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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
1. Applicant's amendment of claims 1 and 5-12, and cancellation of claims 3-4 in “Claims - 12/09/2025” with “Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject - 12/09/2025”, have been acknowledged by Examiner.
This office action considers claims 1-2 and 5-20 pending for prosecution, wherein claims 12-17 are withdrawn from further consideration, and claims 1-2, 5-11, and 18-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. Applicant’s argument, in the “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” filed on 12/09/2025, see “Applicant has amended the term “the non-magnetic conductive layer” in claims 8 and 9 to “the non-magnetic conductive film” to solve this objection (remarks on page 5), has been considered and is persuasive.
In view of that along with the relevant amendment to claims 8-9, in the file “Claims” filed on 12/09/2025, the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection to claims 8-9 has been withdrawn.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (100; Fig 3A; [0063]) = (element 100; Figure No. 3A; Paragraph No. [0063]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
3. Claims 1-4 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huai et al. (US 20150340601 A1; hereinafter Huai).
Regarding claim 1, Huai teaches a semiconductor memory device (see the entire document, specifically Fig. 1+; [0002+], and as cited below), comprising:
a bottom electrode (124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]);
a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) structure ({150, 148, 130, 128, 126}; Fig. 5; [0040]) disposed over the bottom electrode (124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]);
a seed layer (146; Fig. 5; [0040, 0042], comprising of ruthenium; see also [0048] of the instant invention, where the seed layer comprises of ruthenium; thus, it is construed that layer 146 is a seed layer) disposed between the MTJ structure ({150, 148, 130, 128, 126}; Fig. 5; [0040]) and the bottom electrode (124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]); and
a non-magnetic amorphous insertion layer (122; Fig. 5; [0025-0031], comprising of an amorphous nonmagnetic) disposed between the seed layer (146; Fig. 5; [0040, 0042], comprising of ruthenium; see also [0048] of the instant invention, where the seed layer comprises of ruthenium; thus, it is construed that layer 146 is a seed layer) and the bottom electrode (124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]).
wherein the non-magnetic amorphous insertion layer (122; Fig. 5; [0025, 0026], comprising of an amorphous nonmagnetic) comprises a multilayer structure including at least one repeat unit of a bottom layer (132; Fig. 1; [0025-0031]) directly on the bottom electrode (124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]), a middle layer (134; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) on the bottom layer (132; Fig. 1; [0025-0031]), and a top layer (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) on the middle layer (134; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]), wherein the bottom layer (132; Fig. 1; [0025-0031]) is an amorphous magnetic film, the middle layer (134; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) is a non- magnetic conductive film, and the top layer (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) is a non-magnetic metal film.
Regarding claim 2, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the seed layer (146; Fig. 5; [0040, 0042], comprising of ruthenium; see also [0048] of the instant invention, where the seed layer comprises of ruthenium; thus, it is construed that layer 146 is a seed layer) comprises Pt, Co, Ru, Ir or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 6, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the amorphous magnetic film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) has a thickness of 2-10 angstroms (see [0028]).
Regarding claim 7, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the amorphous magnetic film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) comprises CoFeB, TbFe, TbCo, GdCo, CoFeBTa, CoFeBW, CoFeBMo, CoSiBZr, CoFeBTi, CoFeBHc, CoFeBNb, or CoFeSi (see [0027]).
Regarding claim 8, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the non-magnetic conductive film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) comprises MgO, LaNiOx, TiOx, MgZnOx, TaN, or TiN (see [0027]).
Regarding claim 9, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the non-magnetic conductive film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) has a thickness of 0.1-5 angstroms (see [0028]).
Regarding claim 10, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the non-magnetic metal film (134; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]; see [0029] in view of [0026], where layer comprises of Ta) comprises Ta, W, Mo, Zr, Ti, Hf, Nb, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 11, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further teaches wherein the non-magnetic metal film (134; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]; see [0029] in view of [0028]) has a thickness of 0.1-10 angstroms (see [0029] in view of [0028]).
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 of this title, 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.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as (30A; Fig 2B; [0128]) = (element 30A; Figure No. 2B; Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
4. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Huai et al. (US 20150340601 A1; hereinafter Huai), in view of the following statement.
Regarding claim 5, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 4.
Huai further teaches wherein the amorphous magnetic film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) comprises (see below for “(CoxFeioo-x)yBioo-y, wherein 0<x<100 and 20 <y 80”).
As noted above, Huai does not expressly disclose “wherein the amorphous magnetic film comprises “(CoxFeioo-x)yBioo-y, wherein 0<x<100 and 20 <y 80”.
However, Huai teaches wherein the amorphous magnetic film (132; Fig. 5; [0025-0031]) comprises CoFeB. Huai further teaches that one of the functions of the amorphous layer is “…to provide a smooth surface” for layers formed thereon ([0025]), and the amorphous layer comprises one or more of Fe and Co, and may further include B, to form an alloy or compound ([0027]).
Therefore, both the instant application (see [0051] of the instant disclosure) and Huai teach the same material used the same way for the same purpose (providing a smooth surface). Accordingly, even though Huai fails to disclose the claimed composition, it appears that a person of ordinary skill in the art may arrive at the recited limitation through routine optimization for the well-known advantage of providing a smooth surface.
5. Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Huai et al. (US 20150340601 A1; hereinafter Huai), in view of Ma et al. (US 20210005809 A1; hereinafter Ma).
Regarding claim 18, Huai teaches all of the features of claim 1.
Huai further comprising: (see below for “an insulator surrounding”) the bottom electrode (Huai 124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]), wherein the non-magnetic amorphous insertion layer (Huai 122; Fig. 5; [0025-0031], comprising of an amorphous nonmagnetic) is in direct contact with the bottom electrode (Huai 124; Fig. 5; [0023, 0040]) and (see below for “the insulator”).
As noted above, Huai does not expressly disclose “an insulator surrounding the bottom electrode, wherein the non-magnetic amorphous insertion layer is in direct contact with the bottom electrode and the insulator”.
However, in the analogous art, Ma teaches a magnetic tunnel junction ([Abstract]), wherein (Fig. 1+; [0071+]) an ILD layer (Ma 13; Fig. 13; [0104]; SiCOH) surrounding the bottom electrode (Ma 14; Fig. 13; [0105]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Ma’s ILD layer surrounding the bottom electrode into Huai’s device, and thereby, modified Huai’s (by Ma) device will have
an insulator (in view of Ma 13; Fig. 13; [0104]; SiCOH) surrounding the bottom electrode (Huai 124 in view of Ma 14; Fig. 13; [0105]), wherein the non-magnetic amorphous insertion layer (Huai 122; Fig. 5; [0025-0031], comprising of an amorphous nonmagnetic) is in direct contact with the bottom electrode (Huai 124 in view of Ma 14; Fig. 13; [0105]) and the insulator (Ma 13; Fig. 13; [0104]; SiCOH).
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Huai in the manner set forth above, at least, because this inclusion provides an ILD layer surrounding the bottom electrode (Ma [0104]), which adds insulative protection to the device layers.
Regarding claim 19, modified Huai (by Ma) teaches all of the features of claim 18.
Modified Huai (by Ma) further teaches wherein the bottom electrode (Huai 124 in view of Ma 14; Fig. 13; [0105]) has a first width and the MTJ structure (in view of Ma {210, 220, 230, 240,}; Fig. 13; [0107]) has a second width, wherein the second width is greater than the first width (in view of Ma see Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 20, modified Huai (by Ma) teaches all of the features of claim 18.
Modified Huai (by Ma) further teaches wherein the insulator (in view of Ma 13; Fig. 13; [0104]; SiCOH) comprises silicon oxide (in view of Ma 13; Fig. 13; [0104]; SiCOH).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed in the “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment” on 12/09/2025 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive, because of the following: the Applicant's amendment of claim 1 necessitated the shift in new grounds of rejection detailed in sections above. The shift in grounds of rejection renders the Applicant's arguments moot.
Please see the analysis of rejection for claims 17above.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Omar Mojaddedi whose telephone number is 313-446-6582. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m..
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, Julio J. Maldonado, can be reached on 571-272-1864. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR F MOJADDEDI/Examiner, Art Unit 2898