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 Status
Claims 1, 7, and 13 are amended in the communication by the applicant filed on 2 April 2026.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kariyada (US 20190172513 A1, hereafter “Kariyada”), in view of Kariyada et al (WO 2020008853 A1, hereinafter “Kariyada2”).
Regarding Claim 1 – Kariyada discloses a magnetoresistive effect element comprising: a magnetization fixed layer (24 [0056] and annotated, redrawn Fig. 1); a first oxide insulating layer (23 0057] and Fig. 1) on a first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (23 on a side of 24 as in Fig. 1); a magnetization free layer (22 [0049] and Fig. 1) on an opposite side of the first oxide insulating layer from a side of the magnetization fixed layer (22 on opposite side of 23 from 24 as in Fig. 1), wherein the magnetization free layer has perpendicular magnetic anisotropy ([0050]); a second oxide insulating layer (21 may comprise MgO in 21A and 21C [0054-0055]) on an opposite side of the magnetization free layer from a side of the first oxide insulating layer (21 on opposite side of 22 from 23 as in Fig. 1), wherein the second oxide insulating layer is a nonmagnetic layer (MgO is nonmagnetic [0057]), and the second oxide insulating layer has a multilayer structure that includes a crystallization inhibiting layer between a lower oxide insulating layer and an upper oxide insulating laver (21B is considered to be a crystallization inhibiting layer between 21A and 21C, formed of CoFeB for example [0053-0054]); a metal cap layer (31 [0049]) on an opposite side of the second oxide insulating layer from a side of the magnetization free layer (31 on opposite side of 21 from 22 as in Fig. 1), wherein a thickness of the second oxide insulating layer is larger than a thickness of the first oxide insulating layer (21A alone up to 4 nm [0030] and 23 limited to less than 1.5 nm [0036]; example in Table 1 of (21A:) 1nm + (21B:) 1.25nm + (21C:) 5nm > (23:) 1nm); an electrode (32 [0049]).
Kariyada fails to expressly disclose layer 21B is a crystallization inhibiting layer.
However, the prior art is the same as that of the claim, and is simply silent regarding the function of 21B as a crystallization inhibiting layer. Inherent properties need not be recognized at the relevant time. See MPEP 2112(II). Furthermore, Kariyada discloses CoFeB for this layer, matching the instant application with an overlapping range of 10-50% boron content (Kariyada [0053]) compared with the example of 30% in the instant application in [0022] and Fig. 3, presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05(I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider using CoFeB as the crystallization inhibiting layer.
Kariyada fails to disclose a multilayer metal layer on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, wherein the first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer, and the multilayer metal layer includes at least a first iridium (Ir) film and a first molybdenum (Mo) film.
However, Kariyada2 discloses a multilayer metal layer (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20) on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (2nd Side in annotated Fig. 20), wherein the first surface side (1st Side in annotated Fig. 20) of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (Kariyada2 annotated Fig. 20), the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer (MML in annotated Kariyada2 Fig. 20), and the multilayer metal layer includes at least a first iridium (Ir) film and a first molybdenum (Mo) film (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20).
Kariyada2 discloses a magnetoresistive structure analogous to Kariyada. Kariyada2 teaches the inclusion of iridium and molybdenum in a multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure (Kariyada2 [0023]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kariyada and Kariyada2 to include an iridium layer and a molybdenum layer in a multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure.
PNG
media_image1.png
411
701
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
793
572
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
506
599
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the second oxide insulating layer includes a MgO film as a main component (Kariyada [0026] and [0027]), and one of a metal layer (21B) or an oxide layer except for MgO is inserted in the MgO film (Kariyada [0049]).
Regarding Claim 3 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the metal layer includes at least one of a Ta film, a second Ir film, a Cr film, a second Mo film, a CoFeB film, or a Mg film (“(T)he second ground layer 21B includes …at least one kind of element …constituting the storage layer 22…”, Kariyada [0049]).
Regarding Claim 4 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses a thickness of the metal layer is in a range of 0.3 nm to 0.9 nm (less than 3 nm, Kariyada [0054], which represents an overlapping range and a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding Claim 6 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses in the second oxide insulating layer, a thickness on an upper (away from free layer) side (21C) of the metal layer (21B) is larger than a thickness on a lower (closer to the free layer) side (21A) of the metal layer (21B). (Kariyada example in Table 1; (21C:) 5nm > (21A:) 1nm)
Regarding Claim 7 – Kariyada discloses a semiconductor device comprising a memory cell that includes a magnetoresistive effect element (10) and a selecting transistor (TR) (Kariyada Fig. 3; [0004]) are connected in series, wherein the magnetoresistive effect element includes a magnetization fixed layer (24)(Kariyada Fig. 1, [0056]), a first oxide insulating layer (23) on a first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (24) (Kariyada Fig. 1, [0057]), a magnetization free layer (22, “storage layer”) on an opposite side of the first oxide insulating layer (23) from a side of the magnetization fixed layer (24), wherein the magnetization free layer has perpendicular magnetic anisotropy (Kariyada [0050]), a second oxide insulating layer (21) on an opposite side of the magnetization free layer (22) from a side of the first oxide insulating layer (23)( Kariyada Fig. 1, [0049], [0050, and [0055]), the second oxide insulating layer is a nonmagnetic layer (MgO is nonmagnetic [0057]), and the second oxide insulating layer has a multilayer structure that includes a crystallization inhibiting layer between a lower oxide insulating layer and an upper oxide insulating laver (21B is considered to be a crystallization inhibiting layer between 21A and 21C, formed of CoFeB for example [0053-0054]); a metal cap layer (31) on an opposite side of the second oxide insulating layer (21) from a side of the magnetization free layer (22), wherein a thickness of the second oxide insulating layer (21) is larger than a thickness of the first oxide insulating layer (23). (Kariyada Fig. 1; [0036] and [0030]; example in Table 1 of (21A:) 1nm + (21B:) 1.25nm + (21C:) 5nm > (23:) 1nm). (Please see annotated Figure 1 above.), and an electrode (32 [0049]).
Kariyada fails to expressly disclose layer 21B is a crystallization inhibiting layer.
However, the prior art is the same as that of the claim, and is simply silent regarding the function of 21B as a crystallization inhibiting layer. Inherent properties need not be recognized at the relevant time. See MPEP 2112(II). Furthermore, Kariyada discloses CoFeB for this layer, matching the instant application with an overlapping range of 10-50% boron content (Kariyada [0053]) compared with the example of 30% in the instant application in [0022] and Fig. 3, presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05(I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider using CoFeB as the crystallization inhibiting layer.
Kariyada fails to disclose a multilayer metal layer on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, wherein the first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer, and the multilayer metal layer includes at least a first iridium (Ir) film and a first molybdenum (Mo) film.
However, Kariyada2 discloses a multilayer metal layer (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20) on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (2nd Side in annotated Fig. 20), wherein the first surface side (1st Side in annotated Fig. 20) of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (Kariyada2 annotated Fig. 20), the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer (MML in annotated Kariyada2 Fig. 20), and the multilayer metal layer includes at least a first iridium (Ir) film and a first molybdenum (Mo) film (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20).
Kariyada2 discloses a magnetoresistive structure analogous to Kariyada. Kariyada2 teaches the inclusion of iridium and molybdenum in the multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure (Kariyada2 [0023]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kariyada and Kariyada2 to include an iridium layer and a molybdenum layer in the multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure.
PNG
media_image4.png
659
483
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 7.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the second oxide insulating layer includes a MgO film as a main component (Kariyada [0026] and [0027]), and one of a metal layer (21B) or an oxide layer, except for MgO, is inserted in the MgO film (Kariyada [0049]).
Regarding Claim 9 – Kariyada Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the metal layer includes at least one of a Ta film, an Ir film, a Cr film, a Mo film, a CoFeB film, or a Mg film ( “(T)he second ground layer 21B includes …at least one kind of element …constituting the storage layer 22…”, Kariyada [0049]).
Regarding Claim 10 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses a thickness of the metal layer is in a range of 0.3 nm to 0.9 nm (less than 3 nm, Kariyada [0054], which represents an overlapping range and a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding Claim 12 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the second oxide insulating layer (21), a thickness on an upper (away from free layer) side (21C) of the metal layer (21B) is larger than a thickness on a lower (closer to the free layer) side (21A) of the metal layer (21B). (Kariyada example in Table 1; (21C:) 5nm > (21A:) 1nm)
Regarding Claim 13 – Kariyada discloses electronic equipment (Kariyada [0047]) comprising a semiconductor device (Kariyada [0051]) that includes a magnetoresistive effect element (10) (Kariyada Fig. 3), wherein the magnetoresistive effect element includes a magnetization fixed layer (24) (Kariyada Fig. 1, [0056]), a first oxide insulating layer (23) on a first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (24) (Kariyada Fig. 1, [0057]), a magnetization free layer (22) on an opposite side of the first oxide insulating layer (23) from a side of the magnetization fixed layer side (24), wherein the magnetization free layer has perpendicular magnetization anisotropy (“storage layer” in Kariyada [0050] and [0058]), a second oxide insulating layer (21) on an opposite side of the magnetization free layer (22) from a side of the first oxide insulating layer (23), the second oxide insulating layer is a nonmagnetic layer (MgO is nonmagnetic [0057]), and the second oxide insulating layer has a multilayer structure that includes a crystallization inhibiting layer between a lower oxide insulating layer and an upper oxide insulating laver (21B is considered to be a crystallization inhibiting layer between 21A and 21C, formed of CoFeB for example [0053-0054]); and a metal cap layer (31) on an opposite side of the second oxide insulating layer (21) from a side of the magnetization free layer (22), wherein a thickness of the second oxide insulating layer (21) is larger than a thickness of the first oxide insulating layer (23). (Kariyada Fig. 1; [0036] and [0030]; example in Table 1 of (21A:) 1nm + (21B:) 1.25nm + (21C:) 5nm > (23:) 1nm). (Please see annotated Figure 1 above.), and an electrode (32 [0049]).
Kariyada fails to expressly disclose layer 21B is a crystallization inhibiting layer.
However, the prior art is the same as that of the claim, and is simply silent regarding the function of 21B as a crystallization inhibiting layer. Inherent properties need not be recognized at the relevant time. See MPEP 2112(II). Furthermore, Kariyada discloses CoFeB for this layer, matching the instant application with an overlapping range of 10-50% boron content (Kariyada [0053]) compared with the example of 30% in the instant application in [0022] and Fig. 3, presenting a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05(I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider using CoFeB as the crystallization inhibiting layer.
Kariyada fails to disclose a multilayer metal layer on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, wherein the first surface side of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer, the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer, and the multilayer metal layer includes at least an iridium (Ir) film and a molybdenum (Mo) film.
However, Kariyada2 discloses a multilayer metal layer (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20) on a second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (2nd Side in annotated Fig. 20), wherein the first surface side (1st Side in annotated Fig. 20) of the magnetization fixed layer is opposite to the second surface side of the magnetization fixed layer (Kariyada2 annotated Fig. 20), the multilayer metal layer is between the electrode and the magnetization fixed layer (MML in annotated Kariyada2 Fig. 20), and the multilayer metal layer includes at least a first iridium (Ir) film and a first molybdenum (Mo) film (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20), and the multilayer metal layer includes at least an iridium (Ir) film and a molybdenum (Mo) film (Kariyada2 [0087] and MML in annotated Fig. 20).
Kariyada2 discloses a magnetoresistive structure analogous to Kariyada. Kariyada2 teaches the inclusion of iridium and molybdenum in the multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure (Kariyada2 [0023]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kariyada and Kariyada2 to include an iridium layer and a molybdenum layer in the multilayer metal layer for the benefit of separating ferromagnetic layers to allow easy magnetization of the magnetization fixed layer, provide perpendicular anisotropy, and control the crystal structure.
Regarding Claim 14 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 further discloses the multilayer metal layer further includes: a laminated film that includes a platinum (Pt) film and a first cobalt (Co) film, a second Co film between the laminated film and the first Ir film, a third cobalt (Co) film between the first Ir film and the first Mo film (Kariyada2 [0087] and annotated Fig. 20).
Claims 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kariyada (US 2019/0172513 A1, hereafter “Kariyada”), in view of Kariyada et al (WO 2020008853 A1, hereinafter “Kariyada2”), and further in view of MPEP 2112(III-V).
Regarding Claim 5 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 fails disclose a film thickness ratio between the MgO film and the metal layer is based on a thickness of the metal layer. However, the ratio of MgO film thickness to metal thickness is inherently based on metal layer thickness and this claim is therefore unpatentable (See MPEP 2112(III-V)).
Regarding Claim 11 – Kariyada modified by Kariyada2 discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
The combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 fails disclose a film thickness ratio between the MgO film and the metal layer is based on a thickness of the metal layer. However, the ratio of MgO film thickness to metal thickness is inherently based on metal layer thickness and this claim is therefore unpatentable (See MPEP 2112(III-V)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant submits the combination of Kariyada and Kariyada2 does not teach or suggest the second oxide is a nonmagnetic layer, and includes the crystallization inhibiting layer between a lower oxide insulating layer and an upper oxide insulating layer. The examiner respectfully submits that Kariyada discloses both MgO as a nonmagnetic second oxide layer, and CoFeB between upper and lower portions of the second oxide insulating layer as the crystallization inhibiting layer, as explained above in the replies to claims 1, 7, and 13.
Applicant further asserts Kariyada et al (WO 2020008853 A1, hereinafter “Kariyada2”) does not qualify as prior art. Applicant is misinformed in their characterization of the effective filing dates. Kariyada2 is applicable as prior art until Applicant perfects a foreign priority date. Presently, the instant application is only entitled to the filing date of 20 April 2021. MPEP §2152.06 provides, under scenario (C): To rely upon the foreign priority date, it must be perfected. Applicants must perfect the foreign priority date by submitting a certified English translation if their foreign priority application is not in English. When the application’s foreign priority application is not in English, applicant must file a certified English translation of that foreign priority application in order for the application’s effective filing date to become the foreign priority date. Also, the English translation must provide §112(a) support for the claimed subject matter. This application is not entitled to benefit of its foreign priority date until the foreign priority date is perfected. See also, MPEP §§2151, 2152.01 and 35 U.S.C 100. Kariyada2 is still available as prior art and the rejections in view of Kariyada2 are maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JASON MCDONALD whose telephone number is (571) 272-5944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-6p Eastern, alternating Fridays out of office.
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 Maldonado can be reached at (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 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.
/JASON MCDONALD/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 /JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights