CTNF 18/786,342 CTNF 73579 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-fti AIA The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 Claims 20-27 and 34-35 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 20, the phrase “the second conductive portion” of lines 2-3 lacks proper antecedent basis. Regarding claims 34-35, it is unclear what is meant by the limitations recited in claims 34-35 due to the confusing nature of wordings therein. More specifically, it is unclear what exactly constitutes the recited elements of claims 34-35 in accordance with the drawings. For example, it is unclear what exactly constitutes “a film edge of the first conductive film” and “a conductive edge of the first conductive portion” in accordance with the drawings. Clarification is required. Claims not specifically mentioned above are rejected by virtue of their dependency on a rejected claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-fti 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, 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 negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-fti Claim s 1-19 and 28-43 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Park (7,495,206) in view of Sakai et al (US 2008/0067680) . Regarding claim 1, Park shows in Figs.3 and 4C the following elements of applicant’s claim: a first substrate (102; 400, 402); a second substrate (200; 500) which overlaps the first substrate; a first structure (108-110, 111A-111C) which is between the first substrate and the second substrate (Fig.3), the first structure including a first film (110; 108) of a dielectric material and a first portion of a conductive material (111A-111C; 109), the first portion being in a groove of the first film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 111C in the layer 110 is considered as a groove); and a second structure (203, 204A, 205, 206A-206C) which is between the first structure and the second substrate, the second structure including a second film (205; 203) of a dielectric material and a second portion of a conductive material (206A-206C; 204A), the second portion being in a groove of the second film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 206A in the layer 205 is considered as a groove), wherein a first face of the first film is bonded to a second face of the second film, and the first portion is bonded to the second portion (Fig.3) and wherein the first portion includes a first conductive portion of a first conductive material (109; 111A-111C) and a first conductive film of a second conductive material (111A-111C; 109), and the first conductive film (111A-111C; 109) faces the second face of the second film (203, 205). While Park disclose that its first portion (111A-111C; 109) comprises a first conductive material and a second conductive material, it does not specifically mention that the second conductive material is different from the first conductive material. However, Sakai et al discloses that different materials (claims 13-14) can be used for first and second conductive materials and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park since the specific material and scheme utilized for the conductive materials would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements. Regarding claim 2, similarly to claim 1, while Park does not specifically mention that a second insulating film is made of a silicon nitride film or a silicon carbide film, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Sakai et al (paragraphs 11) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance. Regarding claim 3, although Park does not specifically mention that an insulating film is made of one of a silicon nitride film, a silicon carbide film, silicon carbonitride film and a silicon oxynitride film, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Sakai et al (paragraph 11) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance. Regarding claims 4-5, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.3 of Park. Regarding claim 6, Park shows in Fig.3 the recited first transistor (Tx) and second transistor (201, 202). Regarding claims 7-8, the specific material utilized for an insulating film would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art merely depending on the needs of the particular application. Regarding claim 9, although Park does not specifically mention the use of a processor, such use is well known in the art and it would have been obvious, if not inherent, to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a processor in the device of Park in view of the desire to effectively process output signals of an image sensor. Regarding claim 10, Park shows in Figs.3 and 4C the following elements of applicant’s claim: a first substrate (102; 400, 402); a second substrate (200; 500) which overlaps the first substrate; a first structure (108-110, 111A-111C) which is between the first substrate and the second substrate (Fig.3), the first structure including a first film (110; 108) of a dielectric material and a first portion of a conductive material (111A-111C; 109), the first portion being in a groove of the first film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 111C in the layer 110 is considered as a groove); and a second structure (203, 204A, 205, 206A-206C) which is between the first structure and the second substrate, the second structure including a second film (205; 203) of a dielectric material and a second portion of a conductive material (206A-206C; 204A), the second portion being in a groove of the second film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 206A in the layer 205 is considered as a groove), wherein a first face of the first film is bonded to a second face of the second film, and the first portion is bonded to the second portion (Fig.3), and wherein the first portion includes a first conductive portion of a first conductive material (109; 111A-111C) and a first conductive film of a second conductive material (111A-111C; 109), and the first conductive film (111A-111C; 109) faces the second portion (206A-206C; 204A). While Park disclose that its first portion (111A-111C; 109) comprises a first conductive material and a second conductive material, it does not specifically mention that the second conductive material is different from the first conductive material. However, Sakai et al discloses that different materials (claims 13-14) can be used for first and second conductive materials and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park since the specific material and scheme utilized for the conductive materials would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements. Regarding claim 11, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.3 of Park in view of Sakai et al. Regarding claim 12, Park disclose the recited first wire (109; 409) and second wire (204A; 504A). Regarding claims 13-14, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.4C of Park. Regarding claims 15-18, the specific material utilized for a conductive material and an insulating material would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art merely depending on the needs of the particular application. Regarding claim 19, although Park does not specifically mention the use of a processor, such use is well known in the art and it would have been obvious, if not inherent, to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a processor in the device of Park in view of the desire to effectively process output signals of an image sensor. Regarding claims 28-29, the limitations therein are disclosed in Sakai et al (paragraph 5). Regarding claim 30, Park discloses (Fig.3) that the first conductive film (111A-111C) contacts the second face of the second film (205), and wherein the second portion (206A-206C; 204A) includes a second conductive portion (204A) of the first conductive material, the second portion includes a second conductive film (206A-206C) of the second conductive material, and the second conductive film (206A-206C) contacts the first face of the first film (110). Regarding claim 31, Park discloses (Fig.3) wherein the second conductive film (206A-206C) contacts the first conductive portion (111A-111C). Regarding claim 32-33, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.3 of Park (111B; 206B). Regarding claims 34-35, as far as the claim is understood, the specific configuration and scheme utilized to bond conductive elements would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements. Regarding claims 36-37, although Park does not specifically mention that an insulating film is made of one of a silicon nitride film, a silicon carbide film, silicon carbonitride film and a silicon oxynitride film, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Sakai et al (paragraph 11) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance. Regarding claim 38, Park shows in Figs.3 and 4C the following elements of applicant’s claim: a first substrate (102; 400, 402); a second substrate (200; 500) which overlaps the first substrate; a first structure (108-110, 111A-111C) which is between the first substrate and the second substrate (Fig.3), the first structure including a first film (110; 108) of a dielectric material and a first portion of a conductive material (111A- 111C; 109), the first portion being in a groove of the first film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 111C in the layer 110 is considered as a groove); and a second structure (203, 204A, 205, 206A-206C) which is between the first structure and the second substrate, the second structure including a second film (205; 203) of a dielectric material and a second portion of a conductive material (206A-206C; 204A), the second portion being in a groove of the second film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 206A in the layer 205 is considered as a groove), wherein a first face of the first film is bonded to a second face of the second film, and the first portion is bonded to the second portion (Fig.3), and wherein the first portion includes a first conductive portion of a first conductive material (109; 111A-111C) and a first conductive film of a second conductive material (111A-111C; 109), and the first conductive film (111A-111C; 109) faces the first film (110; 108). While Park disclose that its first portion (111A-111C; 109) comprises a first conductive material and a second conductive material, it does not specifically mention that the second conductive material is different from the first conductive material. However, Sakai et al discloses that different materials (claims 13-14) can be used for first and second conductive materials and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park since the specific material and scheme utilized for the conductive materials would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements. Further, although Park does not specifically mention the use of a diffusion prevention film, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Sakai et al (paragraphs 5 and 10) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park in view of the desire to prevent diffusion of a conductive material into in interlayer insulating film resulting in improving the image sensor. Regarding claim 39, Park shows in Figs.3 and 4C the following elements of applicant’s claim: a first substrate (102; 400, 402); a second substrate (200; 500) which overlaps the first substrate; a first structure (108-110, 111A-111C) which is between the first substrate and the second substrate (Fig.3), the first structure including a first film (110; 108) of a dielectric material and a first portion of a conductive material (111A-111C; 109), the first portion being in a groove of the first film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 111C in the layer 110 is considered as a groove); and a second structure (203, 204A, 205, 206A-206C) which is between the first structure and the second substrate, the second structure including a second film (205; 203) of a dielectric material and a second portion of a conductive material (206A-206C; 204A), the second portion being in a groove of the second film (i.e. the space for receiving the conductive material 206A in the layer 205 is considered as a groove), wherein a first face of the first film is bonded to a second face of the second film, and the first portion is bonded to the second portion (Fig.3), and wherein the first portion includes a first conductive portion of a first conductive material (109; 111A-111C) and a first conductive film of a second conductive material (111A-111C; 109), and the first conductive film (111A-111C; 109) faces the first film (110; 108). While Park disclose that its first portion (111A-111C; 109) comprises a first conductive material and a second conductive material, it does not specifically mention that the second conductive material is different from the first conductive material. However, Sakai et al discloses that different materials (claims 13-14) can be used for first and second conductive materials and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilized the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park since the specific material and scheme utilized for the conductive materials would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements. Further, although Park does not specifically mention that an insulating film is made of one of a silicon nitride film, a silicon carbide film, silicon carbonitride film and a silicon oxynitride film, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Sakai et al (paragraph 11) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Sakai et al in the device of Park in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance. Regarding claims 40-41, Park discloses (Fig.3) wherein the first conductive film (111A-111C; 109) contacts the first film (110; 108). Regarding claims 42-43, although Park does not specifically mention the use of a processor, such use is well known in the art and it would have been obvious, if not inherent, to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a processor in the device of Park in view of the desire to effectively process output signals of an image sensor . Allowable Subject Matter 07-43-02 AIA Claim s 20-27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: while the prior art (i.e. Park) shows in Fig.3 the use of a first conductive portion (111A-111C), a second conductive portion (206A-206C), a first film (110) and a second film (205), it fails to disclose or make obvious the claimed device comprising, in addition to the other recited features of claims 1 and 20, the arrangement of the claimed first region, second region and third region in the manner recited in claim 20 . 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shimotsusa (US 2023/0299112 A1) is cited for disclosing a solid state image pickup device . 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 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 2 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 3 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 4 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 5 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 6 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 7 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 8 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 9 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 10 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 11 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 12 Art Unit: 2878 Application/Control Number: 18/786,342 Page 14 Art Unit: 2878
Prosecution Insights