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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed on January 22, 2024.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: RRAM Structure With Titanium Oxide Electrode and Fabricating Method of the Same
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) 1, 5, 11-12, 16, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi (US 2012/0217464). Claim 1, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) a resistive random access memory (RRAM) structure comprising: an RRAM (11, variable resistance device, Para [0032]), wherein the RRAM comprises a bottom electrode (111/112, lower electrode/interface layer of electrode, Para [0041]), a variable resistive layer (113, resistance change layer, Para [0041]) and a top electrode (114, upper electrode, Para [0041]) stacked from bottom to top (111-114 are stacked bottom to top), wherein the bottom electrode (111/112) is composed of titanium oxide (TiOx) (112 of 111/112 is composed of TiOx, Para [0040]), and x has an increased gradient variation which is increased toward the top electrode (the amount of oxide increases from the lower 111 towards top electrode 114 through 112, Para [0041]). Claim 5, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) the RRAM structure of claim 1, wherein a composition of the bottom electrode (111/112) along a direction (vertical direction) toward the top electrode is nonhomogeneous (111/112 goes from TiN to TiOx along the vertical direction, Para [0040]). Claim 11, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) the RRAM structure of claim 1, wherein 0<x≤2 (112 of 111/112 can be TiOx where x=1, Para [0043]). Claim 12, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) a fabricating method of a resistive random access memory (RRAM) structure, comprising: forming an RRAM (11, variable resistance device, Para [0032]), wherein the RRAM comprises a bottom electrode (111/112, lower electrode/interface layer of electrode, Para [0041]), a variable resistive layer (113, resistance change layer, Para [0041]) and a top electrode (114, upper electrode, Para [0041]) stacked from bottom to top (111-114 are stacked bottom to top), wherein the bottom electrode (111/112) is composed of titanium oxide (TiOx) (112 of 111/112 is composed of TiOx, Para [0040]), and x has an increased gradient variation which is increased toward the top electrode (the amount of oxide increases from the lower 111 towards top electrode 114 through 112, Para [0041]).
Claim 16, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) the fabricating method of the RRAM structure of claim 12, wherein a composition of the bottom electrode (111/112) along a direction (vertical direction) toward the top electrode is nonhomogeneous (111/112 goes from TiN to TiOx along the vertical direction, Para [0040]). Claim 22, Kobayashi discloses (Fig. 11) the fabricating method of the RRAM structure of claim 12, wherein 0<x≤2 (112 of 111/112 can be TiOx where x=1, Para [0043]).
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.
Claim(s) 10 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (US 2012/0217464) as applied to claim 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Fujii (US 2009/0224224).
Claim 10, Kobayashi discloses the RRAM structure of claim 1. Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the variable resistive layer comprises tantalum oxide or hafnium oxide. However, Fujii discloses (Fig. 1) wherein a variable resistive layer 104 may comprise tantalum oxide (Para [0131]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Fujii, including the specific material of the
variable resistive layer to the teachings of Kobayashi.
The motivation to do so is that the combination yields the predictable results of allowing for the
selection of a known material based on its suitability for the intended use as a variable resistive layer as tantalum oxide has high affinity to the semiconductor process and can easily be incorporated into the process (Fujii, Para [0204]). Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See also MPEP 2144.07.
Claim 21, Kobayashi discloses the fabricating method of the RRAM structure of claim 12. Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the variable resistive layer comprises tantalum oxide or hafnium oxide. However, Fujii discloses (Fig. 1) wherein a variable resistive layer 104 may comprise tantalum oxide (Para [0131]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Fujii, including the specific material of the
variable resistive layer to the teachings of Kobayashi.
The motivation to do so is that the combination yields the predictable results of allowing for the
selection of a known material based on its suitability for the intended use as a variable resistive layer as tantalum oxide has high affinity to the semiconductor process and can easily be incorporated into the process (Fujii, Para [0204]). Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See also MPEP 2144.07.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 6-9, 13-15, and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art of record, Kobayashi (US 2012/0217464), Fujii (US 2009/0224224), fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination) the following limitations in combination with the rest of the claim:
Regarding Claim 2, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased in a unit that is not an integer.
Regarding Claim 3, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased in a continuous manner.
Regarding Claim 4, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased linearly or curvedly.
Regarding Claim 6 (from which claims 7-9 depend), a titanium plug embedded in the dielectric layer, wherein the titanium plug contacts the bottom electrode.
Regarding Claim 13, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased in a unit that is not an integer.
Regarding Claim 14, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased in a continuous manner.
Regarding Claim 15, wherein the increased gradient variation is increased linearly or curvedly.
Regarding Claim 17 (from which claims 18-20 depend), a titanium plug embedded in the dielectric layer, wherein the titanium plug contacts the bottom electrode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO G RAMALLO whose telephone number is (571)272-9227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 6pm.
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, William Partridge can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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.
/G.G.R/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights