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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03/30/2026 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the specification overcome each specification objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action.
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 (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 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(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Song et al. (US 20230389440 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Song teaches a magnetic memory device comprising:
a spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, spin current channel layer 7/10);
a wiring crossing the spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, 10 of the spin current channel layer is a wiring as a current flows through it. Applicant’s own specification (paragraph 0050) teaches a wiring layer is a layer through which a current is transmitted. Song, paragraph 0011 teaches a current passes through 10 of the spin current channel layer);
and a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) layer at an intersection of the spin current channel layer with the wiring (Fig. 1, MTJ 100)
wherein the spin current channel layer includes a MgO-based layer and a beta-phase tungsten layer on the MgO-based layer (Fig. 1. Paragraph 0014 teaches 7 of the spin current channel layer includes a MgO-based layer. Paragraph 0016 and 0017 teaches 10 is a beta-phase tungsten layer. 10 is on 7).
and the beta-phase tungsten layer is in contact with the MTJ layer, and wherein the MgO-based layer includes an MgO layer in direct contact with the beta-phase tungsten layer (Fig. 1, beta-phase tungsten layer 10 is in contact with MTJ layer 100 (paragraph 0021 teaches spacer layer 20 may be omitted) and in direct contact with MgO-based layer 7 (which only includes an MgO layer)).
Regarding Claim 2, teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 1, wherein the MgO-based layer is a single layer including the MgO layer (Lee, paragraph 0032 teaches MgO layer 230 is a single layer (Fig. 1 and paragraph 0014 teach the MgO based layer is a single layer including the MgO layer).
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) 3-5, 9-10, 12, 14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Park et al. (KR 20180026195A, hereafter referred to as Park 195, see attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 3, Song teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 1.
Song fails to specifically teach the device wherein the MgO-based layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer, and the second layer is in contact with the beta-phase tungsten layer.
However, Park 195 teaches a magnetic memory device wherein the MgO-based layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer, and the second layer is in contact with the beta-phase tungsten layer (Park 195, fig. 1, MgO based layer (120 through 140) including a first layer 120 and a second layer 130. The second layer 130 is in electrical contact with the beta-phase tungsten layer 150).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Park 195 into the method of Song by forming the memory device wherein the MgO-based layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer, and the second layer is in contact with the beta-phase tungsten layer. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Song in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of forming a memory device that can reduce power consumption and improves precision (Park 195, paragraph 0010. See attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 4, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the second layer is the MgO layer (Park 195, fig. 1 and paragraph 0051 (see attached machine translation) teaches second layer 130 is formed of MgO).
Regarding Claim 5, Song in view of Park 195 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 120 is formed of a metal (Ta) of one component).
Regarding Claim 9, Song in view of Park 195 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 0052 teaches that layer 140 can be multilayered. Therefore, the MgO based layer can be reinterpreted such that the third layer is layer 130 formed of MgO, the first layer is the bottommost layer of layer 140, which can be formed of CoFeB (formed of two different metals and a non-metal component) and a second layer the top most layer of 140 formed of an alloy (See paragraph 0052 of machine translation)).
Regarding Claim 10, Song in view of Park 195 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 0052 teaches that layer 140 can be multilayered and can be interpreted as comprising three layers: a bottommost layer, a middle layer, and a top layer. Therefore, the MgO based layer can be reinterpreted such that the third layer is 130 formed of MgO, and the first layer comprises the bottommost layer of 140 (first material layer of the first layer) and the middle layer of 140 (second material layer of the first layer). The second layer can then be interpreted as the top layer of 140).
Regarding Claim 12, Song in view of Park 195 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 (Song, Paragraph 0015 teaches the thickness of the beta-phase tungsten greater than or equal to 5 nm, which includes the range from about 5.5 nm to about 8.0 nm).
Regarding Claim 14, Song teaches a magnetic memory device comprising:
a spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, spin current channel layer 7/10);
a wiring crossing the spin current channel layer (Fig. 1, 10 of the spin current channel layer is a wiring as a current flows through it. Applicant’s own specification (paragraph 0050) teaches a wiring layer is a layer through which a current is transmitted. Song, paragraph 0011 teaches a current passes through 10 of the spin current channel layer);
and an MTJ layer at an intersection of the spin current channel layer with the wiring (Fig. 1, MTJ 100),
wherein the spin current channel layer includes a first layer and a second layer on the first layer, (Fig. 1, spin current channel layer (7/10) includes a first layer 7 and a second layer 10 on the first layer),
and the second layer has a spin hall angle (SHA) in a range from about 0.3 to about 0.5 (Song, paragraph 0015 teaches the second layer 10 may have a spin-hall angle greater than or equal to 4, which falls within the claimed spin hall angle range).
Song fails to specifically teach the first layer includes a metal.
However, Park 195 teaches a memory device wherein the first layer includes a metal (Park 195, fig. 1 and paragraph 0051 teaches first layer 120/130/140 includes a metal (e.g. Ta)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate the teachings of Park 195 into the method of Song by forming the memory device wherein the first layer includes a metal. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Song in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of forming a memory device that can reduce power consumption and improves precision (Park 195, paragraph 0010. See attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 16, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 14, wherein the first layer includes an MgO layer in direct contact with the second layer, and wherein the second layer is a beta-phase tungsten layer (Song, fig. 1 teaches first layer 7 formed of MgO (paragraph 0014) in direct contact with second layer 10 formed of beta-phase tungsten (paragraphs 0016-0017)).
Regarding Claim 20, Song teaches an electronic apparatus comprising: the magnetic memory device of claim 1 (Park 195, paragraph 0005 teaches MRAM based Flash, SRAM, and DRAM).
Claim(s) 6, 8, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Park 195 as applied to claim 3-5, 9-10, 12, 14, 16, and 20 above, and further in view of Fukami et al. (US Patent Pub 20210119114 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes a two-component material layer (Park 195, paragraph 0051).
Sogn in view of Park 195 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 Song in view of Park195 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 Song in view of Park195 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).
Regarding Claim 8, Song in view of Park195 and Fukami teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the first layer includes an alloy (Fukami, paragraph 0097 teaches first layer 11a can be formed of FeMn, which is an alloy).
Regarding Claim 11, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 10, wherein the second material layer includes CoFeB (Park, paragraph 0052 teaches the second material layer can be CoFeB).
Song in view of Park 195 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 Song in view of Park 195 by forming a second material layer that includes one of Ta or TaB. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Song in view of Park 195 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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Park 195 and Fukami as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Takahashi (JP2021190656A1, see attached machine translation).
Regarding Claim 7, Song in view of Park195 and Fukami teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 6 wherein the first layer includes a two-component material layer including a metal oxide.
Song in view of Park195 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 Song in view of Park195 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 Song in view of Park195 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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Park 195 as applied to claims 3-5, 9-10, 12, 14, 16, and 20 above, and further in view of Ralph et al. (US Patent Pub 20160276006 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device as described in claim 1.
Song in view of Park 195 fails to teach specifically 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 Song in view 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 Song in view of 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).
Claim(s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Park 195 as applied to claims 3-5, 9-10, 12, 14, 16, and 20 above, and further in view of Park (KR 20210033191 A, hereafter referred to as Park 191).
Regarding Claim 15, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 14.
Song in view of Park 195 fails to specifically teach the memory device wherein the first layer includes one of a TaN layer and an NiO layer.
However, Park 191 teaches a first layer 190 formed of NiO (Park 191, fig. 12, first layer 190 can be formed of NiO (Paragraph 0119, see attached machine translation)).
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 Song in view of Park 195 by forming the device wherein the first layer includes one of a TaN layer and an NiO layer. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Song in view of 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, Song in view of Park 195 and 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, Song in view of Park 195 and 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 0052 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 Song in view of Park 195 as applied to claim 3-5, 9-10, 12, 14, 16, and 20 above, and further in view of Ralph (US Patent Pub 20160276006 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Song in view of Park 195 teaches the magnetic memory device of claim 14.
Song in view of 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 Song in view 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 Song in view of 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).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as applied above.
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
/ZANDRA V SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights