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 .
This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed June 11, 2026. Claims 1-32 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-31 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection as set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see amendments and arguments, filed June 11, 2026, with respect to claim 32 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Claim 32 is an added claim taking the allowable subject manner noted in Office Action dated, April 6, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 3, 4, 7-11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In regards to claims 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 18, the claims include a structure on the protective layer, such as a concave lens, a convex lens, an anti-reflective layer, an IR cut filter, a Fresnel lens, a meta-lens, a light-shielding film including a hole, and a lens. These structures can be seen in figures 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 20. As can be seen in all of these figures the structures claimed to be on the protective layer are directly on the protective layer. The contradicts what is claimed in claim 1, wherein the protective member and the resin layer are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re incident outside the pixel region. The interface includes a material other than air. The Applicant does not teach each of these structures where the interface is between air and the protective member. Some of the embodiments are used to prevent the angle from being greater than or equal to Ɵc, such as the convex lens, Fresnel lens and light shielding film with hole, see figures 12, 18 and 20. Since, these structures are not taught with the newly added limitation, these claims include new matter. Please correct.
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 3, 4, 7-11 and 18 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.
In regards to claims 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 18, the claims include a structure on the protective layer, such as a concave lens, a convex lens, an anti-reflective layer, an IR cut filter, a Fresnel lens, a meta-lens, a light-shielding film including a hole, and a lens. These structures can be seen in figures 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 20. As can be seen in all of these figures the structures claimed to be on the protective layer are directly on the protective layer. The contradicts what is claimed in claim 1, wherein the protective member and the resin layer are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re incident outside the pixel region. The interface includes a material other than air. The Applicant does not teach each of these structures where the interface is between air and the protective member. Some of the embodiments are used to prevent the angle from being greater than or equal to Ɵc, such as the convex lens, Fresnel lens and light shielding film with hole, see figures 12, 18 and 20. Since, these structures are directly added to the surface of the protective member it is unclear how the interface is between air and the protective member. For examining purposes the claims will rely on the interface between air or other structures, as long as the critical angle is exceeded, which is a well-known concept for total internal reflection to occur, one of ordinary skill would select materials to ensure this occurs at the interface as desired. Please clarify.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 22 and 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) in view of Asano (JP H06244393).
Re claim 1: Iwasaki teaches an imaging device (fig. 10), comprising: a pixel region (PA/SA) in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged (paragraph 71) (fig. 3 and 10); an on-chip lens (ML) provided on the pixel region (see fig. 10); a protective member (501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (ML) (see fig. 10); and a resin layer (110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (ML) and the protective member (501/301) (see fig. 10), wherein the resin layer (110) and the protective member (501/301) has a thickness (see fig. 10), and wherein the protective member (501/301) and the resin layer (110) are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens (ML) and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident on the pixel region (PA/SA) (see fig. 10, paragraph 132), but does not specifically teach a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2), T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air is re-incident outside the pixel region. Asano teaches wherein when a thickness of a resin layer is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the resin layer is configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident outside the pixel region (fig. 1, equation 5, paragraphs 10-20 in machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the equation and total reflection at the interface to guide light outside the pixel region in Asano to determine the thickness of an adhesive/resin layer and protection layer using the critical angle and size of a light reception surface in order to reduce the undesired effects of light from scattering and reflection through the layer and member of Iwasaki to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 2: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein glass is used for the protective member, and the critical angle Ɵc is about 41.5° (Iwasaki, paragraph 133).
Re claim 22: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the pixel region (PA) includes at least an effective pixel region that outputs a pixel signal used to generate an image (Iwasaki, paragraphs 66-71, fig. 3 and 10).
Re claim 27: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the pixel region (Iwasaki, PA/SA) includes an effective photosensitive region (Iwasaki, PA) in which the pixels including photodiodes are arranged (Iwasaki, see fig. 3, paragraphs 66-79).
Re claim 28: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the pixel region (Iwasaki, PA/SA) further includes an external region (Iwasaki, SA) in which the pixels including the photodiodes are not arranged (Iwasaki, see fig. 3).
Re claim 29: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the external region (Iwasaki, SA) is provided around the effective photosensitive region (Iwasaki, PA) (Iwasaki, see fig. 3).
Claim(s) 3, 4 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishida (WO 2020039958).
Re claim 3: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a concave lens provided on the protective member. Nishida teaches further comprising a concave lens (171) provided on a protective member (14, see fig. 14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a concave lens on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Nishida in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 4: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a convex lens provided on the protective member. Nishida teaches further comprising a concave lens (171) provided on a protective member (14, see fig. 14, written description machine translation under the seventh embodiment the lens 171 can be convex or concave). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a convex lens on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Nishida in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 18: Iwasaki an imaging device (fig. 10), comprising: a pixel region (PA) in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged (paragraph 71) (fig. 3 and 10); an on-chip lens (ML) provided on the pixel region (see fig. 10); a protective member (501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (ML) (see fig. 10); and a resin layer (110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (ML) and the protective member (501/301) (see fig. 10); and a lens (42), wherein the resin layer (110) and the protective member (501/301) has a thickness (see fig. 10), and wherein the protective member (501/301) and the resin layer (110) are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens (ML) and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident on the pixel region (PA) (see fig. 10, paragraph 132), but does not specifically teach the lens provided on the protective member and the totally reflected at an interface between the protective member and air is re-incident outside the pixel region. Asano teaches wherein when a thickness of a resin layer is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the resin layer is configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident outside the pixel region (fig. 1, equation 5, paragraphs 10-20 in machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the equation and total reflection at the interface to guide light outside the pixel region in Asano to determine the thickness of an adhesive/resin layer and protection layer using the critical angle and size of a light reception surface in order to reduce the undesired effects of light from scattering and reflection through the layer and member of Iwasaki to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation. Iwasaki as modified by Asano does not specifically teach further comprising the lens provided on the protective member. Nishida teaches further comprising a lens (171) provided on a protective member (14, see fig. 14, written description machine translation under the seventh embodiment the lens 171 can be convex or concave). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a lens on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Nishida in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Watanabe et al. (US 20060023108).
Re claim 6: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a light absorbing film provided on a side surface of the protective member. Watanabe teaches comprising a light absorbing film (58) provided on a side surface of a protective member (25A) (fig. 10, paragraph 70 and 71). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a light absorbing film on the side of the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Watanabe in order to further suppress undesired reflected light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claims 7 and 8: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising an antireflection film or an infrared cut filter provided on the protective member. Watanabe teaches comprising an antireflection film or an infrared cut filter provided on a protective member (25A) (fig. 1, paragraph 46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include an antireflection film or an infrared cut filter on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Watanabe in order to further suppress undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Duparre et al. (US 20100002313).
Re claim 9: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a Fresnel lens provided on the protective member. Duparre teaches further comprising a Fresnel lens (220) provided on a protective member (220, see fig. 5, paragraph 39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a Fresnel lens on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Duparre in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hsieh et al. (US 20220155504).
Re claim 10: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a metalens provided on the protective member. Hsieh teaches comprising a metalens (16) provided on a protective member (32) (fig. 1, paragraph 42 and 63). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a metalens on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Hsieh in order to guide light to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sekine (US 20170301713).
Re claim 11: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10); the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301) provided on the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 10); and the resin layer (Iwasaki, 110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) and the protective member (Iwasaki, 501/301, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach further comprising a light shielding film provided on the protective member and including a hole. Sekine teaches comprising a light shielding film (12) provided on a protective member (4) and including a hole (see fig. 2, paragraph 53). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a light shielding film on the protective member of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Sekine in order to guide light to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ootsuka (WO 2020149207).
Re claim 14: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach wherein a plurality of the on chip lenses is provided for each of the pixels. Ootsuka teaches wherein a plurality of on chip lenses (34) is provided for each of a plurality of pixels (see fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have a plurality of on chip lenses for each pixel of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Ootsuka in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 19: Iwasaki an imaging device (fig. 10), comprising: a pixel region (PA) in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged (paragraph 71) (fig. 3 and 10); a plurality of on-chip lenses (ML) provided on the pixel region (see fig. 10); a protective member (501/301) provided on the on-chip lenses (ML) (see fig. 10); and a resin layer (110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lenses (ML) and the protective member (501/301) (see fig. 10); and the protective member (501/301) has a thickness (see fig. 10), and wherein the protective member (501/301) and the resin layer (110) are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens (ML) and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident on the pixel region (PA) (see fig. 10, paragraph 132), but does not specifically teach the plurality of on-chip lenses on each of the pixels and the totally reflected at an interface between the protective member and air is re-incident outside the pixel region. Asano teaches wherein when a thickness of a resin layer is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the resin layer is configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident outside the pixel region (fig. 1, equation 5, paragraphs 10-20 in machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the equation and total reflection at the interface to guide light outside the pixel region in Asano to determine the thickness of an adhesive/resin layer and protection layer using the critical angle and size of a light reception surface in order to reduce the undesired effects of light from scattering and reflection through the layer and member of Iwasaki to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation. Iwasaki as modified by Asano does not specifically teach the plurality of the on chip lenses is provided for each of the pixels. Ootsuka teaches wherein a plurality of on chip lenses (34) is provided for each of a plurality of pixels (see fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have a plurality of on chip lenses for each pixel of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Ootsuka in order to further suppress flare and undesired light from entering the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Suzuki et al. (US 20180084192).
Re claim 15: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML) provided on the pixel region (Iwasaki, see fig. 10), but does not specifically teach wherein one of the on-chip lenses is provided for a plurality of the pixels. Suzuki teaches wherein one of on-chip lenses (402) is provided for a plurality of pixels (see fig. 3 and 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have one of on chip lenses for a plurality of pixels of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Suzuki in order to guide light to a region of pixels in a desired manner providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 20: Iwasaki an imaging device (fig. 10), comprising: a pixel region (PA) in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged (paragraph 71) (fig. 3 and 10); an on-chip lenses (ML) provided on the pixel region (see fig. 10); a protective member (501/301) provided on the on-chip lenses (ML) (see fig. 10); and a resin layer (110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lenses (ML) and the protective member (501/301) (see fig. 10); and the protective member (501/301) has a thickness (see fig. 10), and wherein the protective member (501/301) and the resin layer (110) are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens (ML) and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident on the pixel region (PA) (see fig. 10, paragraph 132), but does not specifically teach the on-chip lens on each of the pixels and the totally reflected at an interface between the protective member and air is re-incident outside the pixel region. Asano teaches wherein when a thickness of a resin layer is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the resin layer is configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident outside the pixel region (fig. 1, equation 5, paragraphs 10-20 in machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the equation and total reflection at the interface to guide light outside the pixel region in Asano to determine the thickness of an adhesive/resin layer and protection layer using the critical angle and size of a light reception surface in order to reduce the undesired effects of light from scattering and reflection through the layer and member of Iwasaki to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation. Iwasaki as modified by Asano does not specifically teach one of the on-chip lenses is provided for a plurality of the pixels. Suzuki teaches wherein one of on-chip lenses (402) is provided for a plurality of pixels (see fig. 3 and 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have one of on chip lenses for a plurality of pixels of Iwasaki as modified by Asano similar to Suzuki in order to guide light to a region of pixels in a desired manner providing for higher quality image formation.
Claim(s) 16, 17 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jang et al. (US 20190088704).
Re claim 16: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, further comprising: a color filter (Iwasaki, CF) provided between the pixel region (Iwasaki, 21) and the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 6), but does not specifically teach a first light shielding film provided in the color filter on between the pixels adjacent to each other. Jang teaches further comprising: a color filter (C/F) provided between a pixel region (100) and an on chip lens (140) (fig. 6); and a first light shielding film (132a) provided in the color filter (C/F) on between the pixels (100) adjacent to each other (see fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a first light shielding material similar to Jang with the device of Iwasaki as modified by Asano in order to detect light of specific wavelengths with reduced cross talk providing for higher quality color image formation.
Re claim 17: Iwasaki as modified by Asano and Jang teaches further comprising a second light shielding film (Jang, 134a) on the first light shielding film (Jang, 132a) on between the adjacent pixels (Jang, 100, see fig. 6).
Re claim 21: Iwasaki an imaging device (fig. 10), comprising: a pixel region (PA) in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged (paragraph 71) (fig. 3 and 10); an on-chip lenses (ML) provided on the pixel region (see fig. 10); a color filter (Iwasaki, CF) provided between the pixel region (Iwasaki, 21) and the on-chip lens (Iwasaki, ML, see fig. 6); a protective member (501/301) provided on the on-chip lenses (ML) (see fig. 10); and a resin layer (110, paragraph 110) that adheres between the on-chip lenses (ML) and the protective member (501/301) (see fig. 10); and the protective member (501/301) has a thickness (see fig. 10), and wherein the protective member (501/301) and the resin layer (110) are configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens (ML) and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident on the pixel region (PA) (see fig. 10, paragraph 132), but does not specifically teach a first light shielding film provided in the color filter in between the pixels adjacent to each other and the totally reflected at an interface between the protective member and air is re-incident outside the pixel region. Asano teaches wherein when a thickness of a resin layer is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied, wherein the resin layer is configured such that diffracted reflected light originating at the on-chip lens and reflected at an interface between the protective member and air after being incident on the interface at an angle greater than or equal to Ɵc is re-incident outside the pixel region (fig. 1, equation 5, paragraphs 10-20 in machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the equation and total reflection at the interface to guide light outside the pixel region in Asano to determine the thickness of an adhesive/resin layer and protection layer using the critical angle and size of a light reception surface in order to reduce the undesired effects of light from scattering and reflection through the layer and member of Iwasaki to the pixel region providing for higher quality image formation. Iwasaki as modified by Asano does not specifically teach a first light shielding film provided in the color filter in between the pixels adjacent to each other. Jang teaches further comprising: a color filter (C/F) provided between a pixel region (100) and an on chip lens (140) (fig. 6); and a first light shielding film (132a) provided in the color filter (C/F) on between the pixels (100) adjacent to each other (see fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a first light shielding material similar to Jang with the device of Iwasaki as modified by Asano in order to detect light of specific wavelengths with reduced cross talk providing for higher quality color image formation.
Claim(s) 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Endo (US 20130076951).
Re claim 23: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the pixel region (PA) includes at least an effective pixel region that outputs a pixel signal used to generate an image (paragraphs 66-71, fig. 3 and 10), but does not specifically teach wherein the pixel region further includes an optical black (OB) pixel region that outputs a pixel signal serving as a reference of dark output. Endo teaches wherein a pixel region (102/12) further includes an optical black (OB) pixel region that outputs a pixel signal serving as a reference of dark output (paragraphs 81-84, fig. 2-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include an optical black region similar to Endo with the pixel region of Iwasaki as modified by Asano in order to compensate for noise in the effective pixel region providing for higher quality image formation.
Re claim 24: Iwasaki as modified by Asano and Endo teaches the imaging device, wherein the OB pixel region (Endo, 102) is provided so as to surround a periphery of the effective pixel region (Endo, 101, fig. 3).
Re claim 25: Iwasaki as modified by Asano and Endo teaches the imaging device, wherein the pixel region (Iwasaki, PA, Endo, fig. 3 and 4) further includes a dummy pixel region (Endo, 103) that stabilizes a characteristic of the effective pixel region (Endo, 101, fig. 3, paragraph 83).
Re claim 26: Iwasaki as modified by Asano and Endo teaches the imaging device, wherein the dummy pixel region (Endo, 103) is provided so as to surround a periphery of the OB pixel region (Endo, 102, fig. 3).
Claim(s) 30 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki (US 20130032914) as modified by Asano (JP H06244393) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Hirano et al. (US 20160027830).
Re claim 29: Iwasaki as modified by Asano teaches the imaging device, wherein the external region (Iwasaki, SA) is provided around the effective photosensitive region (Iwasaki, PA) (Iwasaki, see fig. 3), but does not specifically teach wherein the pixel region further includes a termination region that cuts a semiconductor package from a wafer. Hirano teaches wherein a pixel region (A1/A2/A3, fig. 3) further includes a termination region (A3) that cuts a semiconductor package from a wafer (paragraph 72). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to further include a termination region similar to Hirano with the device of Iwasaki as modified by Asano in order to have a region for cleaving that will not affect the circuitry of the device reducing manufacturing errors.
Re claim 31: Iwasaki as modified by Asano and Hirano teaches the imaging device, wherein the termination region (Hirano, A3) is provided around the external region (Hirano, A2, fig. 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 12 and 13 are 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.
In regards to claim 5, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach the imaging device according to claim 1 as claimed, more specifically in combination with further comprising an actuator that is provided under the protective member or in the protective member and changes a thickness of the protective member.
In regards to claim 12, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach the imaging device according to claim 1 as claimed, more specifically in combination with wherein the thickness T is greater than or equal to a first thickness T1 when a width of a pixel of the plurality of pixels is a first width W1 in a plan view viewed from the incident direction, and when the width of the pixel is a second width W2 (W2 < W1) that is thicker than the first thickness T1.
Claim 13 is object to because of their dependency claim 12.
Claim 32 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 32, the prior art of record individually or in combination with an imaging device as claimed, comprising: a pixel region in which a plurality of pixels that performs photoelectric conversion is arranged; an on-chip lens provided on the pixel region; a protective member provided on the on-chip lens; more specifically in combination with an actuator provided under the protective member or in the protective member that changes a thickness of the protective member; and a resin layer that adheres between the on-chip lens and the protective member, wherein when a thickness of the resin layer and the protective member is T, a length of a diagonal line of the pixel region viewed from an incident direction of light is L, and a critical angle of the protective member is Ɵc, T ≥ L/2/tan Ɵc (Formula 2) or T ≥ L/4/tan Ɵc (Formula 3) Formula 2 or 3 is satisfied.
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 JENNIFER D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-3419. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/JENNIFER D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights