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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II which corresponds to claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 6/29/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration, pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Inventions or Species.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/2/2024 in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 depends from claim 1 and recites “separated by the pixel isolation structure”. Claim 1 does not provide antecedent basis for “the pixel isolation structure.” The only introduction of a pixel isolation structure appears in claim 5. Because claim 6 reaches back only to claim 1, the reference to “the pixel isolation structure” lacks antecedent basis, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claim 7 depends from claim 6 and is rejected for the same reason,
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et.al. (US-20170117309A1, hereinafter Chen)
Regarding Claim 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
620
546
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chen teaches in Fig.1-3 An image sensor, comprising:
a substrate (#102) having a first surface (bottom surface) and a second surface (top surface) facing the first surface, the substrate including a plurality of pixel regions separated by a deep trench (#111), the plurality of pixel regions (#103a-#103c) being adjacent to each other along a first direction and a second direction;
a plurality of photoelectric conversion regions (#302) disposed in the plurality of pixel regions;
a blocking region (#303) disposed in the plurality of pixel regions (#103a-#103c);
a plurality of wiring layers (#108) and a plurality of insulating layers (#106) disposed on the first surface of the substrate; and
a plurality of color filters (#106) and a plurality of micro lenses (#118) disposed on the second surface of the substrate,
wherein the blocking region (#303) is disposed adjacent to the second surface (top surface) of the substrate,
wherein the blocking region (#303) includes a first element of a first type ([0026] #303 is p-type), and the plurality of photoelectric conversion regions (#302 is n-type) include a second element of a second type, the second type being different from the first type, and
wherein a concentration of the first element in the blocking region on the second surface of the substrate is about 1 E16/cm3 to about 1 E18/cm3. ([0026] the p-type region 303 may have a doping concentration greater than or equal to approximately 5e15 atoms/cm3.)
Regarding Claim 6.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 1,
Chen further teaches wherein:
the blocking region (#303) includes a plurality of blocking regions separated by the pixel isolation structure, the plurality of blocking regions corresponding to the plurality of pixel regions, respectively.
Regarding Claim 7.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 6,
Chen further teaches wherein:
the plurality of photoelectric conversion regions (#302) are disposed on the plurality of blocking regions along a third direction, the third direction being vertical to the first direction and the second direction and directed from the second surface of the substrate to the first surface.
Regarding Claim 8.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 1,
Chen further teaches wherein:
the first element is a P-type, and the second element is an N-type ([0026])
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 2-3 and 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, and further in view of Rhodes et.al. (US-20070018264A1, hereinafter Rhodes)
Regarding Claim 2.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 1,
Rhodes discloses, in the same field of endeavor, forming a deep p-well by implementing boron-11 (Fig.2 [0017] a pixel array using isolation that is a combination of a thin epi of thickness 2-6 microns and a deep P-well (DPW) implant process with B11 implant energies of greater than or equal to 700 keV.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s semiconductor device with the teachings of Rhodes, as identified above, as this is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predicable result.
Regarding Claim 3.
Chen modified by Rhodes teaches The image sensor of claim 2,
Chen further teaches wherein:
the blocking region (#303/#110) has a thickness of about 250 nm to about 2000 nm along a third direction, the third direction being vertical to the first direction and the second direction and directed from the second surface of the substrate to the first surface of the substrate. ([0023] the doped region 110 may extend to a depth up of greater than or equal to approximately 0.1 microns )
Regarding Claim 9.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 8,
Rhodes discloses, in the same field of endeavor, forming a deep p-well by implementing boron-11 (Fig.2 [0017] a pixel array using isolation that is a combination of a thin epi of thickness 2-6 microns and a deep P-well (DPW) implant process with B11 implant energies of greater than or equal to 700 keV.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s semiconductor device with the teachings of Rhodes, as identified above, as this is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predicable result.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, and further in view of Park et.al. (US-20190348457A1, hereinafter Park)
Regarding Claim 4 and 5.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 1,
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein:
(claim 4) the deep trench (#102W) penetrates from the first surface toward the second surface of the substrate.
(claim 5) a pixel isolation structure disposed within the deep trench,
wherein an upper surface of the pixel isolation structure (#102W) is coplanar with the first surface of the substrate, and a lower surface of the pixel isolation structure is coplanar with the second surface of the substrate, along a third direction, the third direction being vertical to the first direction and the second direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s semiconductor device with the teachings of Park, as identified above, as this is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predicable result in order to isolate adjacent pixels across the full substrate thickness..
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, and further in view of Masuda et.al. (US-20160112614A1, hereinafter Masuda)
Regarding Claim 10.
Chen teaches The image sensor of claim 1,
Masuda, in the same field of endeavor, teaches in Fig.2 further comprising:
a fine pattern layer (#48) including a plurality of protruding portions and disposed below the blocking region along a third direction, the third direction being vertical to the first direction and the second direction and directed from the second surface of the substrate to the first surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen’s semiconductor device with the teachings of Masuda, as identified above, as this is a known element with a known BSI pixel to yield the predictable result of reduced surface reflection and improved photoelectric-conversion sensitivity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA W KAO whose telephone number is (703)756-4797. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm Pacific Time.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/SOPHIA W KAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/RATISHA MEHTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights