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
The 12/30/2025 "Reply" elects Species B3 and identifies as reading on claims 1-7, 9-10, 13-17, and 19-20.
In the restriction requirement Examiner has set forth why the restriction requirement is proper. Applicant contends that the species are not mutually exclusive and that it would not be a burden to examine all species. However, Applicant has not articulated how the species are not mutually exclusive and the previous office action states that a burden does exists at least because the species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). Further, Examiner notes that claims 13-14 and 19-20 require a void within the second silicon pattern, consistent with non-elected species D (see paragraphs [0021]-[0023] of the present application). Accordingly, the restriction requirement is maintained and Examiner has withdrawn claims 8, 11-14, and 18-20 from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention. See, for example, 37 CFR § 1.142(b).
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US Pub. No. 2021/0193706).
Regarding claim 16, in FIGs. 3-8, Kim discloses an image sensor, comprising: a substrate (10) including a first surface, a second surface opposite to the first surface, and a deep trench (containing element 150, paragraph [0041]); and a pixel separation part (150) in the deep trench, the pixel separation part separating a plurality of pixels from each other, the plurality of pixels including first to fourth pixels in a clockwise direction (starting in the upper left quadrant of FIG. 3), wherein the deep trench includes, a first deep trench between the first pixel and the second pixel, and a second deep trench between the first pixel and the third pixel, the pixel separation part includes, a first part in the first deep trench, and a second part in the second deep trench, each of the first part and the second part includes, a first dielectric pattern (151, paragraph [0065]) covering a lateral surface of the substrate, and a first silicon pattern (155, paragraph [0067]) covering a lateral surface of the first dielectric pattern, the first part further includes a first buried dielectric pattern (157, paragraph [0073]) in contact with a sidewall of the first silicon pattern, and the second part further includes a second silicon pattern (153, paragraph [0067]) in contact with the sidewall of the first silicon pattern, the second silicon pattern filling the second deep trench.
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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US Pub. No. 2021/0193706).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses that the first silicon pattern has a first average grain size, and the second silicon pattern has a second average grain size different than the first average grain size (paragraph [0076]).
Kim does not appear to explicitly disclose that the first silicon pattern has a first average grain size, and the second silicon pattern has a second average grain size greater than the first average grain size.
However, Examiner notes that among the two silicon patterns having different average grain sizes there are only two possible relationships. In one case the second silicon pattern has a second average grain size greater than the first average grain size, in the other case the second silicon pattern has a second average grain size smaller than the first average grain size. As such, there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
According to well established patent law precedent (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2143 I (E)) therefore it would have been "obvious to try" forming the first silicon pattern having a first average grain size, and the second silicon pattern having a second average grain size greater than the first average grain size.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7, 9-10, and 15 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed image sensor particularly characterized by a pixel separation part in the substrate, the pixel separation part separating a plurality of pixels from each other, the pixel separation part including, a first part between the first pixel and the second pixel, and a second part between the first pixel and the third pixel, wherein each of the first part and the second part includes, a first dielectric pattern covering a lateral surface of the substrate, and a first silicon pattern covering a lateral surface of the first dielectric pattern, and the second part further includes a second silicon pattern adjacent to a sidewall of the first silicon pattern, the second silicon pattern having a rhombic shape in a plan view.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUCKER J WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3234. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/TUCKER J WRIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights