DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group B (claims 1 and 4-6) in the reply filed on 2-24-2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is a common special technical feature among the groups A, B, and C because the limitations of claim 2 have been included into the limitations of claim 1. This is not found persuasive because as noted below, amended claim 1 has been found to be obvious/lacks inventive step over Ebiko in view of Ahmed. Therefore, no common special technical feature exists. Claim 3 is rejoined as it is part of the group incorporated into claim 1.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (US 2021/0313361) in view of Ahmed (US 2018/0309965).
[claim 1] Ebiko discloses a frontside-illuminated image sensor (figs. 5,6), comprising: a base (26/24/23/22a, fig. 6) having charge storage regions (21a-d, fig. 6, note that [0049] expressly describes that that generated signal charges are accumulated in regions 21a to 2d, note also that 23 can include a floating diffusion unit [0049]); a photosensitive unit (22a to 22d of 20G, 20B, 20IR, 20R, fig. 6, [0049]) above the base, wherein the photosensitive unit comprises photosensitive layers for different colors (each of 22a to 22d of 20G, 20B, 20IR, 20R, are to different colors of red, green, and blue [0047]) , and one of the photosensitive layers is electrically connected to one of the charge storage regions (fig. 6); a color filter unit(50G, 50B, 50R, fig. 6, [0030]) unit at a side of the photosensitive unit away from the base, wherein the color filter unit comprises color filter layers for different colors [0030], and one of the color filter layers corresponds to one of the photosensitive layers (fig. 6); and a lens structure (51, fig. 6) at a side of the color filter unit away from the base; wherein, the photosensitive unit comprises a red-light photosensitive layer (21d of 20R, fig. 6), a green-light photosensitive layer (21a of 20G, fig. 5) and a blue-light photosensitive layer (21b or 20B, fi. 6). Ebiko, however, does not disclose the materials used in forming of the photosensitive layer 21a to 21d.
Ahmed discloses a frontside-illuminated image sensor (fig. 6G) wherein the photo sensitive layer is made of indium gallium nitride with indium concentration tuned to a desired color wavelength [0333][ with specific proportions of 20% for blue, 30% for green, and 41% for red [0132].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to have made Ebiko’s photosensitive layer out of a indium gallium nitride with indium concentration tuned to a desired color wavelength with Ahmed’s proportions in order to provide for a workable image sensor that matches the desired color wavelength (see [0333][0132] of Ahmed).
Wit this modification Ebiko discloses:
[claim 1] materials of the red-light photosensitive layer, the green-light photosensitive layer and the blue-light photosensitive layer are GaN-based materials containing different proportions of In (upon modification), to generate photosensitive charges based on wavelengths of received light and store the photosensitive charges in a corresponding charge storage region or not generate photosensitive charges based on the wavelengths of the received light (see [0132][0333] of Ahmed).
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (US 2021/0313361) in view of Ahmed (US 2018/0309965) and further in view of Nakanishi (US 2015/0084106).
Ebiko/Ahmed discloses the image sensor of claim 1 but does not expressly disclose a pixel transistor embedded in the base substrate with source and drain and a metal conductive interconnect plug connecting to the photosensitive layer and charge storage layer.
Nakanishi discloses an image sensor (fig.2) with a pixel transistor (136, fig. 2, [0022]) embedded in the base substrate (101 and wiring layer thereon, fig. 2) with source and drain (inherent for the transistor, fig. 2) and a metal conductive interconnect plug (copper plug interconnects in interconnect layer 141, 142, and 143, [0021]) connecting to the photosensitive layer (152, fig. 2) and charge storage layer (151 and/or 137, [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to have used Nakanishi’s pixel transistor and metal interconnect plug configuration in Ebiko’s device in order to provide a means to interconnect the photosensor to a transistor that can control it.
With this modification Ebiko discloses:
[claim 4] The frontside-illuminated image sensor according to claim 1, wherein, transistors (pixel transistors are provided within the wiring layer 24, [0064] with the specific configuration shown in Nakanishi upon modification) are provided on the base, and a source region or a drain region of at least one of the transistors is one of the charge storage regions (upon modification); there is a metal interconnection layer between the base and the photosensitive unit (upon modification), and a metal interconnection structure of the metal interconnection layer is used to electrically connect to the transistors (upon modification).
[claim 5] The frontside-illuminated image sensor according to claim 4, wherein, there is a conductive plug in the metal interconnection layer (upon modification), a first end of the conductive plug is connected to one of the photosensitive layers (electrically connected), and a second end of the conductive plug is electrically connected to one of the charge storage regions (upon modification).
[claim 6] The frontside-illuminated image sensor according to claim 5, wherein the first end of the conductive plug is connected to a side wall of the one of the photosensitive layers (electrically connected upon modification).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (US 2021/0313361) in view of Ahmed (US 2018/0309965).
Ebiko/Ahmed discloses the device of claim 1 and that a range of a proportion for In in the red-light photosensitive layer is from 0.4 to 0.6 (Ahmed [0132]) and a range of a proportion for In in the green-light photosensitive layer is from 0.2 to 0.3 (Ahmed [0132]) but does not expressly disclose that a range of a proportion for In in the blue-light photosensitive layer is from 0.01 to 0.1.
Nevertheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the time of filing to have made the proportion of In for the blue photosensitive layer from 0.01 to 0.1, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It also been held that the normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2003). The claimed range is a result-effective variable since it is known that amount of Indium in an InGaN layer affects the bandgap energy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMAR MOVVA whose telephone number is (571)272-9009. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Julio Maldonado can be reached at 571-272-1864. 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.
/AMAR MOVVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights