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 Objections
Claims 8 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 8, line 1, add --electrode-- after “the bottom.”
In claim 19, line 3, substitute “the remaining” with --a-- before “portion of the bottom electrode.”
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.
Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. (US Pub. 2015/0035096; hereinafter “Han”).
Regarding Claim 1, Han discloses a semiconductor device comprising: a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) stack 50 (page 7, paragraph 68); and a bottom electrode 40 (page 4, paragraph 50) below the MTJ stack 50 (see fig. 2B), wherein a portion 40a (vertical portion) of a bottom electrode 40 is vertically aligned with a portion of the MTJ stack 50 (see fig. 2B) and a remaining portion 40b (horizontal portion) of the bottom electrode 40 extends horizontally beyond the MTJ stack 50 (see figs. 2A and 2B).
Regarding Claim 6, Han discloses wherein the MTJ stack 50 comprises a reference layer 52 (fixed layer), a tunneling barrier 54 and a free layer 56 (page 7, paragraph 68).
Regarding Claim 7, Han discloses wherein a remaining portion (edge region) of the MTJ stack 50 is vertically aligned with a lower metal wire (SL) (page 4, paragraph 49) (see figs. 2A and 2B), wherein an inter-layer dielectric (32, 42) (page 4, paragraph 47; page 7, paragraph 67) is sandwiched between the remaining portion (edge portion) of the MTJ stack 50 and the lower metal wire (SL) (see fig. 2B).
Regarding Claim 8, Han discloses wherein the bottom electrode 40 comprises a metal nitride (page 7, paragraph 66).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frougier et al. (US Pub. 2021/0280776; hereinafter “Frougier”).
Regarding Claim 16, Frougier discloses a method comprising: forming a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) stack (41-44) (page 3, paragraph 34) on a sacrificial layer 11 (page 3, paragraph 30) (see fig. 7), a portion (side portion) of a sacrificial layer 11 is vertically aligned with a portion of the MTJ stack (41-44) (see fig. 7) and a remaining portion (middle portion) of the sacrificial layer 11 extends horizontally beyond the MTJ stack (41-44) (see fig. 7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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:
Claim 2 recites the bottom electrode comprises an interior void.
Claim 17 recites forming a bottom electrode below the MTJ stack after forming the MTJ stack, wherein the bottom electrode is hollow.
These features in combination with the other elements of the base claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claims 3-5 and 18-20 variously depend from claim 2 or 17, so they are objected for the same reason.
Claims 9-15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 9 recites the bottom electrode comprises an interior void.
These features in combination with the other elements of the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claims 10-15 depend from claim 9, so they are allowed for the same reason.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5977. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5:30 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, DAVIENNE MONBLEAU can be reached at (571)272-1945. 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.
/CHEUNG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 March 19, 2026