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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner’s response:
Applicant argument regarding amended claim 1 is moot, since a new reference is being used for the amended portion of the claim.
Applicant argues regarding claim 12 that Mlinar fails to teach or disclose a 4x4 arrangement of pixels including: a first 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels; and a second 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels, and a third 2x2 arrangement of normal pixels, wherein individual phase-difference detection pixels and individual normal pixels have a same size. Applicant argues that Mlinar teaches phase-difference detection pixel 100 is twice the size of the normal pixel 34. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Mlinar discloses in Paragraph 29, fig. 2a that FIG. 2A is an illustrative cross-sectional view of pixel pair 100. Pixel pair 100 may include first and second pixels such Pixel 1 and Pixel 2. Pixel 1 and Pixel 2 may include photosensitive regions 110 formed in a substrate such as silicon substrate 108. Mlinar also teaches at Paragraph 55, fig. 9, phase detection pixel pairs 100 . This clearly teaches that phase detection pixels 100 are two pixels and not just one pixel. Therefore normal pixels 34 (4x4 arrangement) which are in the top two rows and columns have the same size as the individual phase-difference detection pixels.
Applicant argues regarding claim 17 that Kusaka fails to teach wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth 2x1 arrangements of phase-difference detection pixels is covered by a 2x1 shared on-chip lens. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Kusaka teaches that focus detection pixels 321 each assume a structure that includes a pair of photoelectric conversion units 16 and 17 (Paragraph 121). Kusaka further teaches As FIG. 4 shows, the focus detection pixels 311 each include a rectangular micro-lens 10 and a pair of photoelectric conversion units 13 and 14 formed by splitting the photoelectric conversion unit 11 of an image-capturing pixel 310 into two parts via an element separation area 15 ranging along the vertical direction (Paragraph 58). Therefore focus detection pixel 311 and 321 have two photoelectric conversion units (pixels) split horizontally and vertically, each pair including a single rectangular microlens. Therefore Kusaka does teach wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth 2x1 arrangements of phase-difference detection pixels is covered by a 2x1 shared on-chip lens.
Applicant needs to define what a pixel is as to whether it comprises only one photoelectric converter or two photoelectric converters, does it include a color filter, microlens etc.
Therefore in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. pixels include only one photoelectric converter or two) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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) 1-7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US PGPUB 20150062390) in view of Mlinar et al. (US PGPUB 20150381951).
[Claim 1]
Kim teaches a light detecting device comprising:
a plurality of normal pixels (figs. 7a and 7b, red R and blue B pixels, Paragraph 67); and
a plurality of phase-difference detection pixels (Gr and Gb), the plurality of normal pixels and the plurality of phase-difference detection pixels being arranged in a mixed manner (figs. 7a and 7b), wherein
a shared on-chip lens is formed for adjacent phase- difference detection pixels (Paragraph 69, As illustrated in FIG. 7B, it may be possible to use a structure in which one microlens 177 for phase difference detection is used for two color filter arrays and also fig. 7a for four pixels),
an individual on-chip lens is formed for each of the normal pixels (microlens 176, figs. 7a and 7b is formed for general pixels R and B), and
at least two adjacent phase-difference detection pixels sharing the shared on-chip lens correspond to a first range of wavelengths of incident light (Paragraph 67, The phase difference detection is performed using pixels having the same color Gr and Gb).
Kim fails to teach two adjacent phase-difference detection pixel in a same row or same column sharing the shared on-chip lens corresponding to same wavelength. However Mlinar teaches Phase detection pixel pairs 504 in pixel array 500 are arranged consecutively in a line. Pixel array 500 includes a color filter array. Pixels marked with an R include a red color filter, pixels marked with a G include a green color filter, and pixels marked with a B include a blue color filter (Paragraph 43). Dashed lines such as dashed line 102M may indicate regions that are covered by a single microlens such as microlens 102 of FIG. 2A (Paragraph 45).
Therefore taking the combined teachings of Kim and Mlinar, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to have two adjacent phase-difference detection pixel in a same row or same column sharing the shared on-chip lens corresponding to same wavelength in order to reduce optical crosstalk between a green image pixel and a red image pixel.
[Claim 2]
Kim teaches wherein the phase-difference detection pixels include a 2x2 arrangement of the phase-difference detection pixels (microlens 177 in fig. 7a, right side picture shows a 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels).
[Claim 3]
Kim teaches wherein the shared-on chip lens covers the 2x2 arrangement of the phase-difference detection pixels (one microlens 177 for phase difference detection is used for 2x2 pixels in fig. 7a)
[Claim 4]
Kim teaches wherein pixels of the 2x2 arrangement of the phase- difference detection pixels correspond to the first range of wavelengths of incident light (Paragraph 67, The phase difference detection is performed using pixels having the same color Gr and Gb).
[Claim 5]
Kim teaches wherein the normal pixels include a 2x2 arrangement of the normal pixels, which correspond to a second range of wavelengths of incident light (fig. 7a, the right side shows a 2x2 arrangement of normal pixels having red R and blue B wavelengths).
[Claim 6]
Kim teaches, wherein the shared on-chip lens includes a plurality of 2x2 shared on-chip lenses (fig. 7a shows a plurality of shared lenses).
[Claim 7]
Kim teaches wherein the individual on-chip lens includes a plurality of 1x1 individual on-chip lenses (fig. 7a).
[Claim 9]
Kim teaches wherein the normal pixels are configured to generate a pixel signal of an image (normal pixels are used for imaging and phase-difference pixels are used for AF) .
[Claim 10]
Kim teaches wherein the phase-difference detection pixels are configured to generate a pixel signal used in calculation of a phase-difference signal for controlling an auto-focus function (Paragraph 42, The phase difference detection pixel using a microlens according to the present invention can be applied to obtain a phase difference AF function regardless of arrangement positions in the center and outer peripheral areas of an image sensor).
[Claim 11]
Kim teaches a camera in Paragraphs 5 and 7. However Kim fails to teach a camera-equipped mobile apparatus comprising the imaging device according to claim 1. However Official Notice is taken that it is very well known to have a camera in a mobile phone in order to take pictures. Therefore taking the combined teachings of Kim and Official Notice, il would be obvious to have a camera as taught in Paragraphs 5 and 7 to be used in Mobile devices like tablets, computers and cellphones in order to take pictures.
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) 12, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mlinar et al. (US PGPUB 20150381951).
[Claim 12]
A light detecting device comprising: a 4x4 arrangement of pixels (fig. 9, four columns and four rows from the top left side) including a first 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels (pixels marked as 100 in the dashed line, third and fourth rows and first two columns); and a second 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels (pixels marked as 100 in the dashed line, third and fourth rows and third and fourth column) and
a third 2x2 arrangement of normal pixels, wherein individual phase-difference detection pixels and individual normal pixels have a same size (Mlinar discloses in Paragraph 29, fig. 2a that FIG. 2A is an illustrative cross-sectional view of pixel pair 100. Pixel pair 100 may include first and second pixels such Pixel 1 and Pixel 2. Pixel 1 and Pixel 2 may include photosensitive regions 110 formed in a substrate such as silicon substrate 108. Mlinar also teaches at Paragraph 55, fig. 9, phase detection pixel pairs 100 . This clearly teaches that phase detection pixels 100 are two pixels and not just one pixel. Therefore normal pixels 34 (4x4 arrangement) which are in the top two rows and columns have the same size as the individual phase-difference detection pixels).
[Claim 13]
The light detecting device according to claim 12, further comprising third and fourth 2x2 arrangements of normal pixels (top two rows and four columns in fig. 9).
[Claim 16]
A camera-equipped mobile apparatus comprising the light detecting device according to claim 12 (Paragraph 24).
Claim(s) 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kusaka (JP
Patent # 2014041202A, published on 2014-03-06))(US PGPUB 20150234148 is being used as a
translation).
[Claim 17]
A light detecting device comprising:
a first 2x1 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels in a first row of the 4x4 arrangement of pixels (Paragraph 121, fig. 17, blue color filters are each disposed at a focus detection pixel 311 in a first row);
a second 2x1 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels in a second row of the 4x4 arrangement of pixels (Focus detection pixels 321 each assume a structure that includes a pair of photoelectric conversion units 16 and 17 achieved by rotating the pair of photoelectric conversion units in a focus detection pixel 311 by 90.degree.. A red color filter is disposed at the focus detection pixel 321 of second row);
a third 2x1 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels in a third row of the 4x4 arrangement of pixels (Paragraph 121, blue color filters are each disposed at a focus detection pixel 311 in a third row); and
a fourth 2x1 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels in a fourth row of the 4x4 arrangement of pixels (Focus detection pixels 321 each assume a structure that includes a pair of photoelectric conversion units 16 and 17 achieved by rotating the pair of photoelectric conversion units in a focus detection pixel 311 by 90.degree. in a fourth row).
wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth 2x1 arrangements of phase-difference detection pixels is covered by a 2x1 shared on-chip lens (Paragraph 55, On an image-capturing plane 110, a plurality of focus detection pixels 111 are arrayed. The focus detection pixels 11 are each constituted with a micro-lens 112 and a pair of photoelectric conversion units 113 and 114. The pair of photoelectric conversion units 113 and 114 are projected via the micro-lens 112 onto a focus detection pupil plane 120 set to the front of the image-capturing plane 110 over a distance d from the image-capturing plane 110 and thus, a pair of focus detection pupils 123 and 124 are formed).
[Claim 18]
The light detecting device according to claim 17, further comprising normal pixels, each covered by a 1x1 individual on-chip lens (Paragraph 121, fig. 17, Green color filters are each disposed at an image-capturing pixel 310 and the image-capturing pixels 310 each include a rectangular micro-lens 10, Paragraph 58).
[Claim 19]
A camera-equipped mobile apparatus comprising the light detecting device according to claim 17 (Paragraph 58).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US PGPUB 20150062390), Mlinar et al. (US PGPUB 20150381951) and in further view of Fujiki (JP Patent # 2011049472).
[Claim 8]
Kim in view of Mlinar fails to teach wherein the phase-difference detection pixel includes an opening light- shielding structure that limits an opening of the photoelectric converter. However Fujiki teaches dummy microlenses 21 are provided in gap portions formed in the periphery of a second microlens L2 and of a third microlens L3. Since each of the dummy microlenses 21 serves as a stopper for impeding extension of a microlens L1 toward its radial direction in forming thereof, the microlens L1 is formed in a shape originally desired. Therefore, the light incident on a portion outer than the shape originally desired does not converge on a photodiode PD, and as a result, it is possible to prevent increase of the amount of the light received by the pixels adjacent to the dummy microlenses 21 (Abstract). Therefore taking the combined teachings of Kim, Mlinar and Fujiki, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to have been motivated before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to have the phase-difference detection pixel includes an opening light- shielding structure that limits an opening of the photoelectric converter the light incident on a portion outer than the shape originally desired does not converge on a photodiode PD, and as a result, it is possible to prevent increase of the amount of the light received by the pixels adjacent to the dummy microlenses.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mlinar et al. (US PGPUB 20150381951) in view of Kim et al. (US PGPUB 20150062390).
[Claim 14]
Mlinar fails to teach wherein a first 2x2 shared on-chip lens covers the first 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels and a second 2x2 shared on-chip lens covers the second 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels. However Kim teaches (Paragraph 69, As illustrated in FIG. 7B, it may be possible to use a structure in which one microlens 177 for phase difference detection is used for two color filter arrays and also fig. 7a for four pixels. Therefore taking the combined teachings of Mlinar and Kim, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to have been motivated before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to have a first 2x2 shared on-chip lens covers the first 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels and a second 2x2 shared on-chip lens covers the second 2x2 arrangement of phase-difference detection pixels in order for light to be allowed to be collected only in a specific direction, the size of a signal may be small. Accordingly, the values of peripheral pixels are used in image expression, so that it is possible to prevent resolution reduction.
[Claim 15]
Mlinar Fails to teach wherein a 1x1 individual on-chip lens covers each of the normal pixels in the third and fourth 2x2 arrangements of normal pixels. However Kim teaches (microlens 176, figs. 7a and 7b is formed for general pixels R and B). Therefore taking the combined teachings of Mlinar and Kim, it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to have been motivated before the effective filing date of the invention to have been motivated to have a 1x1 individual on-chip lens covers each of the normal pixels in the third and fourth 2x2 arrangements of normal pixels in order for light to be allowed to be collected only in a specific direction, the size of a signal may be small. Accordingly, the values of peripheral pixels are used in image expression, so that it is possible to prevent resolution reduction.
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 YOGESH K AGGARWAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30-6.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at 5712727564. 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.
/YOGESH K AGGARWAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights