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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0053, line 3, “spin hole angle (SHA)” should read “Spin Hall Angle (SHA)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (KR 20180026195A) hereinafter referred to as Park 195.
Regarding Claim 14, Park 195 teaches a magnetic memory device comprising:
a spin current channel layer (fig. 1, Spin current channel layer 110/120/130/140/150);
a wiring crossing the spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, Spin current channel layer 110/120/130/140/150 can be expressed as a wiring or wiring layer because current is passed through the layer between electrodes 200 and 300. Paragraph 0050 of Applicant’s specification teaches a wiring or wiring layer is a layer through which a current is transmitted);
and an MTJ layer at an intersection of the spin current channel layer with the wiring (fig. 1, MTJ 400, paragraph 0052 teaches the control unit 400 may be formed of a magnetic tunnel junction),
wherein the spin current channel layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer (fig. 1, first layer 130/140 and second layer 150),
and the first layer includes a metal (Paragraph 0051 teaches the first layer 130/140 includes a ferromagnetic metal).
and the second layer has a spin hall angle (SHA) in a range from about 0.3 to about 0.5 (paragraph 0052 teaches second layer 150 may be formed of tungsten. Xiao et al. (US Patent Pub 20170338021) paragraph 0005, cited as further evidence, teaches tungsten has a spin hall angle of 0.3, which is within the claimed spin hall angle range).
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2-5, 8-10, 12, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (KR 20180026195A) herein after referred to as Park 195 in view of Guo (20160225982).
Regarding Claim 1, Park 195 teaches a magnetic memory device comprising:
a spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, Spin Current Channel Layer 110/120/130/140/150);
a wiring crossing the spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, Spin current channel layer 110/120/130/140/150 can be expressed as a wiring or wiring layer because current is passed through the layer between electrodes 200 and 300. Paragraph 0050 of Applicant’s specification teaches a wiring or wiring layer is a layer through which a current is transmitted);
and a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) layer at an intersection of the spin current channel layer with the wiring (Fig. 1, MTJ 400, paragraph 0052 teaches the control unit 400 may be formed of a magnetic tunnel junction),
wherein the spin current channel layer includes a MgO-based layer and a tungsten-based layer on the MgO-based layer (Park 195, Fig 1 teaches a MgO based layer (120 through 140 make up the MgO based layer, and a tungsten-based layer 150)
and the tungsten-based layer is in contact with the MTJ layer (tungsten-based layer 150 in electrical contact with MTJ 400).
Park 195 fails to teach a beta-phase tungsten layer on the MgO-based layer.
However, Guo teaches a magnetic memory device with a beta-phase tungsten layer (Guo, Fig. 2A, beta-phase tungsten layer 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Guo into the method of Park 195 by forming the tungsten-based layer out of beta-phased tungsten. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of provides a higher spin polarization ratio and a higher resistivity than Ta or Pt (Guo, paragraph 0040).
Regarding Claim 2, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 1, wherein the MgO-based layer is a single layer including an MgO layer (Park 195, fig. 1, MgO layer 130)
Regarding Claim 3, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 1, wherein the MgO-based layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer (Park 195, fig. 1, MgO based layer (120 through 140) including a first layer 140 and a second layer 130).
Regarding Claim 4, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the second layer includes an MgO layer (Park 195, fig. 1, second layer 130 is an MgO layer (see paragraph 0050)).
Regarding Claim 5, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer is a single layer including a metal of one component (Park 195, paragraph 0051 teaches first layer 140 can include alternately stacked magnetic and non-magnetic metals, including single layers composed of Co, Pd, or Pt).
Regarding Claim 8, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes an alloy (Park 195, paragraph 0051 teaches the first layer 140 can an alloy).
Regarding Claim 9, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes a three-component material layer, and the three-component material layer includes two different metals and one non-metal component (Park 195, paragraph 0051 teaches any full Heusler semimetal alloy combination. Co2FeSi is a full Heusler semimetal alloy which contains two different metals and a non-metal component).
Regarding Claim 10, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes a first material layer and a second material layer on the first material layer (Park 195, paragraph 0051 teaches the first layer 140 can be a multilayered thin film with layers of different materials are alternately stacked. This can be a film including a first material layer and a second material layer).
Regarding Claim 12, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the beta-phase tungsten layer is in a range from about 5.5 nm to about 8.0 nm (Guo, paragraph 0045 teaches a beta-phase tungsten having a thickness in a range between 1.5 nm and 6 nm, which is within the claimed thickness range).
Regarding Claim 20, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches an electronic apparatus comprising: the magnetic memory device of claim 1 (Park 195 (paragraph 0005) teaches MRAM based Flash, SRAM, and DRAM. Guo (paragraph 0046) teaches MTJ structures used in magnetic memory arrays. These are both considered apparatuses).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 in view of Guo as applied to claim 1, 2-5, 8-10, 12, and 20 above, and further in view of Ralph et al. (US Patent Pub 20160276006).
Regarding Claim 13, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device as described in claim 1.
Park 195 in view of Guo fails to teach the magnetic memory device further comprising: a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other; a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings.
However, Ralph teaches a magnetic memory device having a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other; a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings (Ralph, fig. 4A teaches spin current channel layer 404 and MTJ at intersection of spin current channel layers. Fig. 14 teaches wiring (conductive stripe or line). Fig. 15 teaches a plurality of spin current channel layers and wirings spaced apart, and a plurality of MTJ layers at the intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Ralph into the method of Park 195 in view of Guo by forming a magnetic memory device with a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other, a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other, and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in view of Guo in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of creating an array of MTJ circuits that provide write signals and perform read-out of stored data (Ralph, paragraph 0124).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 in view of Guo as applied to claim 1, 2-5, 8-10, 12, and 20 above, and further in view of Fukami et al. (US Patent Pub 2021011914).
Regarding Claim 6, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes a two-component material layer (Park 195, paragraph 0051).
Park 195 in view of Guo fails to teach the first layer having a two-component layer that has a metal component and a non-metal component.
However, Fukami teaches a magnetic memory device with a first layer formed of a two-component material having a metal component and a non-metal component (Fukami, paragraph 0097 teaches that first layer 11a can be formed of FeO).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Fukami into the method of Park 195 in view of Guo by forming a magnetic memory device with first layer that includes a two-component material layer, and the two-component material layer includes a metal component and a non-metal component. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in view of Guo in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of aligning the magnetic moment of the device to the users desired direction (Fukami, paragraph 0066).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 in view of Guo and Fukami as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Takahashi (JP2021190656A)1.
Regarding Claim 7, Park 195 in view of Guo and Fukami teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 6 wherein the first layer includes a two-component material layer including a metal oxide.
Park 195 in view of Guo and Fukami fails to teach a two-component material layer including a metal nitride.
However, Takahashi teaches a magnetic memory device with a first layer formed of a two-component material including a metal nitride (Takahashi, fig. 5, first layer 103. Paragraph 0029 teaches first layer 103 can be a metal nitride).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Shigeki into the method of Park 195 in view of Guo and Fukami by forming a first layer that includes a two-component material layer, and the two-component material layer includes a metal nitride. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in view of Guo and Fukami in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of controlling the spin diffusion signal of the device by using a material with a particular spin diffusion length or thickness (Takahashi, paragraph 0030).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 in view of Guo as applied to claim 1, 2-5, 8-10, 12, and 20 above, and further in view of Fukami.
Regarding Claim 11, Park 195 in view of Guo teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 10, wherein the second material layer includes one of CoFeB (Park 195, paragraph 0051).
Park 195 in view of Guo fails to teach a first material layer that includes one of Ta and TaB.
However, Fukami teaches a magnetic memory device with a channel structure that includes a material layer formed of Ta (Fukami, paragraph 0097 teaches the second layer may be formed of Ta).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Fukami into the method of Park 195 in view of Guo by forming a second material layer that includes one of Ta or TaB. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in view of Guo in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of designing the magnetic memory device so that a magnitude or a pulse width of a current that is used in writing is reduced. (Fukami, paragraph 0097).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 as applied to claim 14 above in view of Shen et al. (US Patent Pub 20200052196).
Regarding Claim 15, Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device described in claim 14.
Park 195 fails to teach a first layer being formed of TaN.
However, Shen teaches a magnetic memory device with a first layer formed of TaN (Shen, Paragraph 0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Shen into the method of Park 195 by forming a first layer that includes a TaN layer. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of promoting a smooth and uniform grain structure in overlying layers (Shen, paragraph 0034).
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 as applied to claim 14 above in view of Park (KR 20210033191 A), herein after referred to as Park 191.
Regarding Claim 16, Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device described in claim 14.
Park 195 fails to teach a first layer including NiO.
However, Park 191 teaches a first layer 190 formed of NiO (Park 191, fig. 12, first layer 190 is an antiferromagnetic layer. Paragraph 0119 teaches the antiferromagnetic layer can be NiO).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Park 191 into the method of Park 195 by forming a first layer including a NiO layer. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of improving switching stability according to an external magnetic field by reliably fixing the in-plane magnetized ferromagnetic layer in a specific direction. (Park 191, paragraph 0023).
Regarding Claim 17, Park 195 in view of Park 191 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 14, further comprising: a first material layer contacting the first layer, wherein the first layer includes one of a TaN layer and an NiO layer (Park 195, paragraph 0051, first layer 130 in contact with first material layer 140. Park 191 teaches 130 can be NiO).
Regarding Claim 18, Park 195 in view of Park 191 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 17, wherein the first material layer includes at least one of a single-layer metal layer, an alloy layer, and a three-component material layer (Park 195, paragraph 0051 teaches a first material layer 140 can be a multilayered thin film that can be comprised of a single metal layer such as Cu or Pt, an alloy layer comprised of full-Heusler semimetal alloys, and three-component layer containing a material such as CoFeB).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park 195 as applied to claim 14 above in view of Ralph et al. (US Patent Pub 20160276006).
Regarding Claim 19, Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device as described in claim 14.
Park 195 fails to teach the magnetic memory device further comprising: a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other; a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings.
However, Ralph (US Patent Pub 20160276006) teaches a magnetic memory device having a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other; a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings (Ralph, fig. 4A teaches spin current channel layer 404 and MTJ at intersection of spin current channel layers. Fig. 14 teaches wiring (conductive stripe or line). Fig. 15 teaches a plurality of spin current channel layers and wirings spaced apart, and a plurality of MTJ layers at the intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Ralph into the method of Park 195 by forming a magnetic memory device with a plurality of the spin current channel layers spaced apart from each other, a plurality of the wirings spaced apart from each other, and a plurality of the MTJ layers at intersections of the plurality of spin current channel layers with the plurality of wirings. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Park 195 in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of creating an array of MTJ circuits that provide write signals and perform read-out of stored data (Ralph, paragraph 0124).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICENTE R GONZALES whose telephone number is (571)272-3365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at (571) 272-2429. 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.
/V.R.G./Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/JOHN M PARKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2899