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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/19/2023 is being considered by the examiner. A signed IDS is hereby attached.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species III, Figures 3C and 3D, Sub-Species VI, Figure 4B, and claims 1-9 and 11-29 in the reply filed on 04/21/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that at least claims 1-6, 8, 9, and 11-24 are generic to Species II and Species III, and at least claims 1-6, 8, 9, and 11-29 are generic to Species III and Species IV. As such, searching for at least Species II, Species III, and Species IV, and sub-species VI would not require a different field of search, would not necessitate search queries tailored to different structures, and thus, would not be a burden for the Examiner.
This is not found persuasive because the claimed inventions are directed to distinct species having different claimed features and requiring materially different searches and examinations (claim 10, “a first insulating material layer portion; and a second insulating material layer portion, wherein the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises a first SOT material layer portion, a second SOT material layer portion, and a third SOT material layer portion, and wherein the first SOT material layer portion, the second SOT material layer portion, and the third SOT material layer portion are alternating with the first insulating material layer portion and the second insulating material layer portion.”, for instance ). The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Additionally, claim 19 does not correspond to elected Species III, Figures 3C and 3D, Sub-Species VI, Figure 4B as this species does not include “electrode” as per claim 19. The limitations(s) of claim 19 are taught with respect to non-elected Sub-Species V - Fig. 4A, for instance.
Accordingly, claim 19 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to one or more non-elected inventions/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The abbreviation/acronym “BiSb, Bi2Se3, Bi2T3, (BiSb)2Te3, SnTe, YPtBi, LuPtBi, LuPdBi, ScPtBi, YAuPb, LaPtBi, CePtBi, WOx, TaOx, and PtOx” should be spelled out.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification uses inconsistent surface terminology. In some portion, the specification states that “a third surface connecting the first and second surfaces, and a fourth surface opposite the third surface”(para. 0008 for instance),while in other portions it states that “a second FM portion disposed adjacent to a third surface of the SOT portion and opposite the second surface,”(para. 108 for instance). This inconsistency makes the claim scope unclear. Appropriate correction is required.
For examination purposes, claim 18 will be examined as best understood by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 12 and 14 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 12 recites the abbreviation/acronym “BiSb” and it is neither defined by the claims nor defined by the specifications, which makes unclear to determine its meaning.
For purposes of examination, “BiSb” in claim 12 is interpreted as Bismuth Antimony.
Claim 14 recites the abbreviation/acronym BiSb, Bi2Se3, Bi2T3, (BiSb)2Te3, SnTe, YPtBi, LuPtBi, LuPdBi, ScPtBi, YAuPb, LaPtBi, CePtBi, WOx, TaOx, and PtOx and it is neither defined by the claims nor defined by the specifications, which makes unclear to determine its meaning.
For purposes of examination, claim 14 will be examined as best understood by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20180106873A1(hereinafter Wu).
Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches a temperature detection device, comprising: a temperature detection stack (para. [0018] i.e., magnetic sensor which uses the so-called spin-orbit torque (SOT) effect), comprising: a first antiferromagnetic (AFM) layer; a first ferromagnetic (FM) layer disposed on the first AFM layer; a spin-orbit torque (SOT) material layer disposed on the first FM layer (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…), wherein the SOT material layer further comprises: one or more SOT material layer portions (para [0044] i.e., SOT effective field ); a second FM layer disposed on the SOT material layer (para [0044] i.e., SOT effective field can also be used as the sensor element, …FM/topological insulator (TI) bilayers ); and a second AFM layer disposed on the second FM layer (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…).
Reference Wu remains silent as to a specific AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure. However, Wu teaches a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and HM/AFM/FM trilayer (Claim 7 of Wu), a FM/HM structure and FM with AFM layers to create a sensor with SOT (Paragraphs 10 and 38) which are three of a finite number of structures to create a sensor with a SOT. Wu inherently discloses to one of ordinary skill the particular composition of the layers can be varied to produce different magnetization patterns to form SOT. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try to add a FM and AFM structures to the other side to form the claimed AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. In turn, because the structure as claimed has the properties predicted by the prior art, it would have been obvious to place the layers in the order of an AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure to make a sensor with SOT.
Regarding claim 13, Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above. Wu further teaches the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises a topological insulator, a topological half-Heusler alloy, or a weakly oxidized heavy metal (para. [0048] i.e., topological insulators).
Claim(s) 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boone et al. U.S. Patent Publication US2015010 9699A1(hereinafter Boone).
Regarding claim 2, Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach the temperature detection device further comprising a heat sink, wherein the heat sink is adjacent to the temperature detection stack.
In an analogous art, Boone teaches a heat sink, wherein the heat sink is adjacent to the temperature detection stack (Fig. 6B i.e., 506; para. [0082] i.e., heat sink 506).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the heat sink as taught by Boone into a temperature detection stack of Wu in order to reduce the STO temperature (Boone, para. 67).
Regarding claim 6, Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach the SOT material layer further comprises one or more insulating material layer portions, wherein a first insulating material layer portion of the one or more insulating material layer portions is disposed between the one or more SOT material layer portions and the heat sink.
In an analogous art, Boone teaches wherein the SOT material layer further comprises one or more insulating material layer portions, wherein a first insulating material layer portion of the one or more insulating material layer portions is disposed between the one or more SOT material layer portions and the heat sink (para. [0075] i.e., … the insulating layer may be positioned between the STO device 504 and the heat sink 506…).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the heat sink configuration as taught by Boone into a temperature detection stack of Wu in order to reduce the STO temperature(Boone, para. 67).
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boone as applied to claims 2 and 6 above, and further in view of Song et al. U.S. Patent Number US10181334B1(hereinafter Song).
Regarding claim 3, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 2 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly disclose the temperature detection device includes a media facing surface (MFS) and wherein a first SOT material layer portion of the one or more SOT material layer portions is recessed from the MFS.
In an analogous art, Song teaches the temperature detection device includes a media facing surface (MFS) and wherein a first SOT material layer portion of the one or more SOT material layer portions is recessed from the MFS (Fig. 3A i.e., "250" and "212"; Col. 5 lines 40-52 i.e., The spin-torque structure 250 …disposed at a location that is recessed from the MFS 212).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the SOT structure of Song into the combined temperature detection device of Wu and Boone to improve linear density and simply the head structure (Col. 5 lines 1-30).
Regarding claim 4, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 3 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly teach the first AFM layer has a surface at the MFS.
In an analogous art, Song teaches the first AFM layer has a surface at the MFS (Fig. 2 i.e., “212”, “250”, and “252”; claim 1 i.e., spin Hall structure …antiferromagnets; Col. 4 lines 1-20 i.e., MFS; Col. 4 lines 48-65 i.e., antiferromagnetic).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to locate the antiferromagnetic (AFM) layer at the media facing surface (MFS) as taught by Soing, in order to achieve enhanced strong spin-orbit coupling and improved magnetic head (Song, Col. 4 lines 48-65).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boone and Song as applied to claims 3 and 4 above, and further in view of Le et al. U.S. Patent Publication US20220013139A1 (hereinafter Le).
Regarding claim 5, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 3 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly teach the SOT material layer further comprises an insulating material layer portion disposed between the first SOT material layer portion and the MFS.
In an analogous art, Le teaches the SOT material layer further comprises an insulating material layer portion disposed between the first SOT material layer portion and the MFS (Fig. 3D "320", "355", and "304"; para. [0053-0054] i.e., " fourth insulation layer 320", "MFS 355", and "second SHL 304" ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the insulation layer disclosed in Reference Le in the temperature detection device to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed in Reference Le, the motivation for the combination would be to ensure that spin hall layers, free layer, and gap layers are not in direct contact with the hard bias layers (Le, para. 59).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boone as applied to claims 2 and 6 above, and further in view of Le.
Regarding claim 7, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 6 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly teach the one or more SOT material layer portions is a first SOT material layer portion and a second SOT material layer portion.
In an analogous art, Le teaches the one or more SOT material layer portions is a first SOT material layer portion and a second SOT material layer portion (Fig. 3D, the lower 304 and the upper 304; para. [0053] i.e., second SHL 304 ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the insulation layer disclosed in Reference Le in the temperature detection device to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed in Reference Le, the motivation for the combination would be to ensure that spin hall layers, free layer, and gap layers are not in direct contact with the hard bias layers (Le, para. 59).
Regarding claim 8, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 6 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly teach the one or more insulating material layer portions further comprises a second insulating material layer portion, wherein the second insulating material layer portion is disposed between the one or more SOT material layer portions and a media facing surface (MFS).
In an analogous art, Le teaches the one or more insulating material layer portions further comprises a second insulating material layer portion, wherein the second insulating material layer portion is disposed between the one or more SOT material layer portions and a media facing surface (MFS) (Fig. 3D "320", "355", and "304"; para. [0053-0054] i.e., " fourth insulation layer 320", "MFS 355", and "second SHL 304" ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the insulation layer disclosed in Reference Le in the temperature detection device to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed in Reference Le, the motivation for the combination would be to ensure that spin hall layers, free layer, and gap layers are not in direct contact with the hard bias layers (Le, para. 59).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Boone as applied to claims 2 and 6 above, and further in view of Yan Wu et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20200312354A1(hereinafter Yan Wu).
Regarding claim 9, Wu as modified by Boone teaches the temperature detection device of claim 2 as discussed above. However, Wu fails to explicitly teach the temperature detection stack has a first thickness and the heat sink has a second thickness, wherein the first thickness is greater than the second thickness.
In an analogous art, Yan Wu teaches temperature detection stack has a first thickness and the heat sink has a second thickness, wherein the first thickness is greater than the second thickness (para. [0011] i.e., The heat sink bottom surface …has a thickness less than that of the STO).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the STO and heat sink configuration disclosed in Reference Yan Wu in the temperature detection device to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed in Reference Yan Wu, the motivation for the combination would be to enable efficient heat dissipation away from the STO element (Yan Wu, para. 11).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Le.
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose the SOT material layer has a first length, and the first FM layer has a second length, wherein the first length is less than the second length.
In an analogous art, Le teaches the SOT material layer has a first length, and the first FM layer has a second length, wherein the first length is less than the second length (Fig. 3D, i.e., "302" and "306"; para. [0053] i.e., first FL 306 disposed over the first SHL 302; The length of 302 facing the MFS is shorter than 306 in the z-direction shown in the Fig. 3D. ).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the length of FM layers. Reference Le teaches a spin-orbital torque (SOT) differential reader, with the figure 3D further showing that the first FM length is less than the second length. Because both Reference Wu and Le teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one parameter for the other to achieve the predictable result of the variation in length.
Regarding claim 12, Wu discloses the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises BiSb.
In an analogous art, Le teaches the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises BiSb (para. [0034] i.e., BiSb ).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the BiSb layer as the SOT material layer. Reference Le teaches a spin-orbital torque (SOT) differential reader, with BiSb as the material for the spin hall layers. Because both Reference Wu and Le teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one element for the other to achieve the predictable result of selecting the SOT material layer.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of PHAM et al. U.S. Patent Publication Number US20230063084A1(hereinafter PHAM) and Sun U.S. Patent Publication Number US20190312198A1(hereinafter Sun).
Regarding claim 14, Wu discloses the temperature detection device of claim 13 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach the topological insulator is BiSb, Bi2Se3, Bi2T3, (BiSb)2Te3, or SnTe; the topological half-Heusler alloy is YPtBi, LuPtBi, LuPdBi, ScPtBi, YAuPb, LaPtBi, or CePtBi; and the weakly oxidized heavy metal is WOx, TaOx, or PtOx, wherein x is a number greater than zero.
In an analogous art, PHAM teaches the topological insulator is BiSb, Bi2Se3, Bi2T3, (BiSb)2Te3, or SnTe (para. [0059] i.e., Bi2Se3, (Bi, Sb)2Te3, and BiSb); and the topological half-Heusler alloy is YPtBi, LuPtBi, LuPdBi, ScPtBi, YAuPb, LaPtBi, or CePtBi (para. [0035] ie., LuPdBi, LuPtBi, ScPtBi, YAuPb, LaPtBi, CePtBi ).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the topological insulator. Reference PHAM teaches a spin injection source, magnetic memory, spin hall oscillator, and magnetic sensor, with the topological insulator and the topological half-Heusler alloy as the material for the spin hall layers. Because both Reference Wu and PHAM teach the spin orbit torque (SOT), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one element for the other to achieve the predictable result of selecting the topological insulator.
In an analogous art, Sun teaches the weakly oxidized heavy metal is WOx, TaOx, or PtOx, wherein x is a number greater than zero (para. [0056] i.e., tungsten (W), …tantalum (Ta), platinum (Pt)…, and oxides thereof).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the topological insulator. Reference Sun teaches a spin orbit torque (SOT), with the oxidized heavy metal as the material for the spin hall layers. Because both Reference Wu and Sun teach the spin orbit torque (SOT), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one element for the other to achieve the predictable result of selecting the weakly oxidized heavy metal.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Le et al. U. S. Patent Publication Number US20210336127A1(hereinafter Le ‘127).
Regarding claim 15, Wu discloses the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises a seed layer.
In an analogous art, Le ‘127 teaches the one or more SOT material layer portions comprises a seed layer (para. [0029] i.e., seed layer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the seed layer disclosed in Reference Le ‘127 in the temperature detection device to achieve the claimed invention. As disclosed in Reference Le ‘127, the motivation for the combination would be to promote growth of the BiSb (Le ‘127, para. 29).
Regarding claim 16, Wu discloses the temperature detection device of claim 1 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach a magnetic recording head comprising the temperature detection device.
In an analogous art, Le ‘127 teaches a magnetic recording head comprising the temperature detection device (para. [0002] i.e., …spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) applications, such as for a spin Hall layer for energy-assisted magnetic recording write heads and magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) devices.).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the magnetic recording head. Reference Le teaches a spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) device. Because both Reference Wu and Le teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one component for the other to achieve the predictable result of improved magnetic recording head performance.
Regarding claim 17, Wu as modified by Reference Le ‘127 teaches the magnetic recording head of claim 16 as discussed above but fails to explicitly teach a magnetic recording device, comprising the magnetic recording head.
In an analogous art, Le ‘127 teaches a magnetic recording device, comprising the magnetic recording head (para. [0002] i.e., …spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) applications, such as for a spin Hall layer for energy-assisted magnetic recording write heads and magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) devices.).
Reference Wu teaches a magnetic sensor with a biasing spin-orbit effective field. However, Wu does not teach or suggest the magnetic recording device. Reference Le teaches a spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) device. Because both Reference Wu and Le teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one component for the other to achieve the predictable result of improved magnetic recording device performance.
Claim(s) 18, 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boone in view of Song and further in view of Wu.
Regarding claim 18, Boone teaches a temperature detection device, comprising: a spin-orbit torque (SOT) portion having a first surface at a media facing surface (MFS) (Fig. 6A i.e., "518" and "504"; para.[0081] i.e., "magnetic medium 518" and "STO device 504" ); a heat sink portion disposed adjacent the SOT portion (Fig. 6B i.e., 506; para. [0082] i.e., heat sink 506) but fails to explicitly disclose a heat sink portion disposed adjacent the SOT portion recessed from the MFS; a first ferromagnetic (FM) portion disposed adjacent to a second surface of the SOT portion and the heat sink portion, wherein the first FM portion has a surface at the MFS; a second FM portion disposed adjacent to a third surface of the SOT portion, the third surface being opposite the second surface; an first antiferromagnetic (AFM) portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent to the first FM portion and the heat sink portion; and a second AFM portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent the second FM portion and the heat sink portion.
In an analogous art, Song teaches a heat sink portion disposed adjacent the SOT portion recessed from the MFS (Fig. 3A i.e., "250" and "212"; Col. 5 lines 40-52 i.e., The spin-torque structure 250 …disposed at a location that is recessed from the MFS 212).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the SOT structure of Song into Boone’s temperature detection device to improve linear density and simply the head structure(Col. 5 lines 1-30).
In an analogous art, Wu teaches a first ferromagnetic (FM) portion disposed adjacent to a second surface of the SOT portion and the heat sink portion (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…); a second FM portion disposed adjacent to a third surface of the SOT portion, the third surface being opposite the second surface (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…); an first antiferromagnetic (AFM) portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent to the first FM portion and the heat sink portion (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…); and a second AFM portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent the second FM portion and the heat sink portion (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…).
Reference Wu remains silent as to a specific AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure. However, Wu teaches a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and HM/AFM/FM trilayer (Claim 7 of Wu), a FM/HM structure and FM with AFM layers to create a sensor with SOT (Paragraphs 10 and 38) which are three of a finite number of structures to create a sensor with a SOT. Wu inherently discloses to one of ordinary skill the particular composition of the layers can be varied to produce different magnetization patterns to form SOT. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try to add a FM and AFM structures to the other side to form the claimed AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. In turn, because the structure as claimed has the properties predicted by the prior art, it would have been obvious to place the layers in the order of an AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure to make a sensor with SOT.
Boone further teaches the first FM portion has a surface at the MFS (Fig. 6A i.e., 518; para.[0081] i.e., magnetic medium 518 ); the second FM portion has a surface at the MFS (Fig. 6A i.e., 518; para.[0081] i.e., magnetic medium 518 ); the first AFM portion has a surface disposed at the MFS (Fig. 6A i.e., 518; para.[0081] i.e., magnetic medium 518 ); and the second AFM portion has a surface disposed at the MFS (Fig. 6A i.e., 518; para.[0081] i.e., magnetic medium 518 ).
Regarding claim 22, Boone as modified by Song and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 18 as discussed above. Boone further teaches a magnetic recording head comprising the temperature detection device (para. [0001] i.e., spin torque oscillator (STO) that may be used in microwave assisted magnetic recording).
Regarding claim 23, Boone as modified by Song and Wu teaches the magnetic recording head of claim 22 as discussed above. Boone further teaches the magnetic recording head comprising a read head and a write head, wherein the temperature detection device is disposed adjacent to the write head (Fig. 5A i.e., "500" and "504"; para. [0002] i.e., read and write heads; para. [0070] i.e., magnetic head 500…STO device 504 )
Regarding claim 24, Boone as modified by Song and Wu teaches the magnetic recording head of claim 22 as discussed above. Boone further teaches a magnetic recording device comprising the magnetic recording head (Fig. 5A i.e., "500" and "504"; para. [0002] i.e., read and write heads; para. [0070] i.e., magnetic head 500…STO device 504 ).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boone in view of Song and Wu as applied to claims 18, 22-24 above and further in view of Le '127.
Regarding claim 20, Boone as modified by Song and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 18 as discussed above. However, Boone fails to explicitly teach the SOT portion comprises a seed layer, a texture layer, a buffer layer, a nucleation layer, a SOT material sub-layer, a first interlayer, a second interlayer, a barrier layer, and a cap layer.
In an analogous art, Le '127 teaches the SOT portion comprises a seed layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 32; para. [0048] i.e., silicide layer 32), a texture layer (para. [0032] i.e., one or more fcc materials with a (111) orientation), a buffer layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 42), a nucleation layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 44), a SOT material sub-layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 50; para. [0045] i.e., BiSb layer 50), a first interlayer (Fig. 1E i.e., 71; para. [0040] i.e., surface control layer 71), a second interlayer (Fig. 1E i.e., "74A" and "76A"; para. [0038] i.e., 74A… 76A ), a barrier layer (Fig. 1E i.e., "74B" and "76B"), and a cap layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 92; para. [0047] i.e., capping layer 92 ).
Reference Boone teaches a spin torque oscillator (STO) device. However, Boone does not teach or suggest the specific layers of spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) device. Reference Le '127 teaches the specific spin-orbit torque (SOT) layers. Because both Reference Boone and Le '127 teach spin torque oscillator (STO) device, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one element for the other to achieve the predictable result of selecting the STO layers.
Regarding claim 21, Boone as modified by Song and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 18 as discussed above. However, Boone fails to explicitly teach the SOT portion comprises a seed layer, a texture layer, a buffer layer, a SOT material sub-layer, an interlayer, and a cap layer.
In an analogous art, Le '127 teaches the SOT portion comprises a seed layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 32; para. [0048] i.e., silicide layer 32), a texture layer (para. [0032] i.e., one or more fcc materials with a (111) orientation), a buffer layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 42), a SOT material sub-layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 50; para. [0045] i.e., BiSb layer 50), an interlayer (Fig. 1E i.e., 70; para. [0048] i.e., interlayer 70), and a cap layer (Fig. 1E i.e., 92; para. [0047] i.e., capping layer 92 ).
Reference Boone teaches a spin torque oscillator (STO) device. However, Boone does not teach or suggest the specific layers of spin-orbit torque (SOT) magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) device. Reference Le '127 teaches the specific spin-orbit torque (SOT) layers. Because both Reference Boone and Le '127 teach spin torque oscillator (STO) device, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one element for the other to achieve the predictable result of selecting the STO layers.
Claim(s) 25-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Le in view of Boone and further in view of Wu.
Regarding claim 25, Le teaches a temperature detection device, comprising: a spin-orbit torque (SOT) portion having a first surface at a media facing surface (MFS), a second surface opposite the first surface, a third surface connecting the first and second surfaces, and a fourth surface opposite the third surface, wherein the first surface has a first length and the third surface has a second length, and wherein the first length is greater than the second length (para. [0052] i.e., by selecting a material or an appropriate thickness for the second SHL 304 that includes a higher spin polarization angle, resulting in a higher spin hall angle, the signal output of the upper reader may also be increased. Likewise, the second SHL 304 thickness may be decreased which may increase the signal output of the upper reader.). However, Le fails to explicitly disclose a heat sink portion disposed adjacent the SOT portion; a ferromagnetic (FM) portion disposed adjacent to the SOT portion; and an antiferromagnetic (AFM) portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent the FM portion and the heat sink portion.
In an analogous art, Boone teaches a heat sink portion disposed adjacent the SOT portion (Fig. 6B i.e., 506; para. [0082] i.e., heat sink 506).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the heat sink configuration as taught by Boone into a temperature detection stack of Le in order to reduce the STO temperature(Boone, para. 67).
In an analogous art, Wu teaches a ferromagnetic (FM) portion disposed adjacent to the SOT portion (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…); and an antiferromagnetic (AFM) portion spaced from the SOT portion and disposed adjacent the FM portion and the heat sink portion (claim 7 i.e., The magnetic sensor … a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, …AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and a HM/AFM/FM trilayer…).
Reference Wu remains silent as to a specific AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure. However, Wu teaches a FM/AFM/HM trilayer, AFM/FM/HM trilayer, and HM/AFM/FM trilayer (Claim 7 of Wu), a FM/HM structure and FM with AFM layers to create a sensor with SOT (Paragraphs 10 and 38) which are three of a finite number of structures to create a sensor with a SOT. Wu inherently discloses to one of ordinary skill the particular composition of the layers can be varied to produce different magnetization patterns to form SOT. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try to add a FM and AFM structures to the other side to form the claimed AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure, as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. In turn, because the structure as claimed has the properties predicted by the prior art, it would have been obvious to place the layers in the order of an AFM, FM, SOT, FM, and AFM structure to make a sensor with SOT.
Regarding claim 26, Le as modified by Boone and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 25 as discussed above. Le further teaches the FM portion has a fifth surface disposed at the MFS, a sixth surface opposite the fifth surface, a seventh surface connecting the fifth surface to the sixth surface, and an eighth surface opposite the seventh surface, wherein the fifth surface has a third length, wherein the seventh surface has a fourth length, and wherein the third length is greater than the first length (para. [0043] i.e., The first and the second FLs 306, 308 have a greater thickness in the y-direction than the first and the second SHLs 302, 304.).
Regarding claim 27, Le as modified by Boone and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 25 as discussed above. Le further teaches the fourth length is greater than the third length (Fig. 3D i.e., 308; para. [0053] i.e., first FL 306, a second FL 308; The FM portion is elongated in the stripe height direction.).
Regarding claim 28, Le as modified by Boone and Wu teaches the temperature detection device of claim 25 as discussed above. However, Le fails to explicitly teach a magnetic recording head comprising the temperature detection device.
In an analogous art, Boone teaches a magnetic recording head comprising the temperature detection device (para. [0001] i.e., spin torque oscillator (STO) that may be used in microwave assisted magnetic recording).
Reference Le teaches a spin-orbital torque (SOT) differential reader. However, Le does not teach or suggest the magnetic recording head. Reference Boone teaches a conventional magnetic recording head and recording medium. Because both Reference Le and Boone teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one component for the other to achieve the predictable result of improved magnetic recording head performance.
Regarding claim 29, Le as modified by Boone and Wu teaches the magnetic recording head of claim 28 as discussed above. However, Le fails to explicitly teaches a magnetic recording device, comprising the magnetic recording head.
In an analogous art, Boone teaches a magnetic recording device, comprising the magnetic recording head (Fig. 5A i.e., "500" and "504"; para. [0002] i.e., read and write heads; para. [0070] i.e., magnetic head 500…STO device 504).
Reference Le teaches a spin-orbital torque (SOT) differential reader. However, Le does not teach or suggest the magnetic recording device. Reference Boone teaches the magnetic head and the STO device. Because both Reference Le and Boone teach the spin-orbit torque, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one component for the other to achieve the predictable result of improved magnetic recording device performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5571. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 11am-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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571) 270-1210. 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.
/MICHELLE J. KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2688
/STEVEN LIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights