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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-25 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made that the information disclosure statement has been received and considered by the examiner. If the applicant is aware of any prior art or any other co-pending applications not already of record, he/she is reminded of his/her duty under 37 CFR 1.56 to disclose the same.
Drawings
There are no objections or rejections to the drawings.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11-13 and 23 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (US Patent Application Publication No 2022/0223783) hereinafter referred to as Jeong in view of Leitz et al. (US Patent Application Publication No 2010/0270653) hereinafter referred to as Leitz.
Per Claim 1 Jeong discloses a magnetic random access memory (MRAM) stack device, comprising (see figure 2A)
a first magnetic layer (230/130A) comprising a Heusler compound; and
one or more seed layers (210A/110A) comprising:
a templating structure (210A/110A) comprising a crystalline structure (220/120A) configured to template the Heusler compound, (see [0030])
wherein the first magnetic layer (230/130A) is formed over the templating structure, (fig.2A)
the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy ([0048] teaches that 210A can be a binary ally, but doesn’t teach that the binary allow is PtAl.)
Jeong does not teach the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl).
Leitz teaches an analogous device including a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl). (110 may include or consist essentially of a metal or a metal alloy, e.g., Pd, platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), or silver (Ag); see [0057])
All of the component parts are known in Jeong and Leitz. The only difference is the combination of the old elements into a single device, by using the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong, since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
PNG
media_image1.png
577
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jeong Figure 2A
Per Claim 2 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including a second magnetic layer (250); and a tunnel barrier (240) positioned between, and in contact with, one or more of the first magnetic layer (230) and the second magnetic layer (250), wherein: the first magnetic layer comprises a storage (free) layer; the second magnetic layer comprises a reference (reference) layer; and the first magnetic layer, the tunnel barrier, and the second magnetic layer define a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) (ss described in [0048])
Per Claim 3 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 2 including where the tunnel barrier is formed from compounds selected from the group consisting of MgO and Mg1-zAl2+(2/3)zO4, wherein -0.5 < z < 0.5. [0049]
Per Claim 5 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including where the first magnetic layer defines a thickness dimension, and wherein: the first magnetic layer has a magnetization (252) which is orientated perpendicular to the thickness dimension (as shown in figure 2A); and the first magnetic layer and has a thickness of less than 5 nanometers (nm). ([0041] describes that (130) may be less than 5 nanometers thick.)
Per Claim 6 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including where the first magnetic layer (230/130) is formed from compounds of Mn3Z, wherein: Z is an element selected from the group consisting of germanium (Ge), tin (Sn), and antimony (Sb); and the compounds of Mn3Z are selected from the group consisting of Mn3.3-xGe, Mn3.3-xSn, and Mn3.3-xSb, x in a range from 0 to 1.1. (described in [0014])
Per Claim 8 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including where the Heusler compound is chosen from the group consisting of Mn3Al, Mn3Ga, Mn3In, Mn2FeSb, Mn3CoAl, Mn2CoGe, Mn2CoSi, Mn2CuSi, Mn2CoSn, Co2CrAl, Co2CrSi, Co2MnSb, and Co2MnSi. [0014]
Per Claim 9 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including where the Heusler compound is Mn3Ge. [0014]
Per Claim 11 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses a method of fabricating a magnetic random access memory (MRAM) stack, comprising (see figure 2A)
forming one or more seed layers (210A/110A) comprising:
forming a templating structure (210A/110A) above a substrate, wherein the templating structure includes a crystalline structure (220/120A) (see [0030])
wherein the forming the templating structure (210A/110A) comprises:
forming a layer of a binary alloy ([0048] teaches that 210A can be a binary ally, but doesn’t teach that the binary allow is PtAl.); and
forming a first magnetic layer (230/130A) comprising: (fig.2A)
templating a Heusler compound through the templating structure. [0016]
Jeong does not teach the templating structure comprising: the binary alloy including platinum-aluminum (PtAl).
Leitz teaches an analogous device including a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl). (110 may include or consist essentially of a metal or a metal alloy, e.g., Pd, platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), or silver (Ag); see [0057])
All of the component parts are known in Jeong and Leitz. The only difference is the combination of the old elements into a single device, by using the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong, since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Per Claim 12 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including templating the Heusler compound over the templating structure. (Jeong [0016])
Per Claim 13 Jeong in view of Leitz discloses the device of claim 1 including forming a tunnel barrier (240) over the first magnetic layer (230) and forming a second magnetic layer (250) over the tunnel barrier (240), thereby positioning the tunnel barrier between, and in contact with, the first magnetic layer and the second magnetic layer (as shown in Jeong figure 2A), wherein: the first magnetic layer defines a storage (free) layer; the second magnetic layer define a reference (reference) layer; and the first magnetic layer, the tunnel barrier, and the second magnetic layer define a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ). (ss described in Jeong [0048])
Per Claim 23 Jeong discloses a plurality of MRAM stacks (Jeong [0002] describes plurality of memories), each MRAM stack of the plurality of MRAM stacks comprising: (see figure 2A)
a first magnetic layer (230/130A) comprising a Heusler compound; and
one or more seed layers (210A/110A) comprising:
a templating structure (210A/110A) comprising a crystalline structure (220/120A) configured to template the Heusler compound, (see [0030])
wherein the first magnetic layer (230/130A) is formed over the templating structure, (fig.2A)
the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy ([0048] teaches that 210A can be a binary ally, but doesn’t teach that the binary allow is PtAl.)
Jeong does not teach the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl).
Leitz teaches an analogous device including a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl). (110 may include or consist essentially of a metal or a metal alloy, e.g., Pd, platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), or silver (Ag); see [0057])
All of the component parts are known in Jeong and Leitz. The only difference is the combination of the old elements into a single device, by using the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong, since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong in view of Leitz (as above) and further in view of Fuji et al. (US Patent Application Publication No 2013/0242435) hereinafter referred to as Fuji.
Per Claim 18 Jeong discloses a plurality of magnetic random access memory (MRAM) cells, each MRAM cell of the plurality of MRAM cells comprising (see figure 2A)
a first magnetic layer (230/130A) comprising a Heusler compound; and
one or more seed layers (210A/110A) comprising:
a templating structure (210A/110A) comprising a crystalline structure (220/120A) configured to template the Heusler compound, (see [0030])
wherein the first magnetic layer (230/130A) is formed over the templating structure, (fig.2A)
the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy ([0048] teaches that 210A can be a binary ally, but doesn’t teach that the binary allow is PtAl.)
Jeong does not teach the templating structure comprising: a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl).
Leitz teaches an analogous device including a layer of a binary alloy comprising platinum-aluminum (PtAl). (110 may include or consist essentially of a metal or a metal alloy, e.g., Pd, platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), or silver (Ag); see [0057])
All of the component parts are known in Jeong and Leitz. The only difference is the combination of the old elements into a single device, by using the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the binary alloy material of Leitz in the device of Jeong, since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Jeong in view of Leitz does not teach a magnetic random-access memory (MRAM) array, comprising: a plurality of bit lines and a plurality of corresponding complementary bit lines forming a plurality of bit line-complementary bit line pairs; a plurality of word lines intersecting the plurality of bit line pairs at a plurality of cell locations; a plurality of MRAM cells located at each cell location of the plurality of cell locations, each MRAM cell of the plurality of MRAM cells being electrically connected to a corresponding bit line of the plurality of bit lines and selectively interconnected to a corresponding one of the plurality of the complementary bit lines under control of a corresponding one of the word lines of the plurality of word lines.
Fuji teaches an analogous device including (see figure 29-30)
a magnetic random-access memory (MRAM) array [0406], comprising: a plurality of bit lines (323) and a plurality of corresponding complementary bit lines (332) forming a plurality of bit line-complementary bit line pairs; a plurality of word lines (334) intersecting the plurality of bit line pairs at a plurality of cell locations; (as shown in figure 29)
a plurality of MRAM cells (110) located at each cell location of the plurality of cell locations, each MRAM cell of the plurality of MRAM cells being electrically connected to a corresponding bit line of the plurality of bit lines and selectively interconnected to a corresponding one of the plurality of the complementary bit lines under control of a corresponding one of the word lines of the plurality of word lines [0406-0407]
All of the component parts are known in Jeong in view of Leitz and Fuji. The only difference is the combination of the old elements into a single device, by using the bit/word array of Fuji in the device of Jeong in view of Leitz. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the bit/word array of Fuji in the device of Jeong in view of Leitz, since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
PNG
media_image2.png
317
443
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fuji figure 29
Per Claim 19 Jeong in view of Leitz in view of Fuji discloses the device of claim 18 including
a second magnetic layer (250); and
a tunnel barrier (240) positioned between, and in contact with, one or more of the first magnetic layer (230) and the second magnetic layer, (see Jeong figure 2A) wherein:
the first magnetic layer comprises one of a storage (free) layer and a reference layer; (as shown in Jeong figure 2A)
the second magnetic layer comprises one of a reference (reference) layer and a storage layer in opposition to the first magnetic layer; (as shown in Jeong fig. 2A) and
the first magnetic layer, the tunnel barrier, and the second magnetic layer define a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ). (as shown in Jeong figure 2A)
Per Claim 20 Jeong in view of Leitz in view of Fuji discloses the device of claim 18 including the plurality of word lines, the plurality of MRAM cells, and the plurality of bit line-complementary bit line pairs (as above). Additionally, claim 20 recites the performance properties of the device (i.e. each word line of the plurality of word lines is configured to receive one or more signals to cause a first subset of the plurality of MRAM cells to store logical ones and a second subset of the plurality of MRAM cells to store logical zeroes; and each bit line-complementary bit line pair of the plurality of bit line-complementary bit line pairs is configured to read the stored logical ones and zeroes). This functional limitation does not distinguish the claimed device over the prior art, since it appears that this limitation can be performed by the prior art structure of Jeong, Leitz, and Fuji. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429,1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) See MPEP 2114.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 7, 10, 14-17 are 24-25 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 21-22 are allowed.
Cited Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicants are directed to consider additional pertinent prior art included on the Notice of References Cited (PTOL 892) attached herewith.
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant.
Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMI VALENTINE MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-9786. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 7am-5pm.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached on (571) 270-3829. 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.
/Jami Valentine Miller/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818