DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 02/17/2026.
3. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 are under examination on the merits. Claims 1, 9, 17 are amended.
4. The objections and rejections not addressed below are deemed withdrawn.
5. Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, thus claims 1-20 stand rejected as set forth in Office action dated 11/17/2025 and further discussed in the Response to Arguments below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hiki et al. (JP 2020-067552 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’552”).
Regarding claims 1,3,5: ‘552 discloses a photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]) comprising: 0.8 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D1) ("EBECRYL80" produced by Daicel-Allnex) which is a tetrafunctional acrylate having a pigment and a secondary or tertiary amino group (i.e., first (meth)acrylate; Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D4) ("Aronix M-350" produced by Toagosei Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 3) which is a trimethylolpropane EO-modified triacrylate, 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D5) (i.e., D4 and/or D5 as second (meth)acrylate; "A-DPH" produced by Shin-Nakamura Chemical Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 6) which is dipentaerythritol hexaacrylate (Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.3 parts of ethanone,1-[9-ethyl-6-(2-methylbenzoyl)-9H-carbazole-3-yl]-, 1-(O-acetyloxime) ("IRGACURE OXE 02" produced by BASF) as a photopolymerization initiator (C1), and 1.0 parts of a polymerization inhibitor solution (solution obtained by diluting 1 part of "MH" (non-volatile content of 100 mass%) produced by Seiko Chemical Co., Ltd. with 99 parts of propylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate) (Page 37/45, [0139]) and color filter pixels for a solid-state imaging element formed by applying and exposing said photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 37/45, [0140]; Page 38/45, [0142]; Page 39/45, Table 3, Example 10). ‘552 discloses the inorganic pigment such as titanium black, and synthetic iron black, wherein the inorganic pigment can be used in combination with the organic pigment in order to secure good coatability, sensitivity, developability, and the like while keeping a balance between chroma and lightness (Page 11/45, [0033]).
The photopolymerizable monomer (D1) corresponds to the first (meth)acrylate, and photopolymerizable monomer (D4) and/or photopolymerizable monomer (D5) correspond to the second (meth)acrylate. The percentage of the mass of photopolymerizable monomer (D1) relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 267%, and the percentage of the mass of the polymerization inhibitor relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 3.3%, and satisfies the numerical range in claim 1.
If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Regarding claim 2: ‘552 discloses the photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), wherein a percentage of the first (meth)acrylate relative to a solid content mass of the photosensitive coloring composition for an infrared pass filter is in a range of 0.1% to 20% (Page 30/45, [0111]; Page 31/45, [0112]).
Regarding claims 4,6-8: ‘552 discloses the photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), wherein the photopolymerization initiator includes an oxime ester photopolymerization initiator such as 1-[9-ethyl-6-(2-methylbenzoyl)-9H-carbazole-3-yl]-, 1-(O-acetyloxime) ("IRGACURE OXE 02" produced by BASF) (Page 37/45, [0140]).
PNG
media_image1.png
288
262
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 9,11,13: ‘552 discloses a photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]) comprising: 0.8 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D1) ("EBECRYL80" produced by Daicel-Allnex) which is a tetrafunctional acrylate having a pigment and a secondary or tertiary amino group (i.e., first (meth)acrylate; Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D4) ("Aronix M-350" produced by Toagosei Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 3) which is a trimethylolpropane EO-modified triacrylate, 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D5) (i.e., D4 and/or D5 as second (meth)acrylate; "A-DPH" produced by Shin-Nakamura Chemical Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 6) which is dipentaerythritol hexaacrylate (Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.3 parts of ethanone,1-[9-ethyl-6-(2-methylbenzoyl)-9H-carbazole-3-yl]-, 1-(O-acetyloxime) ("IRGACURE OXE 02" produced by BASF) as a photopolymerization initiator (C1), and 1.0 parts of a polymerization inhibitor solution (solution obtained by diluting 1 part of "MH" (non-volatile content of 100 mass%) produced by Seiko Chemical Co., Ltd. with 99 parts of propylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate) (Page 37/45, [0139]) and color filter pixels for a solid-state imaging element formed by applying and exposing said photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 37/45, [0140]; Page 38/45, [0142]; Page 39/45, Table 3, Example 10).‘552 discloses the inorganic pigment such as titanium black, and synthetic iron black, wherein the inorganic pigment can be used in combination with the organic pigment in order to secure good coatability, sensitivity, developability, and the like while keeping a balance between chroma and lightness (Page11/45, [0033]).
The photopolymerizable monomer (D1) corresponds to the first (meth)acrylate, and photopolymerizable monomer (D4) and/or photopolymerizable monomer (D5) correspond to the second (meth)acrylate. The percentage of the mass of photopolymerizable monomer (D1) relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 267%, and the percentage of the mass of the polymerization inhibitor relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 3.3%, and satisfies the numerical range in claim 1.
The recitation an infrared pass filter has not been given patentable weight because the recitation occurs in the preamble. A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951). If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Regarding claim 10: ‘552 discloses the photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), wherein a percentage of the first (meth)acrylate relative to a solid content mass of the photosensitive coloring composition for an infrared pass filter is in a range of 0.1% to 20% (Page 30/45, [0111]; Page 31/45, [0112]).
Regarding claims 12,14-16: ‘552 discloses the photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), wherein the photopolymerization initiator includes an oxime ester photopolymerization initiator such as 1-[9-ethyl-6-(2-methylbenzoyl)-9H-carbazole-3-yl]-, 1-(O-acetyloxime) ("IRGACURE OXE 02" produced by BASF) (Page 37/45, [0140]).
PNG
media_image1.png
288
262
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 17,19: ‘552 discloses a method of producing a photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), comprising: mixing a colorant, a polymerizable compound, a photopolymerization initiator, and a polymerization inhibitor such as 0.8 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D1) ("EBECRYL80" produced by Daicel-Allnex) which is a tetrafunctional acrylate having a pigment and a secondary or tertiary amino group (i.e., first (meth)acrylate; Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D4) ("Aronix M-350" produced by Toagosei Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 3) which is a trimethylolpropane EO-modified triacrylate, 0.9 parts of a photopolymerizable monomer (D5) (i.e., D4 and/or D5 as second (meth)acrylate; "A-DPH" produced by Shin-Nakamura Chemical Co., Ltd.; number of polymerizable functional groups: 6) which is dipentaerythritol hexaacrylate (Page 37/45, [0140]), 0.3 parts of ethanone,1-[9-ethyl-6-(2-methylbenzoyl)-9H-carbazole-3-yl]-, 1-(O-acetyloxime) ("IRGACURE OXE 02" produced by BASF) as a photopolymerization initiator (C1), and 1.0 parts of a polymerization inhibitor solution (solution obtained by diluting 1 part of "MH" (non-volatile content of 100 mass%) produced by Seiko Chemical Co., Ltd. with 99 parts of propylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate) (Page 37/45, [0139]) (Page 37/45, [0140]; Page 38/45, [0142]; Page 39/45, Table 3, Example 10). ‘552 discloses the inorganic pigment such as titanium black, and synthetic iron black, wherein the inorganic pigment can be used in combination with the organic pigment in order to secure good coatability, sensitivity, developability, and the like while keeping a balance between chroma and lightness (Page11/45, [0033]).
The photopolymerizable monomer (D1) corresponds to the first (meth)acrylate, and photopolymerizable monomer (D4) and/or photopolymerizable monomer (D5) correspond to the second (meth)acrylate. The percentage of the mass of photopolymerizable monomer (D1) relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 267%, and the percentage of the mass of the polymerization inhibitor relative to the mass of the photopolymerization initiator (C1) is 3.3%, and satisfies the numerical range in claim 1.
The recitation an infrared pass filter has not been given patentable weight because the recitation occurs in the preamble. A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951). If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Regarding claim 18: ‘552 discloses the method of producing a photosensitive coloring composition for a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), (Page 6/45, [0001]), wherein a percentage of the first (meth)acrylate relative to a solid content mass of the photosensitive coloring composition for an infrared pass filter is in a range of 0.1% to 20% (Page 30/45, [0111]; Page 31/45, [0112]).
Regarding claim 20: ‘552 discloses the method of producing a color filter (Page 6/45, [0001]), comprising: preparing a photosensitive coloring composition by the method; applying a coating liquid comprising the photosensitive coloring composition to an object such that a coating film comprising the coating liquid is formed on the object; and curing the coating film formed on the object (Page 30/45, [0107]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Hiki et al. (JP 2020-067552 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’552”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iwata et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0358983 A1, hereinafter “’983”).
Regarding claims 1-20: The disclosure of ‘552 is adequately set forth in paragraph 8 above and is incorporated herein by reference. This rejection is applied in the interest of advancing prosecution in the event it can be shown that ‘552 does not expressly teach a photosensitive coloring composition for an infrared pass filter, comprising a colorant exhibiting a black color.
However, ‘983 teaches a solid-state image sensor filter includes: a light-incident surface on which light is incident; an infrared filter located on a side of a photoelectric conversion element on which the light-incident surface is disposed; and a barrier layer located on a side of the infrared filter on which the light-incident surface is disposed, the barrier layer being provided to suppress transmission of an oxidation source to thereby prevent the infrared filter from being oxidized (Page 1, [0012]). As shown in FIG. 11, the color filters 12R, 12G, and 12B have thicknesses T12 which may be different from that of the infrared pass filter 12P, or may be the same as that of the infrared pass filter 12P. The thickness T12 of the color filters 12R, 12G, and 12B is, for example, 0.5 µm or more and 5 µm or less (Page 8, [0123]). ‘983 teaches the infrared pass filter 12P cuts off visible light that may otherwise be detected by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P, to prevent it from reaching the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P, to thereby improve the accuracy of detection of near-infrared light by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P. That is, the infrared pass filter 12P prevents the visible light that may be detected by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P from passing through to the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P. The infrared pass filter 12P is a layer disposed only on the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P (Page 8, [0125]). Materials constituting the infrared pass filter 12P include a black colorant or a black dye, and a transparent resin. The black colorant may be a single colorant having a black color, or a mixture of two or more colorants having a black color. Examples of the black dye include azo-based dye, anthraquinone-based dye, azine-based dye, quinoline-based dye, perinone-based dye, perylene-based dye, and methine-based dye. Examples of the transparent resin include acrylic resin, polyamide-based resin, polyimide-based resin, polyurethane-based resin, polyester-based resin, polyether-based resin, polyolefin-based resin, polycarbonate-based resin, polystyrene-based resin, and norbornene-based resin. The infrared pass filter 12P is formed by film formation using a liquid phase film formation method such as coating (Page 8, [0126]).
In an analogous art of the photosensitive coloring composition, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the photosensitive coloring composition by ‘552, so as to include photosensitive coloring composition for an infrared pass filter, comprising a colorant exhibiting a black color as taught by ‘983, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing a solid-state image sensor filter for use with a photoelectric conversion element includes color microlenses which have a light-incident surface on which light is incident and collect the light incident on the light-incident surface toward a photoelectric conversion element to be combined with the solid-state image sensor filter, and an infrared filter positioned between the color microlenses and the photoelectric conversion element (Page 1, [0013]), and a barrier layer formed between the color microlenses and the infrared filter such that transmission of an oxidation source that oxidizes the infrared filter is suppressed as suggested ‘983 (Page 1, [0012]).
Thus the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since choosing an appropriate colorant exhibiting a black color of a known photosensitive coloring composition based on its suitability for its intended use is within the level ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive,
In response to the Applicant’s argument that the present application is directed to an infrared pass filter. Infrared pass filters do not adjust a color tone or change a color expressed by light passing through the filter as recited by Hiki ’522..
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Alternatively, ‘983 teaches a solid-state image sensor filter includes: a light-incident surface on which light is incident; an infrared filter located on a side of a photoelectric conversion element on which the light-incident surface is disposed; and a barrier layer located on a side of the infrared filter on which the light-incident surface is disposed, the barrier layer being provided to suppress transmission of an oxidation source to thereby prevent the infrared filter from being oxidized (Page 1, [0012]). As shown in FIG. 11, the color filters 12R, 12G, and 12B have thicknesses T12 which may be different from that of the infrared pass filter 12P, or may be the same as that of the infrared pass filter 12P. The thickness T12 of the color filters 12R, 12G, and 12B is, for example, 0.5 µm or more and 5 µm or less (Page 8, [0123]). ‘983 teaches the infrared pass filter 12P cuts off visible light that may otherwise be detected by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P, to prevent it from reaching the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P, to thereby improve the accuracy of detection of near-infrared light by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P. That is, the infrared pass filter 12P prevents the visible light that may be detected by the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P from passing through to the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P. The infrared pass filter 12P is a layer disposed only on the infrared photoelectric conversion element 11P (Page 8, [0125]). Materials constituting the infrared pass filter 12P include a black colorant or a black dye, and a transparent resin. The black colorant may be a single colorant having a black color, or a mixture of two or more colorants having a black color. Examples of the black dye include azo-based dye, anthraquinone-based dye, azine-based dye, quinoline-based dye, perinone-based dye, perylene-based dye, and methine-based dye. Examples of the transparent resin include acrylic resin, polyamide-based resin, polyimide-based resin, polyurethane-based resin, polyester-based resin, polyether-based resin, polyolefin-based resin, polycarbonate-based resin, polystyrene-based resin, and norbornene-based resin. The infrared pass filter 12P is formed by film formation using a liquid phase film formation method such as coating (Page 8, [0126]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since choosing an appropriate colorant exhibiting a black color of a known photosensitive coloring composition based on its suitability for its intended use is within the level ordinary skill in the art.
11. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner Information
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bijan Ahvazi, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 270-3449. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9.00 A.M. -7 P.M..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bijan Ahvazi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
03/09/2026
bijan.ahvazi@uspto.gov