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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 8 objected to because of the following informalities: the claim has a some typographical/grammatical with an extra "and" and a repeated "the" and should likely read "The unit pixel of claim 6, wherein a floating diffusion region of the unit pixel is positioned beneath an aperture of the second gate region." Or similar. Appropriate correction is required.
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 4 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the gate region" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claim 4 is dependent on claims 1 and 2 which have no mention of a gate region. For the purpose of examination this limitation will be interpreted as referring to a backside illuminated sensing pixel.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Galor Gluskin (Pub. No. US 20170373105 A1), hereinafter referred to as Galor.
Regarding claim 1, Galor teaches a unit pixel, comprising: a large photoelectric conversion region, having a hollow columnar shape, configured to convert incident light into a first charge (Figs. 1 & 3a, pixel 120, large photodiode 116; ¶37-39, 46-47); and a small photoelectric conversion region, having a columnar shape, surrounded by the large photoelectric conversion region, configured to convert incident light into a second charge (Figs. 1 & 3a, small photodiode 115; ¶37-39, 46-47).
Regarding claim 11, Galor further teaches the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region respectively forms a photodiode, a phototransistor, a photo-gate, a pinned-photodiode, or a combination thereof (large photodiode 116, small photodiode 115; ¶39, 57, 95).
Regarding claim 12, Galor further teaches an image sensor comprising a plurality of unit pixels of claim 1 that are two-dimensionally arranged (Figs. 1 & 2, pixel 120, two-dimensional pixel array 200; ¶39-45).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Myers et al. (Pub. No. US 20090147091 A1), hereinafter referred to as Myers.
Regarding claim 2, Galor teaches the unit pixel of claim 1 however Galor does not explicitly teach the small photoelectric conversion region is formed by a floating diffusion node of the unit pixel.
Myers teaches the small photoelectric conversion region is formed by a floating diffusion node of the unit pixel (Fig. 3A, 315, 320; ¶31-33).
Galor and Myers are analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the small photodiode of Galor with the teachings of Myers such that the small photoelectric conversion region is formed by a floating diffusion node of the unit pixel. For the purpose of detecting motion of the device to compensate for image blur, as recognized by Myers.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Myers as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Fossum et al. (Pub. No. US 20120038904 A1), hereinafter referred to as Fossum.
Regarding claim 3, Galor in view of Myers does not explicitly teach a gate region having a ring shape, disposed over the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region, wherein the small photoelectric conversion region is positioned beneath an aperture of the gate region.
Fossum teaches a gate region having a ring shape, disposed over the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region, wherein the small photoelectric conversion region is positioned beneath an aperture of the gate region (Figs. 2, 3, 7, and 8, collection gate 120 & 220, drain gate 130 & 230, photo-charge storing region 150 & 250, floating diffusion region 110 & 210; ¶72-85, 104-108).
Galor, Myers and Fossum are all analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor in view of Myers with the teachings of Fossum such that a gate region having a ring shape, disposed over the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region, wherein the small photoelectric conversion region is positioned beneath an aperture of the gate region. For the purpose of having a unit pixel with a ring-shaped structure which has benefits such as being able to measure a distance to an object, as recognized by Fossum.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Myers as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ahn et al. (Pub. No. US 20140327051 A1), hereinafter referred to as Ahn.
Regarding claim 4, Galor further teaches a shared color filter unit (Fig. 1, color filter 110; ¶37-39); and a shared micro lens unit (Fig. 1, MDML 105; ¶37-39). However, Galor in view of Myers does not explicitly teach the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side the gate region is disposed.
Ahn teaches the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side the gate region is disposed (Fig. 1A, color filter layer 140, lens layer 150, transistor layer 110; ¶35-38).
Galor, Myers and Ahn are all analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor in view of Myers with the teachings of Ahn such that the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side the gate region is disposed. For the purpose of having a backside illuminated sensor which has benefits such as increased low-light performance and the ability to manufacture smaller sensors.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Myers as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Ye (Pub. No. US 20230282673 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Galor in view of Myers does not explicitly teach a deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region.
Ye teaches a deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region (Fig. 2, DTI structure 160, first photoelectric sensor a1, second photoelectric sensor b1; ¶47-62).
Galor, Myers and Ye are all analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor in view of Myers with the teachings of Ye such that the device has a deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region. For the purpose of reducing crosstalk between elements within the device, as recognized by Ye.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Fossum.
Regarding claim 6, Galor teaches the unit pixel of claim 1. However, Galor does not explicitly teach a first gate region having a larger ring shape, disposed over the large photoelectric conversion region; and a second gate region having a smaller ring shape, disposed over the small photoelectric conversion region; wherein the second gate region is positioned within an aperture of the first gate region.
Fossum teaches a first gate region having a larger ring shape, disposed over a photoelectric conversion region (Figs. 2 and 3, drain gate 130, photo-charge storing region 150; ¶72-85); and a second gate region having a smaller ring shape, disposed over the photoelectric conversion region (Figs. 2 and 3, collection gate 120, photo-charge storing region 150; ¶72-85); wherein the second gate region is positioned within an aperture of the first gate region (Fig. 2, collection gate 120, drain gate 130; ¶72-85).
Galor and Fossum are analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the photoelectric conversion regions of Galor with the teachings of Fossum such that a first gate region having a larger ring shape, disposed over the large photoelectric conversion region; and a second gate region having a smaller ring shape, disposed over the small photoelectric conversion region; wherein the second gate region is positioned within an aperture of the first gate region. For the purpose of having a unit pixel with a ring-shaped structure which has benefits such as being able to measure a distance to an object, as recognized by Fossum.
Regarding claim 7, Galor does not explicitly teach the small photoelectric conversion region has a hollow columnar shape and is formed by a body/bulk region of a transistor whose gate terminal is the second gate region; and the second gate region is positioned directly above the small photoelectric conversion region.
Fossum teaches the photoelectric conversion region having a hollow columnar shape and is formed by a body/bulk region of a transistor whose gate terminal is the second gate region; and the second gate region is positioned directly above the small photoelectric conversion region (Figs. 2 and 3, collection gate 120, photo-charge storing region 150; ¶72-85).
Galor and Fossum are analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the small photoelectric conversion region of Galor with the teachings of Fossum such that the small photoelectric conversion region has a hollow columnar shape and is formed by a body/bulk region of a transistor whose gate terminal is the second gate region; and the second gate region is positioned directly above the small photoelectric conversion region. For the purpose of having a unit pixel with a ring-shaped structure which has benefits such as being able to measure a distance to an object, as recognized by Fossum.
Regarding claim 8, Galor does not explicitly teach a floating diffusion region of the unit pixel and is positioned beneath an aperture of the second gate region.
Fossum teaches a floating diffusion region of the unit pixel positioned beneath an aperture of the second gate region (Figs. 2 and 3, floating diffusion region 110, collection gate 120; ¶72-85).
Galor and Fossum are analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor with the teachings of Fossum such that a floating diffusion region of the unit pixel is positioned beneath an aperture of the second gate region. For the purpose of having a unit pixel with a ring-shaped structure and a floating diffusion region in the center which has benefits such as being able to measure a distance to an object, as recognized by Fossum.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Fossum as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ye.
Regarding claim 9, Galor in view of Fossum does not explicitly teach a first deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region; and a second deep trench isolation region, having a columnar shape, positioned within an aperture of the small photoelectric conversion region.
Ye teaches a first deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region; and a second deep trench isolation region, having a columnar shape, positioned within an aperture of the small photoelectric conversion region (Fig. 2, DTI structure 160, first photoelectric sensor a1, second photoelectric sensor b1; ¶47-62).
Galor, Fossum, and Ye are all analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor in view of Fossum with the teachings of Ye such that the device has a first deep trench isolation region, having a hollow columnar shape, disposed between the large photoelectric conversion region and the small photoelectric conversion region; and a second deep trench isolation region, having a columnar shape, positioned within an aperture of the small photoelectric conversion region. For the purpose of reducing crosstalk between elements within the device, as recognized by Ye.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galor in view of Fossum as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ahn.
Regarding claim 10, Galor further teaches a shared color filter unit (Fig. 1, color filter 110; ¶37-39); and a shared micro lens unit (Fig. 1, MDML 105; ¶37-39). However, Galor in view of Fossum does not explicitly teach the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side that the first gate region and the second gate region are disposed.
Ahn teaches the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side that the first gate region and the second gate region are disposed. (Fig. 1A, color filter layer 140, lens layer 150, transistor layer 110; ¶35-38).
Galor, Fossum, and Ahn are all analogous art as they are in the same field of endeavor of semiconductor devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Galor in view of Fossum with the teachings of Ahn such that the shared color filter unit and the shared micro lens unit are disposed on a light receiving side of the unit pixel that is opposite to a side that the first gate region and the second gate region are disposed. For the purpose of having a backside illuminated sensor which has benefits such as increased low-light performance and the ability to manufacture smaller sensors.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yang et al. (US 10,334,191 B1), Cohen et al. (US 8,264,581 B2), Mlinar et al. (US 20180269245 A1), Mlinar et al. (US 20170324917 A1), Fowler (US 20150122974 A1), and Jin (US 20230071106 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN ALEXANDER TUTTLE whose telephone number is (571)272-7055. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/E.A.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights