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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-18 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10,14-21, and 25 respectively in view of claim 31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,453.
Claims 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,453.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because, the claims of the instant application are obvious variant of the corresponding ones of the US Patent No. 12,174,453. Furthermore, the scopes of the claims on the instant application are also met and encompassed by the corresponding ones of the Patent No. 12,174,453.
The apparent difference between the conflicting claims mainly arises from the style of limitation recitation and relative placement of conflicting elements within the claims’ body.
Base claims 1 and 25 fail to disclose “nanoposts” within claims’ scope. However, claim 31 of Patent No. 12,174,453 discloses “nanoposts”, which separates the colors in the incoming light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to include nanoposts of claim 31 with the independent claims 1 and 25 of Patent No. 12,174,453, to reach to recited subject matter of the corresponding conflicting claims of the instant application, since, both the patent and the instant application pertains to same/similar invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over prior art. Terminal Disclaimer is required to overcome the Double Patenting rejections made in this Office Action before a Notice of Allowance is issued.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, Mlinar (US 20170366769) discloses an image sensor (14 in Figure 1) comprising:
a sensor substrate (108, figs. 2a-b) including a first pixel (200-1, fig. 17), a second pixel (200-2, fig. 17), a third pixel (200-3, fig. 17), and a fourth pixel (200-4, fig. 17) that are configured to sense light (abstract, ¶0031); and
a color separating lens array (104, fig. 2a-b)
condense light of a first wavelength, in incident light incident on the color separating lens array, onto the first pixel and the fourth pixel (G is incident on 200-1 & 200-4, fig. 17, ¶0075),
condense light of a second wavelength different from the first wavelength, in the incident light incident on the color separating lens array, onto the second pixel (200-2 receives incident R light, fig. 17, ¶0075), and
condense light of a third wavelength different from the first wavelength and the second wavelength, in the incident light incident on the color separating lens array, onto the third pixel (200-3 receives incident B-light, fig. 17, ¶0075),
wherein the first pixel (200-1, fig. 18) includes a first focusing signal region (204-1) configured to generate a first focusing signal (204-1, fig. 18) and a second focusing signal region (204-2, fig. 18) configured to generate a second focusing signal (¶0076-0079), wherein the first focusing signal region and the second focusing signal region independently generate the first focusing signal and the second focusing signal, and the first focusing signal region and the second focusing signal region are arranged to be adjacent to each other in the first pixel in a first direction (¶0076-0079, fig. 18), and
the fourth pixel (200-4, fig. 17) includes a third focusing signal region (204-1, fig. 18) configured to generate a third focusing signal and a fourth focusing signal region (204-2, fig. 18) configured to generate a fourth focusing signal, wherein the third focusing signal region and the fourth focusing signal region independently generate the third focusing signal and the fourth focusing signal, and the third focusing signal region and the fourth focusing signal region are arranged to be adjacent to each other in the fourth pixel in a second direction that is different from the first direction (¶0076-0079, fig. 18).
However, Mlinar fails disclosing color separating lens array comprising a plurality of nanoposts.
Claims 19 and 20 also recites allowable feature plurality of nanoposts, within claims’ scope, and thus allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior and/or pertinent art(s) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, are –Park et al. (US 20250204071 A1), Mun et al. (US 20250176291 A1), Cho et al. (US 20240079430 A1), Mun et al. (US 20240015383 A1), Yun et al. (US 11664401 B2), Mun et al. (US 20230139533 A1), Ahn et al. (US 20220344399 A1), Yun et al. (US 20220326415 A1), Lee et al. (US 20220137424 A1), Roh et al. (US 20210167110 A1), Yun et al. (US 20210126030 A1) – who disclose different focusing methodology using image sensors wherein pixels include color separation means that includes nanoposts.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHBAZ NAZRUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1467. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9.30 am-3 pm, 6.30 pm-9 pm, F: 9.30 am-1.30 pm, 4 pm-8 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, Lin Ye can be reached on 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.
/SHAHBAZ NAZRUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638