Ge disclose in cited figures and related text, e.g., wherein the substrate comprises a first material (silicon in Hsu (110, par. 25) and Cheng (104, par. 70)) different from germanium.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, regarding claims 1 & 10. Please see detailed rejections of claims 1 & 10 above. The detailed rejection explain how Examiner believes that the references still read on the newly amended limitations of claims 1 & 10.
Conclusion
Additional references (if any) are cited on the PTO-892 as disclosing similar features to those of the instant invention.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Alexander Belousov whose telephone number is (571)-272-3167. The examiner can normally be reached on 10 am-4 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jeff Natalini can be reached on 571-272-2266. 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.
/Alexander Belousov/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2894
06/27/26
/Mounir S Amer/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights