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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 8 have been fully considered. Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Xie (CN103779361A), Wang (CN112397528A), and Huang (CN108321119A).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 8 has been fully considered. Applicant’s cancellation of claims 6, 7, and 12 has been acknowledged.
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 1- 5, 8-11 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 1 recites the limitation "the top surface" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1, 5, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Xie et al. (CN103779361A; hereinafter Xie) in view of Wang et al. (CN112397528A; hereinafter Wang), further in view of Huang et al. (CN108321119A; hereinafter Huang).
PNG
media_image1.png
287
577
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Xie: FIG. 1
PNG
media_image2.png
420
625
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wang: FIG. 1F
Regarding Claim 1, Xie discloses a photodiode structure (photodiode D1, FIG. 1 reproduced above, [0044]), including:
a chip (P-type substrate 1 including N-well regions 3 which constitute an Nwell/Psub photodiode), FIG. 1, [0047];
an electrode group (anode electrode 7 and cathode electrode 8 of photodiode D1), arranged on the top surface of the chip (P-type substrate 1 including N-well regions 3), the electrode group including a positive electrode (anode electrode 7) and a negative electrode (cathode electrode 8); FIG. 1, [0050].
Xie [0050] discloses a silicon oxide dielectric layer 6 is deposited on the wafer surface, and electrode contact windows are prepared using photolithography and etching processes. Anode electrodes 7 and cathode electrodes 8 of photosensitive diode D1 are prepared using metallization processes. Therefore, the electrode group including a positive electrode (anode 7) and a negative electrode (cathode 8) are arranged on top of the surface of the chip (P-type substrate 1 including N-well regions 3).
an electrode protection layer (dielectric layers 6 and 11) arranged on the chip (P-type substrate 1 including N-well regions 3) and covering the electrode group (anode 7 and cathode 8 of photodiode D1), FIG. 1, [0050], [0052]; and
wherein a thickness of the electrode protection layer (thickness of the stack of dielectric layers 6 and 11) is greater than a height of the electrode group (anode 7 and cathode 8 of photodiode D1), FIG. 1, [0050], [0052].
Xie FIG. 1, [0050], [0052] discloses a silicon oxide dielectric layer 6 is deposited on the wafer surface, and electrode contact windows are prepared using photolithography and etching processes. Anode electrodes 7 and cathode electrodes 8 of photosensitive diode D1 are prepared using metallization processes. An organosilicon dielectric layer 11 is coated on the upper surface of the chip using a spin coating process and also planarizes the chip surface. Therefore, the thickness of the electrode protection layer which includes the stack of dielectric layers 6 and 11 is greater than a height of the electrode group including anode 7 and cathode 8.
and the electrode protection layer (dielectric layers 6 and 11) completely covers the electrode group (anode 7 and cathode 8 of photodiode D1) such that the electrode group is not exposed, FIG. 1, [0050], [0052].
Xie FIG. 1, [0050], [0052] discloses a silicon oxide dielectric layer 6 is deposited on the wafer surface, and electrode contact windows are prepared using photolithography and etching processes. Anode electrodes 7 and cathode electrodes 8 of photosensitive diode D1 are prepared using metallization processes. An organosilicon dielectric layer 11 is coated on the upper surface of the chip using a spin coating process and also planarizes the chip surface. Therefore, electrode protection layer including dielectric layers 6 and 11 completely covers the electrode group including 7 and 8, such that the electrode group is not exposed.
Xie does not disclose “a metal alloy band-pass optical film, arranged on the electrode protection layer, the metal alloy band-pass optical film including a plurality of layered structures, wherein the plurality of layered structures includes at least two metal alloy material layers made of a silver-platinum alloy;
and a plurality of electric wires, wherein each of the electric wires penetrates the metal alloy band-pass optical film and the electrode protection layer and is connected to the electrode group.”
In a similar art, Wang discloses a method of forming a photodiode (200) in the sensing region of the substrate (100) and forming a filter structure (300) on the photodiode, FIG. 1F reproduced above, [0008].
Wang discloses: a metal alloy band-pass optical film (300), arranged on the electrode protection layer (202), FIG. 1F, [0054], [0055].
the metal alloy band-pass optical film (300) including a plurality of layered structures (first filter stack 302A including adhesive layer 304A, metal layer 306A, insulating layer 308A and second filter stack 302B including adhesive layer 304B, metal layer 306B, insulating layer 308B), FIG. 1F, [0056], [0059].
Wang [0056] discloses the filter structure 300 including filter stacks 302A and 302B forming a resonant structure that can allow specific wavelengths of light to pass through. Therefore, the filter structure 300 functions as a band-pass optical film.
wherein the plurality of layered structures includes at least two metal alloy material layers (metal layers 306A and 306B) made of a silver-platinum alloy, [0049], [0057].
Wang [0049], [0057] discloses the metal layer 306A and 306B may include platinum (Pt), silver (Ag), or alloys of the above. Therefore, the metal layers 306A and 306B may be made of a silver-platinum alloy.
Wang discloses that a filter structure as taught allows specific wavelengths of light to pass through with greater transmittance [0056]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Xie’s structure in order to allow specific wavelengths of light to pass through with greater transmittance as disclosed by Wang [0056].
In a similar art, Huang discloses optoelectronic integrated filter based on CMOS post-processing, [0047].
Huang [0048] discloses a plurality of metal filled vias 9 that pass through the stack of layers 2 - 7 deposited sequentially from bottom to top on a CMOS integrated circuit 1, including optoelectronic device layers (3, 6) and dielectric layers (2,5,7). The metal filled via 9 contacts the electrodes of the CMOS integrated circuit 1.
The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses: a plurality of electric wires (Huang: metal filled vias 9), wherein each of the electric wires penetrates the metal alloy band-pass optical film (Wang: metal alloy filter structure 300) and the electrode protection layer (Xie: dielectric layers 6 and 11) and is connected to the electrode group (Xie: anode 7 and cathode 8 of photodiode D1).
Huang discloses that the metal wires as taught enables electrical interconnection with the electrodes in the circuit [0022]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Xie and Wang’s structure in order to enable electrical interconnection with the photodiode electrodes as disclosed by Huang [0022].
Regarding Claim 5, The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses the photodiode structure of claim 1.
The combination of Xie and Wang does not disclose “wherein the electrode protection layer has a refractive index ranging between 1.45 and 1.6.”
Huang discloses: wherein the electrode protection layer (silicon oxide isolation layer 2) has a refractive index ranging between 1.45 and 1.6, (refractive index of the material was 1.45), [0049], [0053]
Huang discloses that the electrode protection layer as taught enables achieving the desired optical properties of the photodiode structure [0053]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to achieve the desired optical properties as disclosed by Huang [0053].
Regarding Claim 8, (Currently Amended) The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses the photodiode structure of claim 1.
Xie does not disclose “wherein a ratio of silver to platinum in the silver-platinum alloy material is 95:5.”
Wang discloses: wherein a ratio of silver to platinum in the silver-platinum alloy material is 95:5, [0049], [0057].
Wang [0049], [0057] discloses the metal layer 306A and 306B may include platinum (Pt), silver (Ag), or alloys of the above. Therefore, the metal layers 306A and 306B may be made of a silver-platinum alloy.
Wang [0049] discloses the choice of material for the metal layers can depend on the wavelength of light that can pass through the resonant structure that is subsequently formed. Therefore, it would be obvious to adjust the ratio of the silver to platinum in the silver-platinum alloy to 95:5 through routine optimization, to obtain the desired band pass wavelength.
Regarding Claim 9, The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses the photodiode structure of claim 1.
Xie does not disclose “wherein the plurality of layered structures further includes at least one of a silicon dioxide layer, a titanium dioxide layer, a tantalum pentoxide layer and a niobium pentoxide layer.”
Wang discloses: wherein the plurality of layered structures (first filter stack 302A including adhesive layer 304A, metal layer 306A, insulating layer 308A and second filter stack 302B including adhesive layer 304B, metal layer 306B, insulating layer 308B) further includes at least one of a silicon dioxide layer, a titanium dioxide layer, a tantalum pentoxide layer and a niobium pentoxide layer (the insulating layer 308A may be or include silicon dioxide), FIG. 1F, [0052].
Wang discloses that a structure as taught including the silicon dioxide layer to function as a resonant cavity for the light transmission [0051]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure including the silicon dioxide layer to function as a resonant cavity for the light transmission as disclosed by Wang [0051].
Claims 2, 3, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie in view of Wang, further in view of Huang, still further in view of Rantala et al. (US20100136798A1; hereinafter Rantala).
Regarding Claim 2, The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses the photodiode structure of claim 1.
The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang does not disclose “wherein the electrode protection layer is made of an optical transparent glue or an optical transparent photoresist.”
In a similar art, Rantala discloses a method of forming a polymer for semiconductor optoelectronics devices [0003].
Rantala discloses: wherein the electrode protection layer (200) is made of an optical transparent glue or an optical transparent photoresist (siloxane polymer), FIG. 1, [0141]. Rantala [0141] discloses a stack of substrate 10, photodiodes 20, metal lines 30 (functions as electrodes), color filter layer 40, and the planarization and passivation layer 200 (electrode protection layer) made of siloxane polymer, which is an optically transparent photoresist.
Rantala discloses that a structure as taught enhances device performance without increasing cost [0147]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to enhance device performance without increasing cost as disclosed by Rantala [0147].
Regarding Claim 3, The combination of Xie, Wang, Huang, and Rantala discloses the photodiode structure of claim 2.
The combination of Xie, Wang, Huang does not disclose “wherein the optical transparent glue comprises siloxanes, polysiloxanes, acrylics, or epoxy resins.”
Rantala discloses: wherein the optical transparent glue comprises siloxanes, polysiloxanes, acrylics, or epoxy resins, (siloxane polymer, [0141]). Rantala [0141] discloses the planarization and passivation layer 200 (electrode protection layer) is made of siloxane polymer which is an optically transparent glue.
Rantala discloses that a structure as taught enhances device performance without increasing cost [0147]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to enhance device performance without increasing cost as disclosed by Rantala [0147].
Regarding Claim 4, The combination of Xie, Wang, Huang, and Rantala discloses the photodiode structure of claim 2.
The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang does not disclose “wherein the optical transparent photoresist comprises siloxanes or acrylics.”
Rantala discloses: wherein the optical transparent photoresist comprises siloxanes or acrylics, (siloxane polymer, [0141]). Rantala [0141] discloses the planarization and passivation layer 200 (electrode protection layer) is made of siloxane polymer which is an optically transparent photoresist.
Rantala discloses that a structure as taught enhances device performance without increasing cost [0147]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to enhance device performance without increasing cost as disclosed by Rantala [0147].
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Xie in view of Wang further in view of Huang, still further in view of Tsang016 et al. (US20190305016A1; Tsang016).
Regarding Claim 10, The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang discloses the photodiode structure of claim 1.
The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang does not explicitly disclose “wherein
for a light in a wavelength range between 400 nm to 600 nm, the metal alloy band-pass optical film has a light transmittance of 80% or more.”
In a similar art, Tsang016 discloses a photodiode array 110 including a plurality of photodiodes 112a-I that are formed over a p-substrate 140, FIG. 1A, [0054].
Tsang016 discloses: wherein for a light in a wavelength range between 400 nm to 600 nm (filter 132d with transmission band 210d of wavelength 400-500nm and filter 132e with transmission band 210e of wavelength 500-600nm), the metal alloy band-pass optical film (metal layers 134 and 136 included in bandpass filters 132) has a light transmittance of 80% or more, FIG. 2, [0058].
Tsang016 FIG. 2 discloses filters 132d and 132e approaching 100% transmissivity between wavelengths 400-600nm, indicating for a light in a wavelength range between 400nm to 600nm, the metal alloy band-pass optical film has a light transmittance of 80% or more.
Tsang016 discloses that a structure as taught improves optical performance and reduces cost [0002]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to improve optical performance and reduce cost as disclosed by Tsang016 [0002].
Regarding Claim 11, The combination of Xie, Wang, Huang, and Tsang016 discloses the photodiode structure of claim 10.
The combination of Xie, Wang, and Huang does not disclose “wherein for a light in a wavelength range between 300 nm to 399 nm, the metal alloy band-pass optical film has a light transmittance of 1% or less.”
Tsang016 discloses: wherein for a light in a wavelength range between 300 nm to 399 nm (filters 132a, 132b, 132c with transmission bands 210a (300-330nm), 210b (340-370nm), 210c (370-400nm) respectively), the metal alloy band-pass optical film (metal layers 134 and 136 included in bandpass filters 132) has a light transmittance of 1% or less, FIG. 2, [0058].
Tsang016 FIG. 2 discloses filters 132a, 132b, and 132c approaching 0% transmissivity between wavelengths 300 – 399nm, indicating for a light in a wavelength range between 300 nm to 399 nm, the metal alloy band-pass optical film has a light transmittance of 1% or less.
Tsang016 discloses that a structure as taught improves optical performance and reduces cost [0002]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure in order to improve optical performance and reduce cost as disclosed by Tsang016 [0002].
Conclusion
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 Krishna J Palaniswamy whose telephone number
is (571)272-6239. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM -
5PM EST.
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, Brent Fairbanks can be reached on 408-918-7532. The fax phone number
for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-483-7639.
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.
/Krishna J. Palaniswamy/
Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/Brent A. Fairbanks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights