Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1, 2 and 19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Mori et al (US 2008/0192891).
Regarding claim 1, Mori et al shows in Fig.2 the following elements of applicant’s claim: a substrate (20) having a surface over which a plurality of photodiodes (21) are formed; and a protection film (26) that is transparent, has a water-proofing property, and include a side wall part (a side wall portion of 26) vertical to the surface of the substrate and a ceiling part (a top portion of 26) covering a region surrounded by the side wall part, the side wall part and the ceiling part surrounding a region where the plurality of photodiodes are arranged over the substrate (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 2, the limitation therein is shown in Fig.2 of Mori et al.
Regarding claim 19, Mori et al shows in Fig.2 the following elements of applicant’s claim: a substrate (20) having a surface over which a plurality of photodiodes (21) are formed; a protection film (26) that is transparent, has a water-proofing property, and include a side wall part (a side wall portion of 26) vertical to the surface of the substrate and a ceiling part (a top portion of 26) covering a region surrounded by the side wall part, the side wall part and the ceiling part surrounding a region where the plurality of photodiodes are arranged over the substrate (Fig.2); and a signal processing part (paragraph 97) configured to perform signal processing of a pixel signal output from the solid state imaging device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kawasaki (US 2009/0146235) in view of Mori et al (7,728,303).
Regarding claim 1, Kawasaki shows in Fig.1 the following elements of applicant’s claim: a substrate (1) having a surface over which a plurality of photodiodes (2) are formed; and a protection film (11) that is transparent, has water-proofing property (paragraph 43), and include a ceiling part covering a region and the ceiling part surrounding a region where the plurality of photodiodes are arranged over the substrate (Fig.1). Kawasaki differs from the claimed invention in that it does not disclose the use of a side wall part of a protection film. However, such use is known in the art as disclosed by Mori et al (Fig.2) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Mori et al in the device of Kawasaki in view of the desire to improve a solid state imaging device by preventing the invasion of moisture and an impurity to a side surface of the imaging device.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation therein is shown in Fig.2 of Mori et al.
Regarding claims 3-6, the exact placement of a side wall part in the solid state imaging sensor of Kawasaki (i.e. a groove in Fig.1) in view of Mori et al would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the desired performance.
Regarding claims 7-10, Kawasaki shows in Fig.1 the recited color filter (8) and microlens (10).
Regarding claims 11-13, the exact placement of a color filter would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements.
Regarding claims 14-18, these dependent claims merely include well known features of a solid state imaging device that would be an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art depending on the needs of the particular application and does no more that yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 19, Regarding claim 1, Kawasaki shows in Fig.1 the following elements of applicant’s claim: a substrate (1) having a surface over which a plurality of photodiodes (2) are formed; a protection film (11) that is transparent, has water-proofing property (paragraph 43), and include a ceiling part covering a region and the ceiling part surrounding a region where the plurality of photodiodes are arranged over the substrate (Fig.1); and a signal processing part (paragraph 143) configured to perform signal processing of a pixel signal output from the solid state imaging device. Kawasaki differs from the claimed invention in that it does not disclose the use of a side wall part of a protection film. However, such use is known in the art as disclosed by Mori et al (Fig.2) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Mori et al in the device of Kawasaki in view of the desire to improve a solid state imaging device by preventing the invasion of moisture and an impurity to a side surface of the imaging device.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sato (US 2019/0062905) is cited for disclosing a substrate with a water-proofing film.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN K PYO whose telephone number is (571)272-2445. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 PM.
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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/KEVIN K PYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights