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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (lDS) submitted on November 25, 2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is being considered by the Examiner.
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 1-10 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0012003 to Ma et al. (hereinafter “Ma”).
Regarding claim 1, Ma teaches an apparatus comprising an image sensor (e.g., fig. 5C, elements 538 and 540, fig. 6E, element 678) comprising a surface having a first region (e.g., fig. 6E, element 678, a portion of middle raised region associated with fig. 5C, element 538; the Examiner notes that the term “region” is broad and open to broad interpretation) and a second region e.g., fig. 6E, element 680, being interpreted as a very small region that is adjacent to the middle-raised region associated with fig. 5C, element 540; the Examiner notes that the term “region” is broad and open to broad interpretation), the surface intersecting with an optical axis (e.g., fig. 6E), wherein the second region extends beyond one or more edges of the first region (e.g., fig. 6E) a substrate (e.g., fig. 6E, element 502) comprising a meta-lens (e.g., fig. 6E, element 506), the optical axis intersecting with the meta-lens and the substrate (e.g., fig. 6E), wherein a cross-section of the substrate extends beyond the second region of the image sensor in at least one direction along the surface of the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E), and a spacer structure disposed between the substrate and the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E, element 665 and 522).
Regarding claim 2, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the spacer structure is aligned relative to the optical axis (e.g., fig. 6E) and coupled between the substrate and the image sensor, wherein a cross-section of the spacer structure intersects with the optical axis (e.g., fig. 6E) and at least one edge of the cross-section of the spacer structure overlaps with the second region of the image sensor in at least one direction along the surface of the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E, at least the bottom edge of the cross-section overlaps).
Regarding claim 3, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the spacer structure comprises a first spacer element (e.g., fig. 6E, element 665) and a second spacer element (e.g., fig. 6E, element 522), wherein the first spacer element is coupled between the substrate and the second spacer element (e.g., fig. 6E), the second spacer element is coupled between the first spacer element and the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E), and a contact area between the first spacer element and the second spacer element is less than an area of the second region of the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E, as the “contact area” and the “second region” are both broad terms open to broad interpretation, the contact area is interpreted/selected as less than a interpreted/selected area of the second region of the image sensor).
Regarding claim 4, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 3, supra) including teaching wherein an additional contact area between the first spacer element and the substrate is greater than the area of the second region (e.g., fig. 6E, as the “additional contact area” and the “area of the second region” are both broad terms open to broad interpretation, the areas are interpreted/selected to meet this requirement).
Regarding claim 5, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 5 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the spacer structure comprises one or more transparent materials (e.g., [0103]), wherein the one or more transparent materials exhibit transparency at a wavelength of light corresponding to a photosensitive light spectrum of the image sensor (e.g., [0103]).
Regarding claim 6, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 5, supra) including teaching wherein at least one spacer included in the spacer structure comprises glass (e.g., [0098]), and wherein the photosensitive light spectrum comprises a portion of a visible light spectrum (e.g., [0098]).
Regarding claim 7, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 7 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 5, supra) including teaching wherein at least one spacer included in the spacer structure comprises silicon (e.g., [0098]), and wherein the photosensitive light spectrum comprises a portion of an infrared light spectrum (e.g., [0103], SWIR, allowing the photosensitive light spectrum to comprise a portion of an infrared light spectrum).
Regarding claim 8, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 8 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the spacer structure is configured to provide a spacing between the meta-lens and the image sensor, wherein the spacing corresponds to a focal length of the meta-lens (e.g., [0123]; fig. 6E).
Regarding claim 9, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein a first distal end of the spacer structure is coupled to the substrate (e.g., fig. 6E, element 665 to 502).
Regarding claim 10, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 9, supra) including teaching wherein a second distal end of the spacer structure is coupled to the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E, element 522 to 678).
Regarding claim 17, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 17 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, supra) including teaching wherein the spacer structure comprises a band-pass filter element (e.g., fig. 6B, the spacer structure can be interpreted to also include element 673, which is associated with element 665; [0103-104]).
Regarding claim 18, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 18 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 17, supra) including teaching wherein the band-pass filter element comprises a band-pass filter substrate (e.g., fig. 6B, element 673; [0103]; fig. 6E), wherein a band-pass filter is disposed on the band-pass filter substrate (e.g., fig. 6E, element 665 on element 673 of fig. 6B; [0103]).
Regarding claim 19, Ma teaches a method of optical detection, comprising receiving, at a substrate (e.g., fig. 6E, element 502) comprising a meta-lens (e.g., fig. 6E, element 506), light from a scene, wherein an optical axis intersects with the meta-lens and the substrate (e.g., fig. 6E), and receiving the light from the scene at an image sensor (e.g., fig. 5C, elements 538 and 540, fig. 6E, element 678), the image sensor comprising a surface having a first region (e.g., fig. 6E, element 678, a portion of middle raised region associated with fig. 5C, element 538; the Examiner notes that the term “region” is broad and open to broad interpretation) and a second region e.g., fig. 6E, element 680, being interpreted as a very small region that is adjacent to the middle-raised region associated with fig. 5C, element 540; the Examiner notes that the term “region” is broad and open to broad interpretation), the surface intersecting with the optical axis (e.g., fig. 6E), wherein the second region extends beyond one or more edges of the first region and wherein a cross-section of the substrate extends beyond the second region of the image sensor in at least one direction along the surface of the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E).
Regarding claim 20, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 20 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 19, supra) including teaching wherein a spacer structure (e.g., fig. 6E, element 665 and 522) is disposed between the substrate and the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E), the spacer structure is aligned relative to the optical axis (e.g., fig. 6E), and a cross-section of the spacer structure intersects with the optical axis and at least one edge of the cross-section of the spacer structure overlaps with the second region of the image sensor in at least one direction along the surface of the image sensor (e.g., fig. 6E, at least the bottom edge of the cross-section overlaps).
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 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Ma in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0155504 to Hsieh et al. (hereinafter “Hsieh”).
Regarding claim 11, Ma teaches all of the limitations of claim 11 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claim 9, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose the apparatus further comprising a microlens array coupled between the image sensor and the substrate, wherein the microlens array is aligned relative to the first region of the image sensor along the optical axis.
Nevertheless, Hsieh teaches a similar apparatus that includes a microlens array coupled between an image sensor and a substrate (e.g., fig. 1), wherein the microlens array is aligned relative to a first region of the image sensor along an optical axis (e.g., fig. 1, element 24; [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Hsieh with the apparatus as taught by Ma in order to provide express means of focusing light on a per pixel basis, to increase the optical fill factor.
Regarding claim 15, Ma and Hsieh teach all of the limitations of claim 15 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 11, supra) including teaching wherein a second distal end of the spacer structure is coupled to the microlens array (e.g., ‘504 – fig. 1; ‘003 – fig. 6E).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Ma and Hsieh in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2025/0006759 to Siddique et al. (hereinafter “Siddique”).
Regarding claim 13, Ma and Hsieh teach all of the limitations of claim 13 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 11, supra) except for being found by the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the microlens array comprises a meta-lens microlens array.
Nevertheless, Siddique teaches an example of a meta-lens microlens array (e.g., fig. 2; [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the array of Siddique with the apparatus as taught by Ma and Hsieh, in order to reduce scattering or adjust other opto-electrical properties.
Regarding claim 14, Ma and Hsieh teach all of the limitations of claim 14 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claim 13, supra) including teaching wherein the meta-lens microlens array is disposed on an additional substrate (e.g., ‘759 – fig. 2, element 22), and wherein the additional substrate is coupled to the image sensor (e.g., ‘759 – fig. 2; ‘504 – fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0125591 to Gu et al. teaches a similar metalens apparatus, including the layer stacking.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0028215 to Devlin et al. teaches a similar metalens apparatus.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0118452 to Yang et al. teaches a similar metalens apparatus.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0314776 to Yi et al. teaches a similar metalens apparatus.
U.S. Patent No. 11,706,400 to Kim et al. teaches an example of meta-lens microlen arrays.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY C VIEAUX whose telephone number is (571)272-7318. The examiner can normally be reached Increased Flex.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at 571-272-7372. 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.
/GARY C VIEAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638