DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant's election with traverse of Species I (claims 1-7 and 9-17) in the reply filed on August 13, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that "examination of both species would not require materially different searches or examination and therefore would not impose a serious search or examination burden". This is not found persuasive because unique text searches are required to find art that would read on each species, and prior art found for Species I would not read on Species II, and vice versa. Therefore, only the elected claims (1-7 and 9-17) will be examined.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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.
4. Claims 1, 3-7, 9-10, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al (US 2021/0103075 A1, hereafter Park).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses an image sensor (Fig. 12 1000; [0132]-[0133]), comprising:
a meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer; [0091]), wherein the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer) comprises a plurality of meta-pillars (Fig. 4C ne1; [0091]); and
an optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer; [0091]) on the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer) and covering the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer covered by top layer),
wherein in a pixel region (Fig. 4C area spanning P), each of the meta-pillars (ne1) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer) corresponds to at least one opening (Fig. 4C ne2 ([0091]) in the optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer).
Regarding claim 3¸ Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein a height H1 (Fig. 4 h2; [0091]) of the at least one opening (ne2) satisfies 3μm>H1>0.2μm ([0069], [0079], [0092]).
Park discloses h2 may be greater than central wavelength 2λ0, the operation wavelength for the device ([0069], [0092]), and the operation wavelength may be in the range of 200 to 700 nm (0.4 to 0.7 μm) ([0079])
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein in a top view, the at least one opening comprises a round shape or a polygonal shape (Figs. 4A-C; [0086], [0091]).
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer) connects the at least one opening (ne2) and each of the meta-pillars (ne1) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer).
Regarding claim 6, Park discloses image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein in the pixel region (area spanning P), each of the meta-pillars (ne1) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer) corresponds to 1 opening (Fig. 4C ne2) in the optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer).
Regarding claim 7, Park discloses image sensor as claimed in claim 6, wherein the at least one opening (ne2) is arranged in a polygonal arrangement (Figs. 4A-C; [0086], [0091], a circle opening is a polygonal arrangement).
Regarding claim 9, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein a material of the optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer) comprises TiO2, SiN, Si, amorphous Si (a-Si), polycrystalline silicon (p-Si), a III-V semiconductor compound, or a combination thereof ([0090]-[0091], top layer of Fig. 4C is made of material of ME in Fig. 4B).
Regarding claim 10¸ Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: an absorption layer (Fig. 12 1600; [0132]) below the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer; [0133], meta-surface layer included in imaging lens 1200), wherein the absorption layer (1600) comprises an infrared (IR)-cut material ([0132]; absorption layer disclosed as infrared cut-off filter, which inherently must include an infrared-cut material).
Regarding claim 15¸ Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one opening (ne2) is recessed (Fig. 4C) from a top of the optical functional layer (Fig. 4C top layer).
Regarding claim 16, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the meta-pillars (ne1) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer) is concentric (Fig. 4C; ne1 is directly below ne2 and conforms to shape) with the at least one opening (ne2) when the meta-pillars (ne1) correspond (Fig. 4C) to only one of the at least one opening (ne2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
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.
6. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park.
Regarding claim 2¸ Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, wherein Park discloses a width W (Fig. 4C w2; [0091]) of the at least one opening (ne2) and D is a diameter (Fig. 4C w1; [0091]) of each of the meta-pillars (ne1) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer).
Park fails to explicitly disclose the relationship 3∙D>W>0.25∙D.
However, Park discloses various combinations of w1 and w2 may be constructed ([0094]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the width W and diameter D to achieve the desired relationship through routine optimization to implement a metasurface with a desired transmission phase distribution, as discussed by Park ([0094]).
7. Claims 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al (US 2021/0217792 A1, hereafter Chen).
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Park fails to disclose the absorption layer is a multi-film structure.
Chen discloses an absorption layer (Fig. 1B 110; [0039]) is a multi-film structure ([0039]-[0042])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the absorption layer of Park with the absorption layer of Chen to enhance device performance and sensing by improving the signal-to-noise ratio (Chen [0047]).
8. Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Riley, Jr. et al (US 2019/0064532 A1, hereafter Riley).
Regarding claim 12, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, further comprising:
a sensor layer (Fig. 12 1700; [0132]) below the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer; [0133], meta-surface layer included in imaging lens 1200); and
an absorption layer (Fig. 12 1600; [0132]).
Park fails to disclose a supporting structure on the sensor layer; and
an absorption layer between the supporting structure and the meta-surface layer,
wherein the supporting structure comprises an air gap,
wherein the absorption layer and the sensor layer are separated by the air gap.
Riley discloses a supporting structure (Fig. 7 72; [0233] on the sensor layer (Fig. 7 74’ [0233]); and
an absorption layer (Figs 6+8A 44; [0235], Riley discloses Figs. 6 and 7 can be combined as shown in Fig. 8A) between (embodiment in Fig. 6 would be stacked on embodiment of Fig. 7) the supporting structure (72) and the meta-surface layer (Fig. 7 42; [0232]),
wherein the supporting structure (72) comprises an air gap (Fig. 7 space between 72; [0233], Riley discloses an air gap can be formed in space between spacers 68 and 72),
wherein the absorption layer (44) and the sensor layer (74) are separated by the air gap (space between 72) (embodiment containing absorption layer stacked on embodiment containing air gap and sensor).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the support structure of Riley in the device of Park to improve light sensing of the device by widening the illumination zone (Riley [0260]).
Regarding claim 14, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1, further comprising:
a sensor layer (Fig. 12 1700; [0132]) below the meta-surface layer (Fig. 4C bottom layer; [0133], meta-surface layer included in imaging lens 1200).
Park fails to disclose a buffer layer between the sensor layer and the meta-surface layer.
Riley discloses a buffer layer (Fig. 8A 90; [0235]) between the sensor layer (Fig. 8A 92) and the meta-surface layer (Fig. 8A 80).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the buffer layer of Riley in the device of Park to improve device performance by reducing noise.
9. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chang et al (US 2023/0095994 A1, hereafter Chang).
Regarding claim 13, Park discloses the image sensor as claimed in claim 1.
Park fails to disclose each of the meta-pillars of the meta-surface layer is a multi-film structure with metallic or transparent conducting materials.
Chang discloses each of the meta-pillars (Fig. 2A 110; [0029]) of the meta-surface layer (Fig. 2A 100A; [0029]) is a multi-film structure (Fig. 2A; [0029]-[0031]) with metallic or transparent conducting materials ([0029]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the meta-pillars of Park with the meta-pillars of Chang to improve device performance by adjusting the dimensions and refraction index of the meta-pillars using multiple materials and layers, as discussed by Chang ([0031]).
Conclusion
The following art made of record and not relied upon is pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Kwak et al (US 2024/0006435 A1) discloses an image sensor with meta-pillars over an absorption layer and sensor layer
Han et al (US 2021/0014394 A1) discloses an image sensor with meta-pillars over an absorption layer and sensor layer
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL B SUN whose telephone number is (571)699-0231. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/MICHAEL B SUN/Examiner, Art Unit 2892
/ERIC W JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Prosecution Insights