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 Amendments
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed 07/10/2026, in which: claims 6, 10, and 19 are amended; and the rejection of the claims are traversed. Claims 1-20 are currently pending an Office action on the merits as follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/10/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 20170077163, US 20220232184, US 20240080577.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 and 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: The symbol “~” is considered to mean approximately. The examiner is considering the symbol “~’ to be considered a range between two numbers. Appropriate correction of “~” to “-“ is required.
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(s) 1-3, 13-15, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al, US 20170077163, in view of Lee, US 20220232184 in further view of Lee et al, US 20240080577, hereafter ‘577.
Regarding claim 1, Chou discloses : A solid-state image sensor, comprising: photoelectric conversion elements(Fig. 4, #420 with 428 [0045]); a color filter layer disposed above the photoelectric conversion elements and having a first color filter segment and a second color filter segment adjacent to the first color filter segment wherein the first color filter segment and the second color filter segment correspond to different colors(#450 and #452 with alternating assignments according to a Bayer mosaic [0050]; a shielding grid structure disposed between the first color filter segment and the second color filter segment(438 with segments #446/#448 to segment #450 and #452 [0048-0049]).
Chou does not disclose : a meta structure disposed above the color filter layer, wherein in a top view, the second shielding segment is formed as a triangle, a rectangle, or a combination thereof.
However, in the same field of endeavor ‘577 teaches : a meta structure disposed above the color filter layer(Fig. 5, #300 over #500 to form a phase distribution for condensing light of different wavelengths) [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of ‘577 to Chou to include a meta structure above a color filter layer to condense light of different wavelengths to adjacent photo-sensing cells [0048]).
Lee teaches : wherein in a top view, the second shielding segment is formed as a triangle, a rectangle, or a combination thereof(Fig. 2 #420 and #430 with #430 formed as a rectangle).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Lee to Chou and ‘577 to include separate shielding segments to limit light to particular areas of the photoelectric conversion elements (Lee [0053]).
Regarding claim 2, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Lee teaches : wherein in a cross- sectional view, a first width of the first shielding segment is different from a second width of the second shielding segment(Fig 2 #420 different width than #420 over #410).
Regarding claim 3, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Lee teaches : wherein in the top view, the first color filter segment or the second color filter segment is divided into four sub-segments along an X-axis and a Y-axis that is perpendicular to the X-axis(Fig. 2, #410 divided into 4 subsegments).
Regarding claim 13, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Chou teaches : further comprising: a dielectric grid structure disposed on the shielding grid structure(Fig. 4, #442 over 440).
Regarding claim 14, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses: The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 13.
Chou teaches : wherein the dielectric grid structure fully covers the shielding grid structure(Fig. 4, #442 formed over #440).
Regarding claim 15, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 13.
Chou teaches : wherein the dielectric grid structure is divided into a first grid segment that is disposed on the first shielding segment and a second grid segment that is disposed on the second shielding segment.
Regarding claim 18, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Chou teaches : wherein the first color filter segment is a blue color filter segment or a red color filter segment and the second color filter segment is a green color filter segment(#450 and #452 may be red and green [0062]).
Regarding claim 19, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 18.
Lee teaches : wherein there are multiple first color filter segments, second color filter segments, first shielding segments, and second shielding segments, and a pair of second shielding segments correspond to the second color filter segments, or a pair of second shielding segments correspond to the first color filter segments(#430 corresponds to #410 which may overlap #PDPX1-PDPX4 [0060]).
Claim(s) 7-9, 11, 15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al, US 20170077163, in view of Lee, US 20220232184 in further view of Lee et al, US 20240080577, hereafter ‘577, in further view of Yang et al, US 20220173138.
Regarding claim 7, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 does not disclose : further comprising: an isolation structure disposed between the photoelectric conversion elements.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yang teaches : However, in the same field of endeavor, Yang teaches : further comprising: an isolation structure disposed between the photoelectric conversion elements(#11 disposed between #13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Yang to Chou, Lin, and Zhang to include isolation structures between photoelectric conversion elements to improve image signal quality (Yang [0005]).
Regarding claim 8, Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577 and Yang discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 7.
Yang teaches : wherein the isolation structure has first isolation segments that correspond to the shielding grid structure and second isolation segments that divide the first color filter segment and the second color filter segment into sub-segments(Fig. 2a #11 corresponding to #40 and #50. Fig. 11, #11 divides #70 into segments of #20 [0123]).
Regarding claim 9, Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577 and Yang discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 8.
Yang teaches : wherein each of the sub-segments defines a pixel(Fig. 11, #20 to include #20s4, #20s5, and #20s6), and a height of the shielding grid structure is in a range from 20 nm to 0.5×a width of the pixel(Fig. 2d, #50s3 shown to have a smaller height than #13).
Regarding claim 11, Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577 and Yang discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 9.
Lee teaches : wherein in the top view, the second shielding segment has a horizontal width along a first direction and a vertical width along a second direction that is perpendicular to the first direction, and a difference between the horizontal width and the vertical width is (0~1)the width of the pixel(#Fig 2-3, #430 overlapping #410 may be a square that is smaller than #410).
Regarding claim 15, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 13.
Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 does not disclose : wherein the dielectric grid structure is divided into a first grid segment that is disposed on the first shielding segment and a second grid segment that is disposed on the second shielding segment.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yang teaches : wherein the dielectric grid structure is divided into a first grid segment that is disposed on the first shielding segment and a second grid segment that is disposed on the second shielding segment(Fig. 2d, #40s3 disposed on #50s3 and #40s1 disposed on #50s1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Yang to Chou, Lee, and ‘577 to include different sized dielectric grid structures for shielding segments with different sizes.
Regarding claim 20, Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 19.
Chou as modified by Lee and ‘577 does not disclose : wherein in a cross- sectional view, widths of the second shielding segments become narrower from a central region of the solid-state image sensor to an edge of the solid-state image sensor.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yang teaches : wherein in a cross- sectional view, widths of the second shielding segments become narrower from a central region of the solid-state image sensor to an edge of the solid-state image sensor(Fig. 2c, #50s1 wider than #50s3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Yang to Chou, Lee, and ‘577 to adjust shielding segments to modify an aperture ratio (Yang [0084]).
Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al, US 20170077163, in view of Lee, US 20220232184 in further view of Lee et al, US 20240080577, hereafter ‘577, in further view of Yang et al, US 20220173138, in further view of Lin, US 20210358985.
Regarding claim 16, Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577 and Yang discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 15.
Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577 and Yang does not disclose : wherein in a cross- sectional view, the first grid segment and the second grid segment have the same width, and a portion of the second shielding segment extends beyond the second grid segment.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lin teaches : wherein in a cross- sectional view, the first grid segment and the second grid segment have the same width, and a portion of the second shielding segment extends beyond the second grid segment(Fig. 4b, #113b same width throughout with #111 extending beyond #113b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Lin to Chou, Lee, ‘577 and Yang to improve uniform sensitivities of imaging devices (Lin [0057]).
Regarding claim 17, Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577, and Yang discloses : The solid-state image sensor as claimed in claim 15.
Chou as modified by Lee, ‘577, and Yang does not disclose : wherein a width of the first grid segment is equal to a first width of the first shielding segment, and a width of the second grid segment is equal to a second width of the second shielding segment.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lin teaches : wherein a width of the first grid segment is equal to a first width of the first shielding segment, and a width of the second grid segment is equal to a second width of the second shielding segment(Fig. 5a #111 same width as #113b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teachings of Lin to Chou, Lee, ‘577 and Yang to lower a refractive index (Lin [0041]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 10, and 12 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 DAVE TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6841. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-4 PST.
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, CHAD DICKE can be reached at (571) 270-7996. 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.
/D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JACOB Y CHOI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
