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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) to foreign application KR 10-2022-0155794 filed on 11/18/2022. The foreign application is not in English. The certified copy of the foreign priority application KR 10-2022-0155794 has been received. Filing Dates for the Claims — All Claims Not Entitled to Priority DateTo be entitled to the filing date of the foreign priority application KR 10-2022-0155794 that is not in English, an English translation of the non-English language foreign application and a statement that the translation is accurate in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55 is required to perfect the claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The foreign application must adequately support the claimed subject matter, meaning satisfy the written description and enablement requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a). See MPEP §§ 215 and 216. 37 C.F.R. 1.55(g)(3)(ii)-(iii). To demonstrate compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(a), applicant should point to support for their claimed subject matter in their translations.
Title
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12 lines 12-16, filed 27 April 2026, with respect to the title have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the title has been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 18 currently recites “wherein the plurality of second pixel separation structures comprises first, second, third, and fourth pixel separation structures.”
There are already both first and third pixel separation structures delineated in the claim.
For purposes of examination the claim is being interpreted to read “wherein the plurality of second pixel separation structures comprises first, second, third, and fourth second pixel separation structures”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 14-18 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 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the electrical connection between the conductive layer of the first pixel separation structures and the pad of the second pixel separation structures.
Examiner’s Note: For purposes of examination this claim is being interpreted to read: “The image sensor of claim 12, wherein each of the plurality of second pixel separation structures further comprises a conductive layer, and wherein the pad is electrically coupled to the conductive layer.” As drawn to para. 73 of the application.
Claims 15-17 and 21 depend from 14 and are likewise rejected under 35 USC 112(b).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 10-16, 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh 2018, in view of Oh et al. (US Pub 20170170229) hereinafter referred to as Oh 2017.
Regarding claim 1, Oh 2018 teaches an image sensor comprising: a substrate (Oh, 2018, 110, Fig. 12, para. 31) including a first surface (Oh 2018, 110A, Fig. 12, para. 44), a second surface (Oh 2018, 110B, Fig. 12, para. 44), opposing the first surface, an active pixel region (Oh, 2018, PR, Fig. 12, para 31), and a dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR, Fig. 12, para. 31) adjacent to the active pixel region, first to fourth photoelectric conversion elements (PDs) in the dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR1B-DR4B, Fig. 6, para. 67); a plurality of first pixel separation structures configured to separate the first to fourth PDs from each other (Oh 2018, 130, Figs. 12, 6, para. 31); a second pixel separation structure (Oh, 2018, 140, Fig. 12, 140B, Fig. 6, para. 65, 140/140B is the pad and contact portion, while the separation structure is a duplicate of 130); an insulating layer on the first surface (Oh 2018, 156, Fig. 12, para. 53); and a contact vertically overlapping the second pixel separation structure and electrically coupled to the second pixel separation structure (Oh, 2018, 140 (bottom part), Fig. 12, para. 31), wherein the first to fourth PDs are arranged in a 2 x 2 matrix in a plan view (Oh 2018, Fig. 6), wherein the second pixel separation structure is disposed at a center of the 2 x 2 matrix in the plan view (Oh 2018, 140B, Fig. 6, para. 65), wherein the contact at least partially penetrates the insulating layer (Oh 2018, 140 Fig. 12-contact layer is inside 156), and wherein the image sensor is configured to receive light from the second surface (Oh 2018, para. 27).
Oh 2018 does not teach wherein a width of the second pixel separation structure on the first surface in a first direction parallel to the first surface in a cross sectional view is greater than a width of the contact in the first direction.
However, Oh 2017 does teach an image sensor with a separation structure (Oh, 2017, 110c, Fig. 8A, para. 79) attached to a contact (Oh, 2017, 122b, Fig. 8A, para. 80), wherein a width of the pixel separation structure on the first surface in a first direction parallel to the first surface in a cross sectional view is greater than a width of the contact in the first direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the contact of Oh 2017 into the image sensor of Oh 2018 in order to create an image sensor with reduced crosstalk (Oh 2017, para. 50).
PNG
media_image1.png
759
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures (Oh, 2018, 130, Fig. 12, para. 86-88) is in contact with the first (Oh, 2018, 1190A, para. 87) and second surfaces (Oh 2018, Fig. 12, para. 87).
Regarding claim 3, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 2, wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures is disposed in a trench (Oh, 2018, Fig. 13, 130H, para. 93, 96, para. 96 states that he layout of the dummy pixel separation structure 130 may be the same as in Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 4, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 3, wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures includes a lower insulating layer (Oh 2018, 134, Fig. 12, para. 39) that is in contact with the first surface.
.Regarding claim 10, Oh 2018 teaches an image sensor comprising: a substrate (Oh 2018 , 110, Fig. 4, para. 31) including a first surface (Oh 2018, 110A, Fig. 4, para. 44) a second surface opposing the first surface (Oh 2018, 110B, Fig. 4 para. 44), an active pixel region (Oh, 2018, PR, Fig. 4, para 31), and a dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR, Fig. 4, para. 31) adjacent to the active pixel region; first to fourth photoelectric conversion elements (PDs) in the dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR1b-DR4B, Fig. 6, paras. 65-67); an insulating layer arranged on the first surface (Oh, 2018, 156, Fig. 4, para. 53); a plurality of first pixel separation structures configured to separate the first to fourth PDs from each other (Oh, 2018, 130, Figs. 4, 6, para. 66), a second pixel separation structure (Oh, 2018, 140, Fig. 4, 140B, Fig. 6, para. 65, 140/140B is the pad and contact portion, while the separation structure is a duplicate of 130) ; and a pad vertically overlapping the second pixel separation structure and electrically coupled to the second pixel separation structure (Oh, 2018, 140B, Fig. 6, para. 65) wherein the first to fourth PDs are arranged in a 2 x 2 matrix in a plan view (Oh 2018, Fig. 6), wherein the second pixel separation structure is disposed at a center of the 2 x 2 matrix in the plan view, and wherein the image sensor is configured to receive light from the second surface (Oh, 2018, para. 27).
Oh 2018 does not teach a portion of the pad extends into the substrate from the first surface.
However, Oh 2017 teaches an image sensor wherein the contact (Oh 2017, 122a, Fig. 5A, para. 67) penetrate into the substrate (Oh 2017, 101, Fig. 5A, para. 38).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the pad of Oh 2018 to extend into the substrate in the manner of Oh 2017 in order to create an image sensor with reduced crosstalk (Oh 2017, para. 50).
PNG
media_image2.png
795
985
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 10, wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures is disposed in a trench (Oh, 2018, 130H, Fig. 13, para. 93).
Regarding claim 12, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 11, wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures includes a lower insulating layer (Oh,134, Fig. 4, para. 39) that is in contact with the first surface.
Regarding claim 13, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 12, wherein a height of the pad (Oh, 140, Fig. 4, trapezoidal portion) in a thickness direction of the substrate is different from a height of the lower insulating layer in the thickness direction of the substrate (Oh, 156, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, modified Oh 2018 teaches, as interpreted above, the image sensor of claim 12, wherein each of the plurality of second pixel separation structures further comprises a conductive layer(Oh, 2018, 122 Fig. 4, para. 38) , and wherein the pad is electrically coupled to the conductive layer (Oh, 2018, Fig. 4, 140 in contact with 122).
Regarding claim 15, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 14, wherein the conductive layer is directly in contact with the pad. (Oh, 2018, Fig. 4, 140 in contact with 122).
Regarding claim 16, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 14 further comprising a contact (Oh, 2018 140, Fig. 4,-contact is the small region inside layer 156-see image above) electrically coupled to the pad, wherein the contact at least partially penetrates the insulating layer
Regarding claim 22, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 16, wherein the contact is configured to receive a voltage (Oh, 2018, para. 41).
Regarding claim 18, Oh 2018 teaches an image sensor comprising: a substrate (Oh, 2018, 110, Fig. 12, para. 31) including a first surface (Oh 2018, 110A, Fig. 12, para. 44), a second surface (Oh 2018, 110B, Fig. 12, para. 44), opposing the first surface, an active pixel region (Oh, 2018, PR, Fig. 12, para 31), and a dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR, Fig. 12, para. 31) adjacent to the active pixel region, a first set of four photoelectric conversion elements (PDs) in the dummy pixel region (Oh, 2018, DR1B-DR4B, Fig. 6, para. 67); arranged in a first 2 x 2 matrix; a second set of four PDs in the dummy pixel region arranged in a second 2 x 2 matrix (Oh 2018, Fig. 6, para. 64-67, Fig. 6 shows three 2x2 matrices, and para. 67 states they can be arranged on all sides of the pixel regions); an insulating layer arranged on the first surface (Oh 2018, 156, Fig. 4, para. 53), a plurality of first pixel separation structures configured to separate the PDs of the first set from each other (Oh, 2018, 130 Figs. 4, 6, para. 31); a plurality of second pixel separation structures (Oh, 2018, 130 Figs. 12, 6, para. 31)configured to separate the PDs of the second set from each other; a third pixel separation structure (Oh, 2018, 140, Fig. 12, 140B, Fig. 6, para. 65, 140/140B is the pad and contact portion, while the separation structure is a duplicate of 130) disposed at a center of the first set of four PDs in a plan view and in contact with the first and second surfaces; a contact (Oh 2018, 140, Fig. 12 para. 31, the lower portion inside layer 156) vertically overlapping the third pixel separation structure and electrically coupled to the third pixel separation structure, wherein the contact at least partially penetrates the insulating layer (Oh, Fig. 12, the lower portion of 140 penetrates into 156),wherein the plurality of second separation structures comprises first, second, third, and fourth second pixel separation structures, wherein the first, second, third, and fourth second pixel separation structures of the plurality of second pixel separation structures are spaced apart from each other in the plan view(Ohm 2018, 130, Fig. 6), and wherein the image sensor is configured to receive light from the second surface (Oh, 2018, para. 27).
Oh 2018 does not teach wherein a width of the third pixel separation structure on the first surface in a first direction parallel to the first surface in a cross sectional view is greater than a width of the contact in the first direction.
However, Oh 2017 does teach an image sensor with a separation structure (Oh, 2017, 110c, Fig. 8A, para. 79) attached to a contact (Oh, 2017, 122b, Fig. 8A, para. 80), wherein a width of the pixel separation structure on the first surface in a first direction parallel to the first surface in a cross sectional view is greater than a width of the contact in the first direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the contact of Oh 2017 into the image sensor of Oh 2018 in order to create an image sensor with reduced crosstalk (Oh 2017, para. 50).
PNG
media_image1.png
759
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh 2018 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Kao et al. (US Pub. 20220344383), hereinafter referred to as Kao.
Regarding claim 17, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 14, but does not teach wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structures further comprises two liners .
However, Kao teaches an image sensor with isolation structures comprising a trench filling layer (Kao, 112, Fig. 1, para. 20), and inner high-k dielectric liner (Kao, 118, Fig. 1, para. 20, 23) and an outer high-k dielectric layer (Kao, 114, Fig. 1, para. 22-23).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the image sensor of Oh 2018 with the multiple insulation layers of Kao to reduce blooming and crosstalk (Kao, para. 20).
Claims 5-6 and 8-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh 2018 in view of Oh 2017 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kao.
Regarding claim 5, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 4, but does not teach wherein each of the plurality of first pixel separation structure further comprises two liners and a conductive layer, the liners and the conductive layer vertically overlapping the lower insulating layer.
However, Kao teaches an image sensor with isolation structures comprising a trench filling layer (Kao, 112, Fig. 1, para. 20), and inner high-k dielectric liner (Kao, 118, Fig. 1, para. 20, 23) and an outer high-k dielectric layer (Kao, 114, Fig. 1, para. 22-23) all three of which vertically overlap a high-k di-electric layer (Kao, 116, Fig. 1, para. 22)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the image sensor of Oh 2018 with the multiple insulation layers of Kao to reduce blooming and crosstalk (Kao, para. 20).
Regarding claim 6, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 5, wherein the conductive layer (Oh 2018, 132, Fig. 12, para. 39) is in contact with the second surface (Oh, 110B, Fig. 12, para.87).
PNG
media_image1.png
759
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 4, further comprising a pad between the second pixel separation structure and the contact (Oh, 140, Fig. 12, para. 31)
Regarding claim 9, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 8, but does not explicitly teach wherein a portion of the pad extends into the substrate from the first surface.
However, in a separate embodiment of Oh 2017, Oh 2017 teaches an image sensor wherein the contact (Oh 2017, 122a, Fig. 5A, para. 67) penetrate into the substrate (Oh 2017, 101, Fig. 5A, para. 38).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the pad of Oh 2018 to extend into the substrate in the manner of Oh 2017 in order to create an image sensor with reduced crosstalk (Oh 2017, para. 50).
Claim 21is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh 2018 and Oh 2017 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Lim et al. (US Pub 20210327930), hereinafter referred to as Lim.
Regarding claim 21, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 14, but does not teach further comprising a first microlens on the first PD and a second microlens on the second PD.
However, Lim teaches an image sensor with micro lenses on the pixels (Lim 180, Fig. 15, para. 95) wherein some of the pixels may be dummy pixels (Lim, para. 129).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the image sensor of Oh 2018 with the lens configuration of Lim in order to create a device having increased product reliability and quality (Lim para. 6).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh 2018 and Oh 2017 as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Lim.
Regarding claim 7, modified Oh 2018 teaches the image sensor of claim 4, but does not teach further comprising a first microlens on the first PD and a second microlens on the second PD.
However, Lim teaches an image sensor with micro lenses on the pixels (Lim 180, Fig. 15, para. 95) wherein some of the pixels may be dummy pixels (Lim, para. 129).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the image sensor of Oh 2018 with the lens configuration of Lim in order to create a device having increased product reliability and quality (Lim para. 6).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US Pub 20220223636) teaches an image sensor with pixel separation films disposed in a trench.
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 KIERAN M CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-9654. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-4:3.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at 5712703042. 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.
/KIERAN M. CUNNINGHAM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights