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 .
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) 30-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) .
Regarding claim 30, Lee et al discloses An apparatus comprising: a first electrode(80)[0034] ; a second electrode(10)[0034]; a first magnetic tunnel junction(100 MC1/90) comprising: a first synthetic antiferromagnet(50)[0034]; a second synthetic antiferromagnet(30)[0034]; a first insulating layer(40) positioned between the first synthetic antiferromagnet (50)and the second synthetic antiferromagnet(30), the first magnetic tunnel junction(100 MC1/90) positioned between the first electrode(80) and the second electrode(10) fig. 22; and an antiferromagnet(60) positioned between the first electrode (80)and the first synthetic antiferromagnet(10) fig. 1; a third electrode(80); a fourth electrode(10); a second magnetic tunnel junction(100-MC2/90) comprising: a third synthetic antiferromagnet(50); a fourth synthetic antiferromagnet(30); a second insulating layer (40)positioned between the third synthetic antiferromagnet (50)and the fourth synthetic antiferromagnet(30) fig. 1 fig. 22; and a second antiferromagnet (60)positioned between the third electrode(80) and the third synthetic antiferromagnet(50), the second magnetic tunnel junction (100-MC2/90)positioned between the third electrode (80)and the fourth electrode(10 fig. 22; and a substrate(102) or a layer (210)comprising a dielectric material, wherein the fourth electrode(10) is positioned vertically adjacent to the substrate (120)or the layer(210) comprising the dielectric material[0081], the fourth electrode(10) positioned between the second magnetic tunnel junction (100-MC2/90)and the substrate or the layer (210)comprising the dielectric material.
Regarding claim 31, Lee et al discloses wherein the dielectric material (210)comprises: silicon and nitrogen[0081].
Regarding claim 32 wherein the second electrode(10MC1/90) and the third electrode (80)are not electrically conductive coupled to a magnetic tunnel junction other than the first magnetic tunnel junction((100) MC1/90) and the second magnetic tunnel junction((100) MC2/90).
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) 1,3,4,5, 12-14,16,20-22, 26,27,& 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee et al discloses An apparatus comprising: a first electrode(80)[0022][0037]; a second electrode(10)[0022]; a magnetic tunnel junction(100) comprising: a first synthetic antiferromagnet(50)[0034]; a second synthetic antiferromagnet(30)[0034]; an electrically insulating layer (40)positioned between the first synthetic antiferromagnet (50)and the second synthetic antiferromagnet(30)[0034], the magnetic tunnel junction (100)positioned between the first electrode (80)and the second electrode(10), the second electrode (10)positioned vertically adjacent to the magnetic tunnel junction(100) fig. 1; and an antiferromagnet (60)positioned between the first electrode(80) and the first synthetic antiferromagnet(50)[0034].
Lee et al fails to teach a first conductive trace portion positioned horizontally adjacent to the second electrode: and a second conductive trace portion positioned horizontally adjacent to the second electrode, the second electrode positioned between the first conductive trace portion and the second conductive trace portion
However, Gosavi et al discloses a first conductive trace portion(223a) positioned horizontally adjacent to a spin hall electrode (222): and a second conductive trace (223b)portion positioned horizontally adjacent to the spin hall electrode(222), the spin hall electrode(222) positioned between the first conductive trace(223a) portion and the second conductive trace portion(223b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee et al with the teachings of Gosavi et al to reduce the resistance of the spin hall electrode.
Regarding claim 3, Lee et al discloses wherein individual of the first
synthetic antiferromagnet (50)and the second synthetic antiferromagnet (30) [0034]comprise: a first ferromagnet(52 or 32); a second ferromagnet(56 or 36); and
a nonmagnetic layer (54 or 34)positioned between the first ferromagnet (52 or 32)and the second ferromagnet(56 or 36)[0031][0034].
Regarding claim 4, Lee et al discloses wherein the first ferromagnet(52) of the first synthetic antiferromagnet(50) comprises: cobalt, iron, and boron; or iron and boron[0034]; and wherein the second ferromagnet (56)of the first synthetic antiferromagnet (50)comprises: cobalt and iron; cobalt, iron, and boron; or iron and boron[0034].
Regarding claim 5, Lee et al discloses wherein the nonmagnetic layer (54)of the first synthetic antiferromagnet (50)comprises ruthenium, copper, tungsten, iridium, chromium[0034].
Regarding claim 12, Lee et al discloses wherein the nonmagnetic
layer (34)of the second synthetic antiferromagnet(30) comprises ruthenium, tungsten, or chromium[0030].
Regarding claim 13, Lee et al discloses wherein the electrically insulating
layer(40) comprises magnesium and oxygen[0033].
Regarding claim 14, Lee et al discloses wherein the first electrode (80)comprises one or more conductive layers(70/75), one of the one or more conductive layers (70/75)positioned adjacent to the antiferromagnet(60)[0036-0037].
Regarding claim 16, Lee et al discloses wherein the second electrode (10)comprises one or more conductive layers, one of the one or more conductive layers positioned adjacent to the second synthetic antiferromagnet(30)[0025].
Regarding claim 20, Lee et al discloses wherein the magnetic tunnel
junction(100 of MC1/90) is a first magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC1/90), the electrically insulating layer(40 of MC1/90) of the first magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC1/90) is a first insulating layer[0033], the antiferromagnet(60) is a first antiferromagnet[0034], the apparatus further comprising: a third electrode(80 of MC2/90); a fourth electrode(10 of MC2/90); a second magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC2/90) comprising: a third synthetic antiferromagnet(50 of MC2/90); a fourth synthetic antiferromagnet(30 of MC2/90) ; and a second insulating layer (40 of MC2/90) positioned between the third synthetic antiferromagnet (50 of MC2/90)and the fourth synthetic antiferromagnet(30 of MC2/90)[0061][0034] ; a second antiferromagnet(60 of MC2/90) positioned between the third electrode(80 of MC2/90) and the third synthetic antiferromagnet (50 of MC2/90)of the second magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC2/90), the second magnetic tunnel junction (100 of MC2/90)positioned between the third electrode(80 of MC2/90) and the fourth electrode(10 of MC2/90) [0061][0034]; one or more vias(126a/126b) to provide an electrically conductive path between the second electrode(10 of MC1/90) and the third electrode(80 of MC2/90), the one or more vias (126a/126b) [0062]comprising one or more metals[0062].
Regarding claim 21, Lee et al discloses wherein the apparatus is located on a wafer(102)[0065].
Regarding claim 22, Lee et al discloses wherein the apparatus is an integrated circuit component[0095].
Regarding claim 26, Lee et al discloses the apparatus further comprising a substrate(102), the second electrode (10)positioned vertically adjacent to the substrate(102), the second electrode (10)positioned between the magnetic tunnel junction(100) and the substrate(102) [0065][0062].
Regarding claim 27, Lee et al discloses the apparatus further comprising a layer(210) comprising a dielectric material, the second electrode(10) positioned vertically adjacent to the layer(210), the dielectric material comprising: silicon and nitrogen [0081]
Regarding claim 29, Lee et al discloses wherein the second electrode(10 of MC1/90) and the third electrode (80 of MC2/90) are not electrically conductive coupled to any magnetic tunnel junction other than the first magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC1/90) and the second magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC2/90) [0061] fig. 5.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Braganca (US Pub no. 2018/0061887 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1 but fails teach the antiferromagnet comprises: chromium; nickel and oxygen.
However, Braganca et al teaches a MRAM cell comprising an antiferromagnet comprises: chromium; nickel and oxygen[0031]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee et al & Gosavi et al with the teachings of Braganca et al because the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007)).)
Claim(s) 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 4 and further in view of Zheng ( US Pub no.2008/0055792 A1).
Regarding claim 10,Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the limitations of claim 4 but fails to teach wherein individual of the first ferromagnet of the second synthetic antiferromagnet and the second ferromagnet of the second synthetic antiferromagnet comprise a periodic multilayer structure comprising: a plurality of first layers comprising cobalt; and a plurality of second layers comprising platinum or nickel, wherein a period of the periodic multilayer structure comprises one of the plurality of first layers and one of the plurality of second layers, the one of the plurality of first layers positioned adjacent to the one of the plurality of second layers.
However, Zheng et al discloses wherein individual of the first
ferromagnet (166)of the second synthetic antiferromagnet (166/168/170)and the second
ferromagnet (170)of the second synthetic antiferromagnet comprise a periodic
multilayer structure comprising: a plurality of first layers comprising cobalt [0057]; and a
plurality of second layers comprising nickel[0057], wherein a period of the periodic
multilayer structure comprises one of the first layers and one of the second layers, the
one of the first layers positioned adjacent to the one of the second layers [0091][0057]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify Lee et al & Gosavi et al with the teachings of Zheng et al to adjust the magnetic moment.
Regarding claim 11, Zheng et al discloses wherein the first ferromagnet (166)of
the second synthetic antiferromagnet (166/168/170)and the second ferromagnet (170)of
the second synthetic antiferromagnet comprise: a first layer comprising cobalt; and a
second layer positioned adjacent to the first layer comprising cobalt [0057][0091].
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 14 and further in view of Tran (US Pub no. 2015/0255135 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 14 but fails to teach the one or more conductive layers comprising: a first conductive layer comprising tantalum, the first conductive layer positioned adjacent to the antiferromagnet; and a second conductive layer comprising ruthenium, the second conductive layer positioned adjacent to the first conductive layer.
However, Tran et al discloses one or more conductive layers(seed layer )
comprising: a first conductive layer comprising tantalum, the first conductive layer
positioned adjacent to the antiferromagnet; and a second conductive layer comprising
ruthenium, the second conductive layer positioned adjacent to the first conductive
layer[0120]. Since a seed layer comprising one or more layers including Ta Ru is one of
finite solutions to achieve suitable crystallographic properties for the purpose of growing
antiferromagnetic and magnetic structures [0119] as taught by Tran. It would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention
to try in Lee et al & Gosavi et al since a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense KSR, 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 16 and further in view of Kalitsov (US Pub no. 2022/0393100 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 16. Lee et al further discloses the second synthetic antiferromagnet (30)comprising: a first ferromagnet(36) positioned adjacent to the electrically insulating layer(40); a second ferromagnet(32); and a nonmagnetic layer(40) positioned between the first ferromagnet(50) and the second ferromagnet(30), the one or more conductive layers comprising: a first conductive layer (34)comprising tantalum, the first conductive layer positioned adjacent to the second ferromagnet (32)of the second synthetic antiferromagnet(30) fig. 1[0030] but fails to teach a second conductive layer comprising ruthenium, the second conductive layer positioned adjacent to the first conductive layer; and
a third conductive layer comprising tantalum, the first conductive layer positioned
adjacent to the second ferromagnet.
However, Kalitsov et al discloses a second conductive layer(170-multilayer)
comprising ruthenium, the second conductive layer positioned adjacent to the first
conductive layer (170); and a third conductive layer(170) comprising tantalum[0067]. It
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the invention to modify Lee et al & Gosavi et al et al with the teachings of Kalitsov et al such that a second conductive layer comprising ruthenium, the second conductive layer positioned adjacent to the first conductive layer; and a third conductive layer comprising tantalum, the first conductive layer positioned adjacent to the second ferromagnet results in order to enhance VCMA.
Claim(s) 23 & 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Zhu (US Pub no. 2011/0133299 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1 and further teaches integrated circuit component comprising the first electrode(80), the magnetic tunnel junction(100 of MC1/90), and the second electrode(10) [0022][0037][0095]but fails teach wherein the apparatus comprises: a printed circuit board; and a first integrated circuit component attached to the printed circuit board.
However, Zhu et al discloses a printed circuit board; and a first integrated circuit
component attached to the printed circuit board[0045]. It would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify
Lee et al & Gosavi et al with the teachings of Zhu et al to provide integration to electronic devices.
Regarding claim 24, Zhu et al discloses one or more second integrated circuit
components attached to the printed circuit board[0041 ][0047].
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US Pub no. 2021/0367143 A1) in view of Gosavi (US Pub no. 2020/0098410 A1) as applied to claim 20 and further in view of Zhu (US Pub no.2015/0071432 A1).
Regarding claim 28, Lee et al as modified by Gosavi et al discloses all the claim limitations of claim 20 but fails to teach the apparatus further comprising an inverter,
the second electrode and the third electrode electrically conductively coupled to the inverter.
However, Zhu et al teaches conductively coupling inverters to magnetic tunnel junctions[0056]. Since adding inverters to the magnetic junction is one of finite solutions to amplify signals as taught by Zhu et al , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try in Lee et al & Gosavi et al such that the second electrode and the third electrode electrically conductively coupled to the inverter because a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007))
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-25 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.
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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON whose telephone number is (571)270-3208. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-4:30 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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/LATANYA N CRAWFORD EASON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813