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 without traverse of Group I (claims 1-18, 20) in the reply filed on 9/4/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1-18, 20 is/are 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.
In claim 1, it is unclear what comparison is required by “diameters of nanoposts.” Specifically, it is unclear whether the limitation requires each nanopost at the edge of the pixel array to have a diameter greater than each nanopost at the center of the pixel array, corresponding nanoposts to have greater diameters, maximum nanopost diameter to be greater, or average nanopost diameters to be greater.
The other claims are rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are, to the extent taught and understood, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0020980 (Mun) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0326415 (Yun) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0075868 (Kress).
Mun discloses
1. An image sensor comprising:
a pixel array 1100 including a plurality of unit pixels 111, 112, 113, 114 having photoelectric conversion elements ([0066]) arranged in a matrix form (2D arrangement) on a semiconductor substrate 110 in a first direction X and a second direction Y crossing the first direction X;
color filters 120 (121-124) corresponding to the unit pixels 111, 112, 113, 114, the color filters 120 (121-124) having at least two different colors ([0067]); and
meta-microlenses 130 (131-134) on the color filters 120 (121-124) and configured to condense light incident ([0070]) to the unit pixels 111, 112, 113, 114, each of the meta-microlenses 130 (131-134) including first and second nanostructures ([0072]), and the first nanostructure implemented with a plurality of nanoposts NP.
Mun fails to disclose
each of the meta-microlenses including first and second nanostructures having different refractive indexes, and diameters of the nanoposts at an edge of the pixel array are greater than diameters of the nanoposts at a center of the pixel array.
Yun teaches
An image sensor comprising:
each of the meta-microlenses 151 including first and second nanostructures 151H, 151L having different refractive indexes (high, low, [0100]), and the first nanostructure 151H implemented with a plurality of nanoposts ([0101]),
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ high and low refractive index nanostructures in Mun. The motivation would be to select the desired effective refractive index distribution and for condensing incident light onto corresponding light sensing cells as taught by Yun ([0100]-[0107]). Also, the refractive index may gradually decrease toward the periphery of the region such that the planar nanophotonic microlens may be configured to operate as a convex lens converging light ([0101]).
Kress teaches
An image sensor comprising:
the first nanostructure 1520, 1630 implemented with a plurality of nanoposts NP ([0130]-[0142]), and diameters D of the nanoposts NP at an edge of the pixel array ([0131]) are greater than diameters D of the nanoposts NP at a center of the pixel array (Figs. 15A, 15B, 16A-16C).
Mun discloses a required phase-gradient correction increases as a chief ray angle (CRA) increases from center portion 1100a toward edges of pixel array 1110 (Figs. 5A, 5B, 6, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 9, 12, 13A, 13B).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify diameter of the nanoposts in Mun. The motivation would be to configure nanostructure dimensions and refractive index distribution according to CRA and position within the pixel array via an optimization process as taught by Kress ([0083], [0095], [0107]). Further, progressively increasing nanopillar diameters is a known technique for obtaining a selected spatial phase and deflection response as taught by Kress ([0072], [0075], [0083]).
Mun in view of Kress teaches
2. The image sensor of claim 1, wherein the diameters D of the nanoposts NP are sequentially increased from the center 1100a (Mun) of the pixel array 1100 (Mun) toward the edge of the pixel array 1100b/1100c/1100e/1100h (Mun).
Yun teaches
3. The image sensor of claim 2, wherein each of the meta-microlenses 151 includes a refractive index peak region 151a ([0101]) having a highest effective refractive index of a meta-microlens of the meta-microlenses 151, and a distance between the refractive index peak region 151a and a center of a unit pixel 111, 112, 113, 114 corresponding to the meta-microlens 151 has different values at the center 1100c of the pixel array 1100 and the edge of the pixel array 1100 ([0065], [0057], [0077]-[0079], [0101]).
Yun teaches
4. The image sensor of claim 3, wherein at least some of the nanoposts 151 have different diameters ([0101]) in the corresponding unit pixel 111, 112, 113, 114, and the nanoposts have the greatest diameter ([0101]) in the refractive index peak region 151a ([0072]).
Yun teaches
5. The image sensor of claim 3, wherein the refractive index peak region 151a is sequentially far away from the center 1100c of the corresponding unit pixel 111, 112, 113, 114 with an approach to the edge of the pixel array 1100 from the center of the pixel array 1100 ([0088], [0089]).
Yun teaches
6. The image sensor of claim 5, wherein the refractive index peak region 151a coincides with the center 1100c of the corresponding unit pixel 111, 112, 113, 114 at the center of the pixel array 1100 ([0064]-[0067]).
Yun teaches
7. The image sensor of claim 2, wherein the nanoposts 151H, 151L in the corresponding unit pixel 111, 112, 113, 114 have different pitches and/or densities at the center 1100c of the pixel array 1100P and the edge of the pixel array ([0080],[0083]).
Yun teaches
8. The image sensor of claim 1, wherein the meta-microlenses 151 are shifted in a direction toward the center 1100c with an approach to the edge of the pixel array 1100P from the center 1100C of the pixel array ([0118]-[0121]).
Yun teaches
9. The image sensor of claim 8, wherein the color filters 141, 142, 143 are shifted in a direction toward the center 1100C with an approach to the edge of the pixel array 1100P from the center of the pixel array 1100 ([0116]-[0119]).
Yun teaches
10. The image sensor of claim 9, wherein a distance by which the meta-microlenses 151 are shifted is greater than a distance by which the color filters 140 (141, 142, 143) are shifted ([0104]-[0106]).
Yun teaches
11. The image sensor of claim 9, wherein the color filters 140 include two or more types of color filters 141, 142, 143 having different colors, and the color filters 141, 142, 143 having the different colors are shifted by different distances with an approach to the edge of the pixel array 1100P from the center of the pixel array 1100c ([0061]-[0063], [0104]-[0108]).
Yun teaches
12. The image sensor of claim 11, wherein the color filters 140 include a red color filter 143, a green color filter 141, and a blue color filter 142, and the red color filter 143 is shifted more than the green color filter 141 and the blue color filter 142 ([0120]-[0122], [0136]-[0138]).
Yun teaches
13. The image sensor of claim 9, wherein a region where each of the color filters 140 is provided at least partially overlaps a corresponding unit pixel region 111, 112, 113, and an overlapping area of the region where the color filter 140 is provided and the corresponding unit pixel region 1100 is decreased from the center 1100c toward the edge 1100P ([0103]-[0107]).
Yun teaches
14. The image sensor of claim 8, wherein a region where each of the meta-microlenses 151 is provided at least partially overlaps a corresponding unit pixel region 111, 112, 113, 114, and an overlapping area of the region where the meta-microlens 151 is provided and the corresponding unit pixel region 111, 112, 113, 114 is decreased from the center 1100C toward the edge 1100P ([0098]-[0103]).
Yun teaches
15. The image sensor of claim 1, wherein the pixel array 1100 includes a plurality of regions arranged in a direction from the center 1100C of the pixel array to the edge of the pixel array 1100P, and the plurality of regions ([0061]-[0064], [0114]-[0117]) have a shape of concentric circles ([0104]).
Mun discloses
16. The image sensor of claim 1, wherein the meta-microlenses 130 have a flat upper surface ([0073]-[0084]).
Mun discloses
17. The image sensor of claim 16, further comprising:
at least one of an anti-reflective layer, a nano-prism, a color splitter, a color sorter, or a polarizer provided on the meta-microlenses 130 ([0092]-[0094]).
Mun discloses
18. The image sensor of claim 1, wherein each of the unit pixels 111, 113, 113, 114 includes four pixels in a 2 x 2 array (C1, C2, C3, C4, [0090]-[0091]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mun in view of Yun and Kress as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0176391 (Kim).
The Examiner that wrote the Restriction inadvertently grouped claim 20 (a fabrication sequence method) with claim 1 (an image sensor product). The meta-microlenses could plausibly be formed by materially different fabrication techniques, e.g., patterning/depositing the high-index nanopost material first and subsequently filling the spaces with low-index material, rather than forming holes in the low-index layer and filling those holes. This satisfies the MPEP 806.05 (f) basis for treating the product and process as distinct. Accordingly, claim 20 is being treated as a product-by-process claim MPEP 2113. Patentability is based on the product itself and the combination of references above for claim 1 teaches an obvious product. The product-by-process limitations are accorded patentable weight only to the extent that the recited manufacturing steps impart a structural distinction to the claimed image sensor. The recited “holes” is a structural characteristic imparted by the recited process steps.
The combination of Mun, Yun and Kress fails to teach
20. A method for manufacturing the meta-microlenses of the image sensor set forth in claim 1, the method comprising:
forming a low-refractive index material layer on the color filters;
forming a plurality of holes by etching the low-refractive index material layer;
filling the plurality of holes with a high-refractive index material; and
partially removing upper sides of the holes filled with the high-refractive index material through chemical mechanical polishing.
Kim teaches ([0131])
A method comprising:
forming a low-refractive index material layer DL on the color filters 160 (CF1, CF2);
forming a plurality of holes H by etching the low-refractive index material layer DL ([0115]);
filling the plurality of holes H with a high-refractive index material NP ([0116]); and
partially removing upper sides of the holes H filled with the high-refractive index material NP through chemical mechanical polishing ([0117]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a method including etch/fill/CMP to form holes in the modified image sensor Mun. The motivation would be to form nanoposts with uniform widths or diameters in the height direction as taught by Kim ([0116]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2024/0244340 (Lee), 2021/0028235 (Han), 2020/0279881 (Jin) teach meta-microlenses made from nanoscale structures that locally tune refractive index and phase delay.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERESA M ARROYO whose telephone number is (703)756-1576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 A.M. E.T. - 5:00 P.M. E.T.).
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, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571.272.1236. 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.
/TERESA M. ARROYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights