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 .
This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed June 11, 2026. Claims 2-8, 10-13 are currently pending.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on June 11, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent 12,080,735 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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 10, 11 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.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear how many semiconductor substrates are intended to be in the invention as a first and a second semiconductor substrate are already claimed in claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, it is unclear how many substrates are in the invention as a first and second semiconductor substrate are already claimed in claim 2.
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)(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) 2, 3, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Sakakibara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0272678).
Regarding claims 2, 3, 12, 13, Sakakibara et al. disclose (Figs. 18, 37) a solid-state imaging element comprising: a first pixel circuit including a first transistor (82), a second transistor (81) and a photoelectric converter (171) that performs photoelectric conversion on received light to generate a pixel signal, the first transistor being configured to amplify the pixel signal generated by the photoelectric converter, the second transistor (81) being configured to receive a reference signal (REF), and a third transistor (85) configured to respectively output bias current to the first transistor and the second transistor, wherein the first pixel circuit (51) is arranged on a first semiconductor substrate (upper substrate 11A) and a second pixel circuit (52) is arranged on a second semiconductor substrate (lower substrate 11C), the substrates being laminated in a stacked structure (Fig. 36). Sakakibara et al. also disclose (Fig. 18 and [0131]) the first, second and third transistors connected as claimed. Sakakibara et al. further disclose an optical system (601; Fig. 71) as claimed. The photoelectric converter is a solid-state imaging element.
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) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakakibara et al. in view of Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0081180).
Regarding claims 5-7, Sakakibara et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Sakakibara et al. do not disclose the layout of the transistors are linearly arranged. Lee teaches (Figs. 1 and 2) a differential amplifier having three transistors (T4, T5, T6) that are linearly arranged as claimed. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such an arrangement in the apparatus of Sakakibara et al. in view of Lee to obtain a more compact device as taught, known and predictable. The source of the second transistor and a ground node with which a drain of the third transistor is connected are adjacent to each other (Fig. 2; [0035]). Since the first, second and third transistors share an active area, the diffusion area is shared as claimed.
Claim(s) 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakakibara et al. in view of Morita et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0280694).
Regarding claims 10, 11, Sakakibara et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Sakakibara et al. do not disclose a first substrate on which the pixel circuit is arranged and a second substrate on which the first, second and third transistors are arranged. Morita et al. teach (Figs. 1-4) a pixel circuit (11) on a first substrate (10) and first, second and third transistors on a second substrate (20) as claimed. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such an arrangement in the apparatus of Sakakibara et al. in view of Morita et al. to provide modularity for image sensors and amplifiers as taught, known and predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH LUU whose telephone number is (571)272-2441. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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 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.
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights