DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Election filed on November 14, 2025.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-14 in the reply filed on November 14, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 15-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tan et al. (US Pub. 2024/0206189 A1).
In re claim 1, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) ferroelectric device comprising: a first electrode (01) and a second electrode (02); and a layer stack (03, 04, 05) between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein the layer stack comprises a titanium oxide layer (05; [0160]) , a doped hafnium zirconate (HZO) (03; [0142]) layer arranged on the titanium oxide layer, and a niobium oxide layer (04; [0155]) arranged on the doped HZO layer.
In re claim 2, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) each of the first electrode and the second electrode comprises at least a titanium nitride layer [0143].
In re claim 3, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) the titanium oxide layer comprises a titanium dioxide layer and the niobium oxide layer comprise a niobium pentoxide
layer [0155].
In re claim 4, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) the titanium oxide layer has a thickness of about 0.5 to about 2.5 nm [0156].
In re claim 5-7, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) the doped HZO layer comprises a HZO layer that is doped with at least one of a lanthanide or a rare earth metal. The lanthanide comprises one or more of lanthanum, praseodymium, cerium or gadolinium [0142]. The rare earth metal comprises one or both of yttrium or scandium.
In re claim 9, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) wherein the layer stack consists essentially of the titanium oxide layer, the doped HZO layer, and the niobium oxide layer.
In re claim 11, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) the doped HZO layer is a ferroelectric layer and inherently has at least two non-zero remnant polarization charge states, since the structure and materials are the same as the claimed invention.
In re claim 14, Tan et al. shows (fig. 12) wherein the ferroelectric device is selected from the group consisting of a metal-ferroelectric-metal capacitor, a ferroelectric random access memory or a ferroelectric field effect transistor ([0099-0101]; fig. 12 shows a MFM capacitor).
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 8, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al. (US Pub. 2024/0206189 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of the cited case law.
In re claims 8, 12, and 13, Tan et al. shows all of the elements of the claims except wherein the doped HZO layer comprises a ratio of (002)-oriented grains having an orthorhombic crystal structure to (111)-oriented grains having the orthorhombic crystal structure that is equal to or greater than 0.8, wherein a remnant polarization of the doped HZO layer is at least 15-60 µC/cm², and wherein an endurance of the doped HZO layer is equal to or greater than 1x10⁸ cycles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the HZO layer having any desired ratio, remnant polarization, and endurance, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Maeng ((US Pub. 2021/0359100-A1), Kang (US Pub. 2021/0359082-A1), Tan (WO-2023065195-A1), Tan (WO-2023024101-A1), Avci (DE-112017008132-T5), and Yu (CN-116981258-A) also disclose various elements of the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E WARREN whose telephone number is (571)272-1737. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am - 6pm.
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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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.
/MATTHEW E WARREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815