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 arguments filed on 7/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that Camayd-Munoz does not disclose offset layers and that Kim does not disclose a color splitter with a size corresponding to the entire upper surface of the photosensor device portion (see page 10 of Remarks).
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Camayd-Munoz discloses a color splitter with a size corresponding to the entire upper surface of the photosensor device portion (figure2A shows that the size of the scattering structure correspond to the size of the 4 photosensitive devices) and Kim is relied upon for teaching the claimed offsetting of layers. Therefore, the prior art when taken in combination teaches the claimed invention.
In view of the foregoing, Applicant’s arguments are not persuaded and the amended claims stand rejected as further detailed below.
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 1-5, 14-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camayd-Munoz et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2020/0124866), hereinafter referenced as Camayd-Munoz, in view of Kim et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2017/0090206), hereinafter referenced as Kim.
Regarding claim 1, Camayd-Munoz discloses an image sensor comprising: a plurality of pixels, wherein each of the plurality of pixels comprises: a photoelectric conversion layer (figure 2A exhibits a pixel layer arranged at focal plane 203 as disclosed at paragraph 24); and a color routing meta-structure layer provided on the photoelectric conversion layer (figure 2A exhibits metastructure 201 as disclosed at paragraph 24; paragraph 30 teaches that the metastructure scatters light based on wavelength), wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer comprises a plurality of meta- structures (figure 3A shows that the meta-structure has a plurality of stacked meta-structures as disclosed at paragraph 35) and each of the plurality of meta-structures consists of small patterns (figure 3A exhibits a plurality of small patterns) having a dimension lower than a wavelength of incident light (paragraph 37 teaches that the structures have 60nm feature size, while the visible light wavelengths which are incident have a size of 400-700nm as disclosed in paragraph 30), and wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer has a size corresponding to an entire upper surface of the first pixel (figure2A shows that the size of the scattering structure correspond to the size of the 4 photosensitive devices). However, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing meta-structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing meta-structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor.
Kim is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Kim teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving color separation efficiency would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Kim’s known principal of wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor (figures 1, 2A, 2B and 2C show that as the edge of the sensor is approached, the layers of color routing structures E10 and E20 are shifted by increasing amounts such that the centerlines of the structures in figure 2A, 2B and 2C are inclined with respect to each other and centerlines of the structures in the pixels shown in figures 2B and 2C are also inclined with respect to the optical axis as disclosed at paragraph 82).
In view of the motivations such as improving color separation efficiency one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein each of the plurality of pixels comprises an R pixel, a G pixel, and a B pixel, and wherein the photoelectric conversion layer comprises four photoelectric conversion elements arranged in a 2x2 array (figure 2A exhibits a 2x2 array of red, blue and green pixels).
Regarding claim 3, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, in addition, Kim discloses wherein the first pixel and the second pixel are provided at locations away from a center of the image sensor (figure 1 shows that the pixels in figures 2B and 2C are both located away from the center of the image sensor).
Regarding claim 4, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, in addition, Kim discloses wherein one of the first pixel or the second pixel is provided at a center of the image sensor (figure 2A shows a pixel located at a center of the image sensor).
Regarding claim 5, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, in addition, Kim discloses wherein center lines of color routing meta-structure layers corresponding to the plurality of pixels are inclined differently from each other (figures 2A, 2B and 2C all show center lines inclined different from each other).
Regarding claim 14, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, however, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose a spacer between the photoelectric conversion layer and the color routing meta-structure layer.
Kim is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Kim teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of maintaining proper spacing between the color separation elements and the focal plane would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Kim’s known principal of a spacer between the photoelectric conversion layer and the color routing structure layer (figure 3 exhibits a spacer layer DL11 between the photoelectric conversion layer PS11 and color routing structures E11).
In view of the motivations such as maintaining proper spacing between the color separation elements and the focal plane one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 15, Camayd-Munoz discloses a meta-optical device comprising: a plurality of regions respectively corresponding to a plurality of pixels of an image sensor, wherein the plurality of regions comprises: a first region comprising a first color routing meta-structure layer, and a second region comprising a second color routing meta-structure layer, (figure 2A exhibits metastructure 201 as disclosed at paragraph 24; paragraph 30 teaches that the metastructure scatters light based on wavelength; it is apparent that there are different meta-structure layers across the pixel array), wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer comprises a plurality of meta- structures (figure 3A shows that the meta-structure has a plurality of stacked meta-structures as disclosed at paragraph 35) and each of the plurality of meta-structures consists of small patterns (figure 3A exhibits a plurality of small patterns) having a dimension lower than a wavelength of incident light (paragraph 37 teaches that the structures have 60nm feature size, while the visible light wavelengths which are incident have a size of 400-700nm as disclosed in paragraph 30), and wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer has a size corresponding to an entire upper surface of the first pixel (figure2A shows that the size of the scattering structure correspond to the size of the 4 photosensitive devices). However, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing meta-structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing meta-structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor.
Kim is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Kim teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving color separation efficiency would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Kim’s known principal of wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor (figures 1, 2A, 2B and 2C show that as the edge of the sensor is approached, the layers of color routing structures E10 and E20 are shifted by increasing amounts such that the centerlines of the structures in figure 2A, 2B and 2C are inclined with respect to each other and centerlines of the structures in the pixels shown in figures 2B and 2C are also inclined with respect to the optical axis as disclosed at paragraph 82).
In view of the motivations such as improving color separation efficiency one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 16, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the meta-optical device of claim 15, in addition, Kim discloses wherein a first chief ray angle (CRA) of light incident on the first region and a second CRA of light incident on the second region are different (figure 1 shows that the CRA of different regions are different).
Regarding claim 17, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the meta-optical device of claim 15, in addition, Kim discloses wherein the first color routing meta- structure layer and the second color routing meta-structure layer comprise layer structures comprising at least one layer shifted towards a center of the image sensor (figures 2B and 2C show different routing structures with layers shifted towards the center of the sensor by different amounts).
Regarding claim 18, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the meta-optical device of claim 17, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein the first color routing meta- structure layer comprises a first layer, a second layer, a third layer, a fourth layer, and a fifth layer stacked in sequence and comprising color routing characteristics (figure 3A exhibits wherein each meta-structure layer includes 5 layers stacked in sequence as disclosed at paragraph 35), and wherein a first shift of the first layer toward the center of the image sensor is less than at least a second shift of the fifth layer toward the center of the image sensor.
Kim is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Kim teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving color separation efficiency would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Kim’s known principal of a first shift of a first layer toward the center of the image sensor is less than at least a second shift of the final layer toward the center of the image sensor (2B and 2C show that as the edge of the sensor is approached, the layers of color routing structures E10 and E20 are shifted by increasing amounts such that the centerlines of the structures in figure 2A, 2B and 2C are inclined with respect to each other and the shift of the lowest layer is less than the shift of the top layer). When applying this known technique to Camayd-Munoz it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to shift the fifth layer, which is the top layer, more than the first layer which is the lowest layer in order to properly direct light to the photoelectric conversion layer.
In view of the motivations such as improving color separation efficiency one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 20, Camayd-Munoz discloses electronic device comprising: an image sensor comprising a plurality of pixels, wherein each of the plurality of pixels comprises: a photoelectric conversion layer (figure 2A exhibits a pixel layer arranged at focal plane 203 as disclosed at paragraph 24); and a color routing meta-structure layer provided at a first location facing the photoelectric conversion layer (figure 2A exhibits metastructure 201 as disclosed at paragraph 24; paragraph 30 teaches that the metastructure scatters light based on wavelength), wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer comprises a plurality of meta- structures (figure 3A shows that the meta-structure has a plurality of stacked meta-structures as disclosed at paragraph 35) and each of the plurality of meta-structures consists of small patterns (figure 3A exhibits a plurality of small patterns) having a dimension lower than a wavelength of incident light (paragraph 37 teaches that the structures have 60nm feature size, while the visible light wavelengths which are incident have a size of 400-700nm as disclosed in paragraph 30), and wherein the first color routing meta-structure layer has a size corresponding to an entire upper surface of the first pixel (figure2A shows that the size of the scattering structure correspond to the size of the 4 photosensitive devices). However, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing meta-structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing meta-structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor.
Kim is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Kim teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving color separation efficiency would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Kim’s known principal of wherein a first center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a first color routing structure layer of a first pixel among the plurality of pixels is inclined with respect to a second center line passing through a center of a lower surface and a center of an upper surface of a second color routing structure layer of a second pixel among the plurality of pixels, and wherein at least one of the first center line and the second center line is inclined with respect to an optical axis of the image sensor (figures 1, 2A, 2B and 2C show that as the edge of the sensor is approached, the layers of color routing structures E10 and E20 are shifted by increasing amounts such that the centerlines of the structures in figure 2A, 2B and 2C are inclined with respect to each other and centerlines of the structures in the pixels shown in figures 2B and 2C are also inclined with respect to the optical axis as disclosed at paragraph 82).
In view of the motivations such as improving color separation efficiency one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Greco et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2022/0137259), hereinafter referenced as Greco.
Regarding claim 6, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim discloses the image sensor of claim 1, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein the second color routing meta-structure layer comprises a plurality of meta-structures (figure 3A exhibits wherein each meta-structure includes a plurality of layers, each layer with their own sub-meta-structure as disclosed at paragraph 35). However, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein each of the plurality of meta-structures of the first color routing meta-structure and the second color routing meta-structure is symmetric with respect to a center of a corresponding pixel or a reference line passing through the center of the corresponding pixel.
Greco is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Greco teaches meta-structures wherein the motivation of improving light focusing would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Greco’s known principal of disclose wherein each of the plurality of meta-structures of the first color routing meta-structure and the second color routing meta-structure is symmetric with respect to a center of a corresponding pixel or a reference line passing through the center of the corresponding pixel (figure 1 shows a meta-lens which is symmetrical with respect to the center line).
In view of the motivations such as improving light focusing one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 7, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Greco discloses the image sensor of claim 6, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein the color routing meta-structure layer comprises a plurality of sub-color routing meta-structure layers sequentially provided on the photoelectric conversion layer (figure 3A exhibits wherein each meta-structure includes a plurality of layers, each layer with their own sub-meta-structure as disclosed at paragraph 35).
Regarding claim 8, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Greco discloses the image sensor of claim 7, in addition, Kim discloses wherein the plurality of sub-color routing meta-structure layers are shifted toward the optical axis (figure 1 shows that the structures are shifted towards the optical axis).
Regarding claim 9, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Greco discloses the image sensor of claim 7, in addition, Kim discloses wherein the plurality of sub-color routing meta-structure layers are provided in a layer structure in which a shift increases from a lower layer of the plurality of sub-color routing meta-structure layers to an upper layer of the plurality of sub-color routing meta-structure layers (figures 2B and 2C show that the upper layer is shifted more than the lower layer).
Claims 10-13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2020/0404185), hereinafter referenced as Noh.
Regarding claim 10, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh discloses the image sensor of claim 1, however, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein a first size of a first meta-structure of the first color routing meta-structure layer is different from a second size of a second meta-structure of the second color routing meta-structure layer.
Noh is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Noh teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving focusing performance would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Noh’s known principal of having different sizes of focusing elements based on their location in the pixel array (figure 3 shows that the diameters of the microlenses increase as the distance from the center of the pixel array increases). When applying this known technique to Camayd-Munoz it would have been obvious to have different sizes of color routing meta-structure layers, since the color routing meta-structure layers also perform focusing (paragraph 24).
In view of the motivations such as improving focusing performance one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 11, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh discloses the image sensor of claim 10, in addition, Noh discloses wherein the first size and the second size increase based on a chief ray angle (CRA) of light incident on the first pixel and the second pixel respectively (figure 3 shows that the diameters of the microlenses increase as the distance from the center of the pixel array increases, as the distance from the center increases, the chief ray angle also increases).
Regarding claim 12, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh discloses the image sensor of claim 10, in addition, Noh discloses wherein the first size and the second size decrease based on a chief ray angle (CRA) of light incident on the first pixel and the second pixel respectively (figure 3 shows that the diameters of the microlenses decrease as the distance from the center of the pixel array decreases, as the distance from the center decreases, the chief ray angle also decreases).
Regarding claim 13, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh discloses the image sensor of claim 10, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein at least one of the first meta-structure and the second meta-structure comprises a plurality of different sub-meta- structures (figure 3A exhibits wherein each meta-structure includes a plurality of layers, each layer with their own sub-meta-structure as disclosed at paragraph 35).
Regarding claim 19, Camayd-Munoz in view of Kim and further in view of Noh discloses the meta-optical device of claim 15, in addition, Camayd-Munoz discloses wherein the first color routing meta- structure layer comprises a first meta-structure, wherein the second color routing meta-structure layer comprises a second meta-structure, wherein the first meta-structure and the second meta-structure have a same shape (figure 2A shows that the meta-structures for the first and second 2x2 pixel arrays are the same). However, Camayd-Munoz fails to disclose wherein the first meta-structure and the second meta-structure have different sizes.
Noh is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Noh teaches an image sensor wherein the motivation of improving focusing performance would have prompted a predictable variation of Camayd-Munoz by applying Noh’s known principal of having different sizes of focusing elements based on their location in the pixel array (figure 3 shows that the diameters of the microlenses increase as the distance from the center of the pixel array increases). When applying this known technique to Camayd-Munoz it would have been obvious to have different sizes of color routing meta-structure layers, since the color routing meta-structure layers also perform focusing (paragraph 24).
In view of the motivations such as improving focusing performance one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Camayd-Munoz.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 JASON A FLOHRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7238. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-3:00.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at 571-272-7564. 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.
JASON A. FLOHRE
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/JASON A FLOHRE/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights