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 .
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, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Kim et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2021/0335877).
Regarding claims 1, 10, Kim et al. disclose (Fig. 4) an image sensor comprising: a first substrate (110) comprising a pixel area (APS) and a peripheral area (OB) adjacent to the pixel area, the pixel area comprising a plurality of pixels (PD) in a 2-dimensional array; a first wiring layer (132) on a lower surface of the first substrate; an anti-reflective layer (140) having a first refractive index, the anti-reflective layer being on an upper surface of the first substrate; and color filters (170) on the anti-reflective layer corresponding to the pixel area and spaced apart from each other by a metal-free ([0099] silicon oxide) grid pattern (160). Kim et al. also disclose a second wiring layer (230) under the first wiring layer; a second substrate (210) under the second wiring layer, a pixel transistor (TR1) is on the first substrate and transistors (TR2) are on the second substrate.
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) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al.
Regarding claim 21, Kim et al. disclose (Figs. 15-28) a method of manufacturing an image sensor, the method comprising: forming a plurality of pixels (PD), respectively comprising a photodiode, in a pixel area of a first substrate of a first semiconductor chip and forming a first wiring layer (Fig. 17) on an active surface of the first substrate; forming (Fig. 18) a logic device in a second substrate of a second semiconductor chip and forming a second wiring layer on an active surface of the second substrate; connecting (Fig. 18) the first semiconductor chip and the second semiconductor chip to each other such that the first wiring layer faces the second wiring layer; forming (Fig. 19) an anti-reflective layer with a first refractive index on the inactive surface of the first substrate; forming (Figs. 20-21) through-vias in a peripheral area of the first substrate, the peripheral area being adjacent to the pixel area of the first substrate; forming ([0194]) color filters, respectively corresponding to the plurality of pixels, on the anti-reflective layer of the pixel area; and forming ([0194]) micro-lenses respectively on the color filters, wherein the forming of the color filters comprises: forming a metal-free grid pattern (160), having a 2-dimensional grid shape, in the pixel area; and forming the color filters respectively in grids of the grid pattern. Kim et al. do not specifically disclose removing a portion of an inactive surface side of the first substrate. However, thinning a substrate or layer is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such a removing step in the method of Kim et al. to provide a desired thickness or a more compact device as known and predictable.
Claim(s) 2-7, 12-15, 17-19, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. in view of Chou et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2019/0378863).
Regarding claims 2-7, 12-15, 17-19, 22, Kim et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Kim et al. also disclose (Fig. 4) a microlens (180) and the antireflection layer is disconnected (at 355, at 460, at 560) in a node isolation portion provided adjacent to: backside contacts (at 355); first through-vias (at 560); and second through-vias (at 460) as claimed. Kim et al. do not disclose the antireflective layer comprising a TiO2 layer. Chou et al. teach ([0046]) a similar device where the antireflective layer comprises TiO2. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such a material layer in the apparatus and method of Kim et al. in view of Chou et al. to improve detection as known and predictable. In combination, the refractive index of the grid is less than the first refractive index as claimed.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. in view of Oshiyama et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2023/0335656).
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Kim et al. do not disclose the lower surface of the color filters are coplanar with the upper surface of the antireflection layer. Oshiyama et al. teach (Fig. 1) a similar device where a lower surface of the color filters (15) are coplanar with the upper surface of the antireflection layer (14). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such a configuration in the apparatus of Kim et al. in view of Oshiyama et al. to simplify manufacturing as known and predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 16, 20, 23-25 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH LUU whose telephone number is (571)272-2441. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights