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
This office action is in response to the filing of the Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment on 02/04/2026. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Couet et al (US 20200403147 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Figure 5 ([0069]) of Couet disclose a magnetic device comprising:
at least two magnetic tunnel junction pillars (pillar along writing and reading line), each magnetic tunnel junction pillar comprising a heavy metal layer portion (13, [0055]), a second free magnetic layer portion (125-123, [0055]) on the heavy metal layer portion, a spacer portion (122, [0052]) on the second free magnetic layer portion, a first free magnetic layer portion (121, [0052]) on the spacer portion, a tunnel barrier layer portion (11, [0051]) on the first free magnetic layer portion, and a fixed magnetic layer portion (30, [0063]) on the tunnel barrier layer portion (11),
wherein at least the heavy metal layer portions, the second free magnetic layer portions and the spacer portions extend between the magnetic tunnel junction pillars through an interconnecting heavy metal layer portion, an interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion and an interconnecting spacer portion, respectively, thereby forming a heavy metal layer (13), a second free magnetic layer (125-123), and a spacer layer (122), and
wherein the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion (middle portion between the pillars) laterally outside of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars is an in-plane free magnetic layer (horizontal direction) and the second free magnetic layer portions of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars have an out-of-plane magnetization (directly under the pillars, Figure 5, [0071]).
Claims 1-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nguyen et al (US 20210104344 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose a magnetic device comprising:
at least two magnetic tunnel junction pillars (please see Figure 4), each magnetic tunnel junction pillar comprising a heavy metal layer portion (11, [0060]), a second free magnetic layer portion (12) on the heavy metal layer portion, a spacer portion (13) on the second free magnetic layer portion, a first free magnetic layer portion (14) on the spacer portion, a tunnel barrier layer portion (15) on the first free magnetic layer portion, and a fixed magnetic layer portion (16) on the tunnel barrier layer portion, wherein at least the heavy metal layer portions, the second free magnetic layer portions and the spacer portions extend between the magnetic tunnel junction pillars through an interconnecting heavy metal layer portion, an interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion and an interconnecting spacer portion, respectively, thereby forming a heavy metal layer, a second free magnetic layer, and a spacer layer (please see Figure 4-5), and wherein the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion (DW, Figure 7) laterally outside of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars is an in-plane free magnetic layer (please see Figure 7, an in-plane magnetization is present in the middle region) and the second free magnetic layer portions of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars have an out-of-plane magnetization (directly under the pillars, Figure 7).
Regarding claim 2, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the first free magnetic layer portions (14, please see Figure 2/7) extend between the magnetic tunnel junction pillars through an interconnecting first free magnetic layer portion to form a first free magnetic layer.
Regarding claim 3, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 2, wherein the tunnel barrier layer (15) portions extend (please see Figure 2/7) between the magnetic tunnel junction pillars through an interconnecting tunnel barrier layer portion to form a tunnel barrier layer.
Regarding claim 4, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the first free magnetic layer (14) portions comprise a first ferromagnetic material and the second free magnetic layer (12) comprises a second ferromagnetic material ([0060]).
Regarding claim 5, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 2, wherein the first free magnetic layer (14) portions comprise a first ferromagnetic material, wherein the second free magnetic layer comprises a second ferromagnetic material, and wherein the interconnecting first free magnetic layer portion comprises a third ferromagnetic material different from the first and second ferromagnetic materials ([0060]).
Regarding claim 6, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the first free magnetic layer (14) portions comprise CoFeB ([0060]).
Regarding claim 7, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 2, wherein the first free magnetic layer (14) portions and the interconnecting first free magnetic layer portion comprise CoFeB ([0060]).
Regarding claim 8, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the second free magnetic layer (12) comprises Co, Fe, CoFeB, or any combination thereof ([0060]).
Regarding claim 9, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the heavy metal layer comprises Ir, W, Hf, Pt, Ta, or any combination thereof ([0060]).
Regarding claim 10, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the spacer layer (13) comprises Ta, W, Nb, Mo, a heavy-metal-transition-metal alloy, or any combination thereof ([0060]).
Regarding claim 11, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 10, wherein the heavy-metal-transition-metal alloy comprises TaCoFeB, WCoFeB, or both ([0060]).
Regarding claim 12, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the spacer layer (13) is from about 0.1 nm to about 1 nm ([0060]).
Regarding claim 13, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 1, wherein the tunnel barrier layer (15) portions comprise MgO ([0068]).
Regarding claim 14, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose that the magnetic device of claim 3, wherein the interconnecting tunnel barrier layer (15, Figure 2) portion and tunnel barrier layer portions comprise MgO ([0068]).
Regarding claim 15, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen disclose a logic device comprising the magnetic device according to claim 1, wherein the at least two tunnel junction pillars include at least four magnetic tunnel junction pillars (please see Figure 5).
Regarding claim 17, Figures 1-8 of Nguyen disclose a method of manufacturing a magnetic or logic device comprising at least two magnetic tunnel junction pillars (Figure 5), the method comprising:
providing a heavy metal layer (11);
providing a second free magnetic layer (12, [0097]) on top of the heavy metal layer;
providing a spacer layer (13, [0099]) on the second free magnetic layer;
providing a first free magnetic layer (14, [0099]) on the spacer layer;
providing a tunnel barrier layer (15, [0099]) on the first free magnetic layer;
providing a fixed magnetic layer (16, [0098]) on the tunnel barrier layer;
structuring the fixed magnetic layer such that fixed magnetic layer portions of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars are remaining (please see Figure 5), wherein structuring comprises subdividing the second free magnetic layer into a plurality of portions including second free magnetic layer portions underneath the fixed magnetic layer portions and an interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion extending between two magnetic tunnel junction pillars (on 13, Figure 5), and wherein the second free magnetic layer portions are out-of-plane magnetic regions, ion beam etching and/or ion irradiating (please see Figure 8A-8B) the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion between the fixed magnetic layer portions such that the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion has an in-plane magnetic state (please see Figure 4).
Regarding claim 18, Figures 4-8 of Nguyen disclose that the method of claim 17, wherein structuring further comprises subdividing the tunnel barrier layer (15) into a plurality of portions (please see Figure 5).
Regarding claim 19, Figures 4-8 of Nguyen disclose that the method of claim 17, wherein structuring further comprises subdividing the first free magnetic layer (15) into a plurality of portions (please see Figure 5).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nguyen et al (US 20210104344 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Figures 1-7 of Nguyen do not explicitly teach that the method of using the magnetic device of claim 1, the method comprising: switching, using spin torque transfer, the first free magnetic layer and the second free magnetic layer of a magnetic tunnel junction pillar of the plurality of magnetic tunnel junction pillars, wherein the switching causes switching of the interconnect second free layer portion due to chiral coupling; and reading, using tunneling magnetoresistance, a magnetization of the first free magnetic layer portion of an other magnetic tunnel junction pillar of the plurality of magnetic tunnel junction pillars.
However, these above limitation specify intended uses or field of uses, and are treated as non-limiting since it has been held that in device claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). Further, a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 16, there is no prior art available nor obvious motivation to combine elements of prior art which teaches a method of forming a magnetic device, comprising:the logic device of claim 15, wherein the magnetic tunnel junction pillars are organized in a star configuration comprising a plurality of arms extending from a central point, wherein the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portions form the arms of the star, and wherein input magnetic tunnel junctions are positioned at outer ends of the arms, and an output magnetic tunnel junction is positioned at the central point of the star” in combination with other limitations on the base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 02/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s main argument regarding claim 1 include: FIGS. 4 and FIG. 7 of Nguyen are directed to two different device arrangements, and the Office Action impermissibly mixes and matches different features to supposedly arrive at Claim 1 without providing any technical reasoning as to how and why such a modification could be made by a skilled artisan. Applicant traverses the rejection at least for this reason. Further, Nguyen fails to disclose that the CoFeB layer (72, Figure 7) laterally outside of the stacks including the fixed layer (73) is a distinct in-plane free magnetic layer. As such, Nguyen fails to anticipate Claim 1 for failing to disclose at least that "the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion laterally outside of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars is an in-plane free magnetic layer and the second free magnetic layer portions of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars have an out-of-plane magnetization," as recited in Claim 1.
In response, the Examiner respectfully points out that Figure 7 of Nguyen anticipates the amended claims as explained above. However, reference to other Figures of Nguyen is recited to show the different components not shown in the Figure 7 of Nguyen. Further, DW region in Figure 7 teaches the interconnecting second free magnetic layer portion laterally outside of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars (pillars are considered directly under TE only in Figure 7) is an in-plane free magnetic layer and the second free magnetic layer portions of the magnetic tunnel junction pillars have an out-of-plane magnetization (as shown by horizontal arrow in the Figure 7). Thus, Figure 7 teaches the amended claim 1.
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 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHAJA AHMAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7991. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (Eastern Time).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, GAUTHIER STEVEN B, can be reached on (571)270-0373. 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.
/KHAJA AHMAD/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights