DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 9-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee; Kangho et al. (US 2017/0186942; hereinafter KLee) in view of Lee; Sung Chul et al. (US 2021/0104661; hereinafter SCLee).
Regarding claim 1, KLee discloses a magnetic memory device, comprising:
a reference magnetic pattern (501; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) and a free magnetic pattern (free layer structure; ¶ [0058]) stacked in vertical alignment relative to a surface of a substrate (¶ [0055]); and
a tunnel barrier pattern (516; Fig 5; ¶ [0058]) extending between the reference magnetic pattern and the free magnetic pattern;
wherein the reference magnetic pattern includes:
a first pinned pattern (502, comprising 508; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-57]), and a second pinned pattern (the PMA portion of 504, comprising 510 or the multilayer stack similar to 508, as described in ¶ [0062]; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-62]; note: perpendicular magnetic anisotropy {PMA}) extending between the first pinned pattern and the tunnel barrier pattern; and
an exchange coupling pattern (506; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-57]), which extends between the first pinned pattern and the second pinned pattern and antiferromagnetically couples the first pinned pattern and the second pinned pattern to each other (¶ [0057]);
wherein the first pinned pattern includes a first magnetic pattern (508; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) and a second magnetic pattern (Co, within 502; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) extending between the first magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern;
wherein one of the first magnetic pattern (the first, 508) and the second magnetic pattern comprises: cobalt and platinum (multilayer stack of cobalt and platinum; ¶ [0055]); and
wherein the other one (the second, Co) of the first magnetic pattern and the second magnetic pattern comprises cobalt.
KLee does not disclose one of the first magnetic pattern and the second magnetic pattern comprises a first non-magnetic element comprising at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Zr, Hf, and Ti, in addition to cobalt and platinum.
In the same field of endeavor, SCLee discloses a similar magnetic memory device comprising a multi-layered pinned pattern (120; Fig 1A; ¶ [0023-30]), wherein the multi-layered pinned pattern comprises cobalt, platinum, and a first non-magnetic element comprising at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Zr, Hf, and Ti (120 may comprise the multi-layered stack iv {¶ [0027]}, which may include, for example, (CoCr/Pt)n {¶ [0029}; that is, cobalt, chromium, and platinum).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the (CoCr/Pt)n material disclosed by SCLee may be used in the second magnetic pattern of KLee. One may have been motivated to do this as an alternate or additional material or layer to Co/Pt in the multilayer stack of KLee, and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because SCLee lists both (Co/Pt)/n and (CoCr/Pt)/n as suitable materials for the same multilayer stack (SCLee; ¶ [0029]), where KLee has disclosed the multilayer stack comprising Co/Pt (KLee; ¶ [0055]), in the similar structures.
Regarding claim 2, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1, wherein the second pinned pattern (KLee; 504, comprising 510; Fig 5) comprises cobalt (KLee; 510 {e.g. Co}; ¶ [0057]).
Regarding claim 3, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1, further comprising:
a polarization enhancement pattern (KLee; 514; Fig 5; ¶ [0058]) extending between the tunnel barrier pattern and the reference magnetic pattern; and
a blocking pattern (KLee; 512; Fig 5; ¶ [0058-60]) extending between the polarization enhancement pattern and the reference magnetic pattern, said blocking pattern having at least a portion therein that is amorphous (¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 9, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 3, wherein the polarization enhancement pattern (KLee; 514; Fig 5) comprises CoFeB (KLee; cobalt-iron-boron; ¶ [0058,0060]).
Regarding claim 10, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1,
wherein the first pinned pattern (KLee; 502, comprising 508; Fig 5) has a first perpendicular magnetization direction perpendicular to an interface between the free magnetic pattern and the tunnel barrier pattern; and
wherein the second pinned pattern (KLee; the PMA portion of 504, comprising 510 or the multilayer stack similar to 508, as described in ¶ [0062]; Fig 5) has a second perpendicular magnetization direction antiparallel to the first perpendicular magnetization direction (KLee; the first and second pinned layers, along with the coupling layer, comprise a SAF having perpendicular magnetic anisotropy {PMA}; ¶ [0010-11,0031,0055]).
Regarding claim 11, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1,
wherein the first magnetic pattern (KLee; 508; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) includes: a sub magnetic pattern comprising cobalt and platinum (KLee; multilayer stack of cobalt and platinum; ¶ [0055]); and
a sub non-magnetic pattern, which extends between the sub magnetic pattern and the second magnetic pattern and comprises the first non-magnetic element (as applied to claim 1, Cr in an additional layer in the multilayer stack 508 of KLee; comprising the (CoCr/Pt)n of SCLee; {¶ [0029}; and
wherein the second magnetic pattern (KLee; Co, within 502, as shown in Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) comprises cobalt.
Regarding claim 13, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the second magnetic pattern (KLee; Co, within 502; Fig 5) further comprises at least one of platinum and the first non-magnetic element (Cr, as applied to claim 1).
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that another of the multi-layers n of (CoCr/Pt)n pinned patterns comprising 120 {Fig 1A} of SCLee, comprised of n layers (n greater than or equal to two), may be used as (in place of) the second magnetic pattern (Co) of KLee, the multi-layers of SCLee comprising Pt and the first non-magnetic element Cr. One would have been motivated to configure the second magnetic pattern this way as an alternative to the Co layer of KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because SCLee discloses the similar first pinned pattern 120 (Fig 1A; ¶ 0023-29]) and similar reference pattern (VMS; Fig 1A; ¶ [0024]) to that of KLee, but not having the Co layer, and because these materials and structures are each well-known in the art for use in magnetic memory devices.
Regarding claim 14, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1,
wherein the first magnetic pattern (508; Fig 5; as applied to claim 1) comprises cobalt, platinum, and the first non- magnetic element (Cr, as applied to claim 1).
KLee in view of SCLee as applied to claim 1 does not disclose wherein the second magnetic pattern (Co, within 502; Fig 5) comprises: a first sub magnetic pattern; and a second sub magnetic pattern extending between the first sub magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern; and wherein one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt, and the other one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt and platinum.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the n multi-layers comprising pinned pattern 120 {Fig 1A} of SCLee, comprised of n layers (n greater than or equal to two), may additionally comprise the second magnetic pattern (Co) of KLee, the multi-layers of SCLee comprising:
a first sub magnetic pattern (one of the n multi-layers comprising 120, for example (Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n; SCLee; ¶ [0029]); and
a second sub magnetic pattern (another of the n multi-layers comprising 120, for example (Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n; SCLee; ¶ [0029]) extending between the first sub magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern; and
wherein one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt ((Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n, for example), and the other one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt and platinum ((Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n, for example).
One would have been motivated to configure the second magnetic pattern this way as an alternative to the Co layer of KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because SCLee discloses the similar first pinned pattern 120 (Fig 1A; ¶ 0023-29]) and similar reference pattern (VMS; Fig 1A; ¶ [0024]) to that of KLee, but not having the Co layer, and because these materials and structures are each well-known in the art for use in magnetic memory devices.
Regarding claim 15, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 14, wherein the other one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern (another of the n multi-layers comprising 120) further comprises the first non-magnetic element ((CoCr/Pt)n, comprising Cr).
Regarding claim 16, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 1,
wherein the first magnetic pattern (508; Fig 5; as applied to claim 1) comprises cobalt and platinum (as applied to claim 1).
KLee in view of SCLee as applied to claim 1 does not disclose wherein the second magnetic pattern (Co, within 502; Fig 5) includes: a first sub magnetic pattern; and a second sub magnetic pattern extending between the first sub magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern; wherein one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt, and the other one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt, platinum, and the first non-magnetic element.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the n multi-layers comprising pinned pattern 120 {Fig 1A} of SCLee, comprised of n layers (n greater than or equal to two), may additionally comprise the second magnetic pattern (Co) of KLee, the multi-layers of SCLee including:
a first sub magnetic pattern (one of the n multi-layers comprising 120, for example (Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n; SCLee; ¶ [0029]); and
a second sub magnetic pattern (another of the n multi-layers comprising 120, for example (Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n; SCLee; ¶ [0029]) extending between the first sub magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern;
wherein one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt ((Co/Pt)n or (CoCr/Pt)n, for example), and the other one of the first sub magnetic pattern and the second sub magnetic pattern comprises cobalt, platinum, and the first non-magnetic element ((CoCr/Pt)n, comprising Cr).
One would have been motivated to configure the second magnetic pattern this way as an alternative to the Co layer of KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because SCLee discloses the similar first pinned pattern 120 (Fig 1A; ¶ 0023-29]) and similar reference pattern (VMS; Fig 1A; ¶ [0024]) to that of KLee, but not having the Co layer, and because these materials and structures are each well-known in the art for use in magnetic memory devices.
Claims 4-6, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee; Kangho et al. (US 2017/0186942; hereinafter KLee) in view of Lee; Sung Chul et al. (US 2021/0104661; hereinafter SCLee), and further in view of Kim; KeeWon et al. (US 2016/0093798; hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 4, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 3,
wherein the blocking pattern (KLee; 512; Fig 5) includes: a first blocking pattern (KLee; tantalum layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058-59]), and a second blocking pattern (KLee; cobalt layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058]), extending between the first blocking pattern and the polarization enhancement pattern.
KLee in view of SCLee does not disclose wherein the first blocking pattern comprises tungsten, and the second blocking pattern comprises molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a similar magnetic memory device comprising a blocking pattern (442; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) including a first blocking pattern (442LP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) and a second blocking pattern (442MP,442UP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]), wherein the first blocking pattern comprises tungsten (¶ [0074]), and the second blocking pattern comprises molybdenum (¶ [0076]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the materials of Kim for the first blocking pattern and the second blocking pattern of KLee in view of SCLee. One may have been motivated to do this as an alternative to the exemplary materials listed by KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because Kim uses the materials in the similar blocking layer and magnetic memory structure as KLee in view of SCLee, and because Kim includes the exemplary blocking pattern materials listed by KLee (cobalt {Co}, tantalum {Ta}) as alternate materials (Kim; Co {¶ [0078]); Ta {¶ [0076]}).
Regarding claim 5, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 4, wherein the second blocking pattern is amorphous (Kim; 442MP may be amorphous; ¶ [0079]).
Regarding claim 6, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 4, wherein the second blocking pattern further comprises a ferromagnetic element (Kim; 442MP may include, for example, Fe; ¶ [0078]).
Regarding claim 17, KLee discloses a magnetic memory device, comprising:
a reference magnetic pattern (501; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) and a free magnetic pattern (free layer structure; ¶ [0058]) stacked in vertical alignment relative to a surface of a substrate (¶ [0055]);
a tunnel barrier pattern (516; Fig 5; ¶ [0058]) extending between the reference magnetic pattern and the free magnetic pattern;
a polarization enhancement pattern (514; Fig 5; ¶ [0058]) extending between the reference magnetic pattern and the tunnel barrier pattern; and
a blocking pattern (512; Fig 5; ¶ [0058-60]) extending between the reference magnetic pattern and the polarization enhancement pattern;
wherein the blocking pattern comprises;
a first blocking pattern (tantalum layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058-59]); and
a second blocking pattern (cobalt layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058]), which extends between the first blocking pattern and the polarization enhancement pattern;
wherein the reference magnetic pattern includes:
a first pinned pattern (502, comprising 508; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-57]), and a second pinned pattern (the PMA portion of 504, comprising 510 or the multilayer stack similar to 508, as described in ¶ [0062]; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-62]; note: perpendicular magnetic anisotropy {PMA}) extending between the first pinned pattern and the blocking pattern; and
an exchange coupling pattern (506; Fig 5; ¶ [0055-57]), extending between the first pinned pattern and the second pinned pattern; and
wherein the first pinned pattern comprises: cobalt and platinum (multilayer stack of cobalt and platinum; ¶ [0055]).
KLee does not disclose: (1) the first pinned pattern (additionally) comprises a first non-magnetic element comprising at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Zr, Hf, and Ti;
(2) the first blocking layer comprises tungsten; and
(3) the second blocking pattern comprises a ferromagnetic element and molybdenum;
wherein the second blocking pattern is in contact with the polarization enhancement pattern;
Regarding (1), in the same field of endeavor, SCLee discloses a similar magnetic memory device comprising a multi-layered pinned pattern (120; Fig 1A; ¶ [0023-30]), wherein the multi-layered pinned pattern comprises cobalt, platinum, and a first non-magnetic element comprising at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Zr, Hf, and Ti (120 may comprise the multi-layered stack iv {¶ [0027]}, which may include, for example, (CoCr/Pt)n {¶ [0029}; that is, cobalt, chromium, and platinum).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the (CoCr/Pt)n material disclosed by SCLee may be used in the first pinned pattern of KLee. One may have been motivated to do this as an alternate or additional material or layer to Co/Pt in the multilayer stack of KLee, and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because SCLee lists both (Co/Pt)/n and (CoCr/Pt)/n as suitable materials for the same multilayer stack (SCLee; ¶ [0029]), where KLee has disclosed the multilayer stack comprising Co/Pt (KLee; ¶ [0055]), in the similar structures.
Regarding (2) and (3), in the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a similar magnetic memory device comprising a blocking pattern (442; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) including a first blocking pattern (442LP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) and a second blocking pattern (442MP,442UP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]), wherein the first blocking pattern comprises tungsten (¶ [0074]), and the second blocking pattern comprises a ferromagnetic element (for example, Fe; ¶ [0077]) and molybdenum (¶ [0076]), wherein the second blocking pattern is in contact with a polarization enhancement pattern (443; Fig 2; ¶ [0075]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the blocking pattern structure of Kim for the first blocking pattern and the second blocking pattern of KLee in view of SCLee. One may have been motivated to do this as an alternative material structure and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because Kim uses the materials in the similar blocking layer and magnetic memory structure as KLee in view of SCLee, and because Kim includes the exemplary blocking pattern materials listed by KLee (cobalt {Co}, tantalum {Ta}) as alternate materials (Kim; Co {¶ [0078]); Ta {¶ [0076]}).
Regarding claim 18, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of Claim 17, wherein the first blocking pattern (KLee; 512; Fig 5, as applied to claim 17) is in contact with the second pinned pattern (KLee; 510; Fig 5).
Regarding claim 19, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of Claim 17, wherein the second blocking pattern is amorphous (Kim; 442MP may be amorphous; ¶ [0079]).
Regarding claim 20, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of Claim 17,
wherein the first pinned pattern (KLee; 502, comprising 508; Fig 5) includes a first magnetic pattern (KLee; 508; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) and a second magnetic pattern (Co, within 502; Fig 5; ¶ [0055]) between the first magnetic pattern and the exchange coupling pattern (KLee; 506; Fig 5);
wherein one of the first magnetic pattern (the first, 508) and the second magnetic pattern includes cobalt, platinum, and the first non-magnetic element (as applied to claim 17), and
wherein the other one of the first magnetic pattern and the second magnetic pattern includes cobalt (the second, Co).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee; Kangho et al. (US 2017/0186942; hereinafter KLee) in view of Lee; Sung Chul et al. (US 2021/0104661; hereinafter SCLee), further in view of Kim; KeeWon et al. (US 2016/0093798; hereinafter Kim), and still further in view of Yoshino; Kenichi et al. (US 2017/0263680; hereinafter Yoshino).
Regarding claim 7, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 6, wherein the second blocking pattern further comprises boron (Kim; 442MP may include B {boron}; ¶ [0078]).
KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim does not disclose wherein a concentration of the molybdenum in the second blocking pattern is smaller than a concentration of boron in the second blocking pattern; however, this would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art in order that the second blocking pattern be amorphous. For example, in the same field of endeavor, Yoshino discloses a magnetic memory comprising a buffer layer (BL/20; Fig 3; ¶ [0041]) which may comprise Mo and B, wherein the buffer layer changes from amorphous to crystalline as the Boron content is reduced. Accordingly, it is apparent that a higher concentration of boron versus molybdenum is needed in order to form an amorphous structure. Further, this may be readily confirmed through additional available material property references and/or through routine experimentation.
Claims 4 (2nd interpretation) and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee; Kangho et al. (US 2017/0186942; hereinafter KLee) in view of Lee; Sung Chul et al. (US 2021/0104661; hereinafter SCLee), and further in view of Kim; KeeWon et al. (US 2016/0093798; hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 4 (2nd interpretation {regarding layer 442MP, as compared to the 1st interpretation}), KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 3,
wherein the blocking pattern (KLee; 512; Fig 5) includes: a first blocking pattern (KLee; tantalum layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058-59]), and a second blocking pattern (KLee; cobalt layer, for example, of a multi-layer pattern; ¶ [0058]), extending between the first blocking pattern and the polarization enhancement pattern.
KLee in view of SCLee does not disclose wherein the first blocking pattern comprises tungsten, and the second blocking pattern comprises molybdenum.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a similar magnetic memory device comprising a blocking pattern (442; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) including a first blocking pattern (442LP,442MP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]) and a second blocking pattern (442UP; Fig 2; ¶ [0072-79]), wherein the first blocking pattern comprises tungsten (¶ [0074]), and the second blocking pattern comprises molybdenum (¶ [0076]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the materials of Kim for the first blocking pattern and the second blocking pattern of KLee in view of SCLee. One may have been motivated to do this as an alternative to the exemplary materials listed by KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because Kim uses the materials in the similar blocking layer and magnetic memory structure as KLee in view of SCLee, and because Kim includes the exemplary blocking pattern materials listed by KLee (cobalt {Co}, tantalum {Ta}) as alternate materials (Kim; Co {¶ [0078]); Ta {¶ [0076]}).
Regarding claim 8, KLee in view of SCLee, and further in view of Kim, discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 4, wherein the first blocking pattern (Kim; 442LP,442MP; Fig 2) further comprises a ferromagnetic element and boron (Kim; 442MP may include, for example, Fe and B; ¶ [0078]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee; Kangho et al. (US 2017/0186942; hereinafter KLee) in view of Lee; Sung Chul et al. (US 2021/0104661; hereinafter SCLee), and further in view of Min; Tai et al. (US 2019/0027680 A1; hereinafter Min).
Regarding claim 12, KLee in view of SCLee discloses the magnetic memory device of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the sub magnetic pattern (KLee; multilayer stack of cobalt and platinum; ¶ [0055]) further comprises a second non-magnetic element; and wherein the second non-magnetic element comprises at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Zr, Hf, and Ti.
In the same field of endeavor, Min discloses a magnetic memory device comprising a pinned magnetic layer (33; Fig 3; ¶ [0051-53]), comprising Co or CoPt and at least one of Nb, Cr, Mo, Zr, Hf. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the sub magnetic pattern of claim 11 may comprise one of these. One would have been motivated to do use the sub magnetic pattern including the second non-magnetic element an alternative to the exemplary materials listed by KLee and/or as part of routine optimization and/or accommodation for the specific requirements including at least performance, reliability, and cost of a particular application. One would have had a reasonable expectation of success because Min has disclosed their use in the similar layer and structure along with the similar Co and Pt elements of KLee and SCLee, and because each of these materials are well-known in the art for use in magnetic memory structures.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Apalkov; Dmytro et al. (US 2017/0345868);
Sugiyama; Hideyuki et al. (US 2019/0051820);
Kim; Young-hyun et al. (US 2014/0327095);
Guo; Yimin et al. (US 2023/0012255)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRAD KNUDSON whose telephone number is (703)756-4582. The examiner can normally be reached Telework 9:30 -18:30 ET; M-F.
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, Eliseo Ramos Feliciano can be reached at 571-272-7925. 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.
/B.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/RATISHA MEHTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817