DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amendment received on 07/20/2026.
Phone calls were attempted to attorneys of record Sameer Gokhale and Phillipe J.C. Signore on 07/30/2026, 07/31/2026, and 08/04/2026 to resolve remaining 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections detailed below. No reply was received.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) based upon an application filed in FRENCH REPUBLIC on 08/06/2021.
Drawings
The amended drawings were received on 07/20/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the following limitation in lines 27-28: “a difference of potential between the contact and the electrical contact of the intermediate electrode”. It is unclear which “contact” or “electrical contact” applicant is referring to because the claim does not recite the corresponding element (first electrode, second electrode, intermediate electrode) or indicate if the contact is an electrical contact. Therefore, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and the balance of claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) at least for their dependencies. For the purpose of this examination, the identified limitation in claim 1 will be interpreted to read as “a difference of potential between the electrical contact of the first electrode and the electrical contact of the intermediate electrode”.
Claim 3 has been amended to recite “the ferroelectric subassembly comprises at least one semiconductive ferroelectric layer or a ferroelectric layer of conductive or semiconductive two-dimensional material, said interfacing subassembly being in direct contact with the ferroelectric subassembly and including said at least one semiconductive ferroelectric layer or a ferroelectric layer of conductive or semiconductive two-dimensional material”. It is unclear what is meant by both structures (ferroelectric subassembly and interfacing subassembly) including/comprising the at least one semiconductive ferroelectric layer or a ferroelectric layer of conductive or semiconductive two-dimensional material. It is not clear if both structures partially include the layer and it is shared between them or if each subassembly includes a singular one of the at least one layer of the respective materials such that the at least one comprises at least two. The only lines the examiner identified in the original specification which support this set of limitations are at the end of page 2, “the ferroelectric subassembly comprising at least one semiconductive ferroelectric layer or a ferroelectric layer made of a conductive or semiconductive two- dimensional material . . . said interfacing subassembly being merged with the ferroelectric subassembly and including said at least one layer” and there are no drawings to show how this layer of a particular material looks relative to these two subassemblies being merged as described by the specification. Therefore, claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Claim(s) 2-15 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as described above, but may be allowable for their dependence on claim 1 if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the cited prior art, either alone or in combination, teaches “a second electrode comprising at least two electrical contacts for reading the state of polarization of the ferroelectric subassembly, the electrical contacts of the second electrode each extending along a respective main direction, at least two main directions being non-parallel to each other”, as recited in claim 1, and in combination with all of the other required limitations of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 1. US 20200134419 A1; Manipatruni et al.; 04/2020; (“Manipatruni”), the closest identified prior art, discloses An electronic device (#300, Figure 3, MESO (magneto-electric spin orbit) device) comprising a stack of layers (Figure 3, #300 comprises a stack of layers) stacked along a direction of stacking (Figure 3, the stack of layers are stacked along the z-direction), the stack of layers comprising:
a first electrode (#308, Figure 3, magnetization port), comprising at least one electrical contact (Figure 3, #308 has at least one electrical contact for the magnet setting current #322),
one ferroelectric subassembly (#326, Figure 3, charge to spin conversion node comprising #306, a dielectric material with dielectric properties according to [0026]), the ferroelectric subassembly being in contact with the first electrode (Figure 3, #306 of #326 is in direct contact with #308) and having a ferroelectric polarization which can take a plurality of states ([0026], #306 may be electrically polarized and switched among a plurality of states indicated by the positive and negative positions in Figures 3 and 4),
a spin-polarization subassembly (#336, Figure 4, spin-to-charge conversion node), the spin-polarization subassembly being adapted to spin-polarize a current flowing through the spin-polarization subassembly (Figures 3 and 4, [0030], the magnetization #324 in #304 produces a spin polarized current which subsequently enters the spin orbit effect stack #330), at least one layer of the spin-polarization subassembly being made of ferromagnetic or ferrimagnetic material (#304, Figure 3, [0025], magnet #304 comprises a ferromagnetic material),
an interfacing subassembly (#330, Figure 3, spin orbit effect stack) arranged between the ferroelectric subassembly and the spin-polarization subassembly (Figure 3, #330 is arranged to be electrically and physically between #326 and #336), the interfacing subassembly being adapted to inter-convert the spin-polarized current into a charge current depending on the ferroelectric polarization state of the ferroelectric subassembly (Figure 3, #330 is a spin orbit effect stack which produces and output charge current based on the polarization state according to [0032]-[0033]),
the ferroelectric subassembly (#326) and the interfacing subassembly (#330), respectively, having a part superimposed along the direction of stacking, on the spin-polarization subassembly (#336) (Figure 3, #326 comprises a portion of #304 and #330 comprises a portion #310 which is superimposed along the z-direction on #336) and a part not superimposed on the spin-polarization subassembly (Figure 3, #326 comprises a portion of #306 and #330 comprises a portion #316 which is not superimposed along the z-direction on #336),
at least one of the interfacing subassembly and the ferroelectric subassembly including a conductive layer suitable for forming an intermediate electrode (#316, Figure 3, output port shown to function as a conductive layer of the output current as an intermediate electrode in the middle of the device), said intermediate electrode comprising an electrical contact for reading the state of polarization of the ferroelectric subassembly ([0034], read operation produces an output current #332 proportional to the magnetization of the device and the output current passes through the output port #316), and
a second electrode (#314, Figure 3, ground electrode), the second electrode delimiting the spin-polarization subassembly (Figure 3, #314 delimits the bottom edge of #336),
the electrical contact of the first electrode (#308) making it possible to change the ferroelectric polarization state of the ferroelectric subassembly (Figures 3 and 4, [0027]-[0029], the direction of magnetization and consequently the polarization state in #326 is at least in part controlled by the magnet setting current #322) by application of a difference of potential between the electrical contact of the first electrode and at least one of the electrical contacts of the second electrode or of a difference of potential between the electrical contact of the first electrode and the electrical contact of the intermediate electrode (Figures 3 and 4, [0027]-[0029], the polarization state of #326 is in part controlled by a difference in potential, and resulting current directions, between #308 and #316).
Manipatruni does not appear to disclose the second electrode (#314, Figure 3, ground electrode) comprising at least two electrical contacts for reading the state of polarization of the ferroelectric subassembly, the electrical contacts of the second electrode each extending along a respective main direction, at least two main directions being non-parallel to each other. Instead, #314 is a single contact electrode for receiving the residual current #334 which is not successfully spin-converted to pass through the output port according to [0032]. The residual current just passes to ground and does not play a role in reading the state of polarization in the ferroelectric subassembly. No eligible prior art was cited which renders obvious the conversion of a single electrical contact ground electrode into an electrode with a plurality of contacts used for reading the state of polarization. Therefore, claim 1 is interpreted to contain allowable subject matter and claims 2-15 contain allowable subject matter by their dependence to claim 1. Claim(s) 1-15 may be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objections and rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) provided above.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s submission of replacement drawings for Figures 1-3 and corresponding remarks, see page 8 of the remarks, filed 07/20/2026, with respect to the objection to the drawings have been fully considered. The replacement drawings are acceptable and the objection to the drawings has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 8, 9, and 14 along with corresponding remarks, see page 8 of the remarks, filed 07/20/2026, with respect to the objection claims 1-15 for minor informalities have been fully considered. The objection to claims 1-15 for minor informalities has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11, 13, and 14 along with corresponding remarks, see page 8 of the remarks, filed 07/20/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1-15 have been fully considered. While some of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections from the non-final rejection mailed on 04/22/2026 have been resolved, 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1-15 remain for the reasons provided above. Specifically, claim 1 still has an unclear use of the word “contact” in the final two lines of the claim where it is unclear which (electrical) contact the claim is referring to. In addition, the amendments to claim 3 have made it unclear what the relationship is between the ferroelectric subassembly, the interfacing subassembly, the at least one semiconductive ferroelectric layer or a ferroelectric layer of conductive or semiconductive two-dimensional material since both subassemblies are separately claimed as including the layer of material. Therefore, claims 1-15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20240224814 A1; Debashis et al.; 07/2024 – Figure 4 discloses a MESO logic device including an output electrode (#104) which comprises at least two electrical contacts (#104a and #104b) for reading the state of the polarization of the ferroelectric subassembly (see [0029] and [0038]-[0040]). However, the two electrical contacts do not extend in at least two main directions being non-parallel to one another, instead both electrical contacts extend in the same direction parallel to one another. Additionally, the effective filing date of the reference (12/29/2022) is later than the effective filing date of the instant application based on the foreign priority date (08/06/2021) and the PCT filing date (08/04/2022).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER JAMES WIEGAND whose telephone number is (571)270-0096. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8AM-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, CHRISTINE KIM can be reached at (571) 272-8458. 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.
/TYLER J WIEGAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights