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 Amendment
The response filed 01/18/2024 is accepted, in which, the specification is amended. Claims 1 and 6 are independent with claims 1-6 awaiting an action on the merits as follows.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains element numbers and is more than 150 words long. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected for indefiniteness.
Regarding claim 2, the claim states, "the first color splitter and the second color splitter have a meta-surface structure." However, the disclosure is silent as to the definition of "meta-surface." To further prosecution, Examiner will assume a meta-surface can be any surface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20190157336 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a solid-state imaging element (image sensor, [Abs], Fig 23), comprising
a first photoelectric conversion unit (232) that includes a photoelectric conversion layer (228) made of an organic material (organic layer, [0141]) and photoelectrically converts light (photoelectric conversion in response to green light, [0146]) in a first wavelength region (green, [0146]);
a second photoelectric conversion unit (204R: photodiode 204 on the left of Fig 23 shown under the red color filter 216R) that is disposed on an opposite side (shown on an opposite side) of a light incident side with respect to the first photoelectric conversion unit (232) and photoelectrically converts light (photodiode, [0133]; well known in the art to photoelectrically convert light) in a second wavelength region (red, [0154]) different from the first wavelength region (green);
a third photoelectric conversion unit (204B: photodiode 204 shown between 204Rs) that is disposed side by side (shown side by side) with the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R) and photoelectrically converts light (photodiode, [0133]; well known in the art to photoelectrically convert light) in a third wavelength region (blue, [0154]) different from the first wavelength region (green) and the second wavelength region (red);
a first color splitter (220A: splitter 220 on left of Fig 23) that is disposed between (shown between) the first photoelectric conversion unit (232) and the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R) and disperses light transmitted through (shown dispersing light) the first photoelectric conversion unit (232); and
a second color splitter (220B: splitter 220 in center of Fig 23) that is disposed between (shown between) the first photoelectric conversion unit (232) and the third photoelectric conversion unit (204B) and disperses the light transmitted through (shown dispersing light) the first photoelectric conversion unit (232); wherein
the first color splitter (220A) makes the light in the second wavelength region (red) incident on (shown on; red light enters first lower photo diode, [0154]) the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R) near (shown near) the first color splitter (220A) and bends the light (shown bending light) in the third wavelength region (blue) toward (shown toward; blue light enters the second lower diode, [0154]) the third photoelectric conversion unit (204B) adjacent (shown adjacent) to the first color splitter (220A), and
the second color splitter (220B) makes the light in the third wavelength region (blue) incident on (shown on; blue light enters the second lower diode, [0154]) the third photoelectric conversion unit (204B) near (shown near) the second color splitter (220B) and bends the light (shown bending light) in the second wavelength region (red) toward (shown toward; red light enters first lower photo diode, [0154]) the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R) adjacent (shown adjacent) to the second color splitter (220B).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the device of claim 1 and goes on to teach wherein the first color splitter (220A, Fig 23) and the second color splitter (220B) have a meta-surface structure (MS: top surface of 220 with materials 18a and 18b, shown in Fig 1, creating a meta-surface structure).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches the device of claim 1 and goes on to teach further comprising:
a first color filter (216R: color filter 216 on left, fig 23) that is disposed between (shown between) the first color splitter (220A) and the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R) and selectively transmits (red color filter; well known in the art to selectively transmit light) the light in the second wavelength region (red);
and a second color filter (216B: color filter 216 shown between 216Rs) that is disposed between (shown between) the second color splitter (220B) and the third photoelectric conversion unit (204B) and selectively transmits (blue color filter; well known in the art to selectively transmit light) the light in the third wavelength region (blue).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches the device of claim 1 and goes on to teach wherein the first wavelength region (green, [0146]) is a green region (photoelectric conversion in response to green light, [0146]), and
the second wavelength region (red) and the third wavelength region (blue) are either a blue region (blue) or a red region (red).
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.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20190157336 A1) as applied to claims 1-4 above, and further in view of Sugiura (US 20150255498 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches the device of claim 1, the first color splitter (220A, Fig 23), the second color splitter (220B), the second photoelectric conversion unit (204R), and the third photoelectric conversion unit (204B).
Kim fails to explicitly teach a light blocking wall disposed between the first color splitter and the second color splitter, and the second photoelectric conversion unit and the third photoelectric conversion unit, and provided to surround the second photoelectric conversion unit or the third photoelectric conversion unit in a plan view.
However, Sugiura teaches further comprising a light blocking wall (6, Fig 4) disposed between (shown between) the first color splitter and the second color splitter, and the second photoelectric conversion unit and the third photoelectric conversion unit, and provided to surround (shown surrounding, Fig 11; surrounde3d on all four sides, [0072]) the second photoelectric conversion unit or the third photoelectric conversion unit in a plan view.
Kim and Sugiura are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are from the same field of endeavor of solid-state imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the device of Kim with the features of Sugiura to create a light blocking wall disposed between the first color splitter and the second color splitter, and the second photoelectric conversion unit and the third photoelectric conversion unit, and provided to surround the second photoelectric conversion unit or the third photoelectric conversion unit in a plan view since the organic photoelectric conversion layer can easily capture and sense light that is incident on the entire light receiving surface of the pixel array (Sugiura, [0051]), accordingly, light-receiving sensitivity can be improved (Sugiura, [0038]).
Regarding claim 6, Sugiura teaches electronic equipment (1, Fig 1), comprising:
a solid-state imaging element (14);
an optical system (13) that captures (shown capturing, Fig 4; receives light from an object and forms and image, [0021]) incident light from a subject and forms an image on an imaging surface of the solid- state imaging element (14); and
a signal processing circuit (15) that performs processing (processes the image signals, [0022]) on an output signal (image signal) from the solid-state imaging element (14).
Sugiura fails to explicitly teach the solid-state imaging element limitations listed in claim 6.
However, Kim teaches the solid-state imaging element of claim 6 because the limitations for the solid-state imaging element of claim 6 are the same as the limitations of the solid-state imaging element of claim 1. Please see above for rejection of claim 1 in view of Kim for rejection of the same limitations of claim 6.
Since Kim teaches the solid-state imaging element composition and Sugiura teaches the electronic equipment comprises a solid-state imaging element, an optical system, and a signal processing circuit, in combination, Sugiura and Kim disclose the limitations of claim 6.
Sugiura and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are from the same field of endeavor of solid-state imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the device of Sugiura with the features of Kim to create the electronic equipment of claim 6. The splitter splits an incident light from an exterior depending on a wavelength of the light so that the split light of different colors may enter the different photo diodes without passing through a separate color filter, respectively. Thus, deposition structure of the image sensor may be simplified (Kim, [0049]) and have a high sensitivity by reducing an amount of an absorbed light that does not reach a photo diode (Kim, [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Roh (US 20160054172 A1) - Splitters under lenses
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeremy D Watts whose telephone number is (703)756-1055. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 8:00am-4:30pm, F 8:00-3pm 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, Chad Dicke can be reached at (571) 270-7996. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JEREMY DANIEL WATTS/Examiner, Art Unit 2897 /CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897