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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim 4 is withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 4 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected Species I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/24/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (Claims 5 and 10-20) in the reply filed on 07/24/2026 is acknowledged. Examiner acknowledges that the applicant has indicated claims 1-3 and 6-9 as generic to the species disclosed and respectfully traverses. The applicant has not indicated that restriction based on the indicated species is improper, but has indicated that claims 1-3 and 6-9 are generic for not requiring that the “first conductive layer” be formed from a single conductive layer. However, the examiner argues that independent claim 1 reads on “a first conductive layer” including “a first portion (LS1/US1),” “a second portion (LS2/US2),” and “a third portion (LS3)” which, if interpreted using the embodiment of Species II, must consist at least two distinct layers (34 and 35). This would not fall under the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a first conductive layer” to comprise at least two distinct layers and materials, as shown in Fig. 12 and as disclosed in the instant application. The disclosure shows that the first portion is formed of a separate and distinct layer (35) from the second layer (34) which forms the third portion, and that the second portion consists of at least two separate and distinct layers. Claims 1-3 and 6-9 are, therefore, not generic to the restricted species, and will be treated as withdrawn as not directed toward the elected Species II. Claim 5 is subsequently withdrawn as dependent upon a non-elected embodiment.
The examined claims will be claims 10-20.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/04/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) to JP 2023-047106 for 03/23/2023. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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: MAGNETIC MEMORY DEVICE HAVING HEAVY METAL WIRING SPIN ORBIT TORQUE LAYERS
Claim Objections
Claims 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 19 and 20 include reference to “a/the substrate” that is not shown in the drawings. The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the substrate of claims 19 and 20 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the substrate of claims 19 and 20 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. Additionally, the third conductive layer of claims 12 and 13 must be shown of the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12, 13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12, the claim reads “a third conductive layer provided in contact with the second magnetoresistive effect element and apart from the first conductive layer, and the second conductive layer is in contact with each of the first conductive layer and the third conductive layer.” It is unclear, from the claim language, the drawings, and the specification of the instant application, what the “third conductive layer” refers to. It is unclear if the third conductive layer is a portion of the previously defined second conductive layer, or is a distinct layer that is not depicted in the figures. For the purposes of examination, it will be interpreted that the third conductive layer is a portion of the second conductive layer at the interface between the second conductive layer and second magnetoresistive element, as evidenced by at least Fig. 23 of the disclosure.
Regarding claim 20, the claim reads “wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are provided between the substrate and the stacked film.” Claim 20 depends from claim 19, which reads “wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are located on the opposite side of the stacked film as the substrate.” It is unclear how the first and second magnetoresistive effect elements can be located between the substrate and the stacked film when they are additionally on an opposite side of the stacked film as the substrate. For the purposes of examination, claim 20 will be read to include the limitation of claim 19 of “a substrate,” but will otherwise be read to be dependent on claim 1, as supported by at least Fig. 15 of the disclosure.
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 10, 11, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shirotori et al. (US PGPub 2017/0179379). This rejection will be made using an embodiment of Shirotori, herein known as Shirotori_A. Examiner notes that claim 11 and claims 12-13 are directed toward different embodiments of an invention, necessitating the format of this rejection.
Regarding claim 10, Shirotori_A teaches (Fig. 8) a magnetic memory device comprising: a stacked film (10, [0087]); and a first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1, [0086]) and a second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2, [0086]) that are provided apart from each other and that are each in contact with the stacked film ([0088]), wherein the stacked film includes a first conductive layer (14, [0086]) in contact with the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1), and a second conductive layer (12, [0086]) that is provided between the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element, that is on the opposite side (below) of the first conductive layer as the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element, and that is in contact with the first conductive layer (14), and a resistance of the second conductive layer is lower than a resistance of the first conductive layer ([0027]).
Regarding claim 11, Shirotori_A teaches (Fig. 8) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first conductive layer (14, [0086]) is further in contact with the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2, [0086]).
Regarding claim 14, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 below) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1, [0086]) and the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2, [0086]) each extends in a first direction (vertical direction), and the first conductive layer (14, [0086]) includes a portion (Overlap) that overlaps with both the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second conductive layer when viewed in the first direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
288
325
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first conductive layer (14, [0039]) contains at least tantalum (Ta) ([0039]).
Regarding claim 16, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first conductive layer (14, [0039]) is formed from a single conductive layer ([0093]).
Regarding claim 17, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the second conductive layer (12, [0041]) contains at least tungsten (W) ([0041]).
Regarding claim 18, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1) includes a first ferromagnetic layer (22, [0024]) in contact with the first conductive layer (14, [0039]), a second ferromagnetic layer (26, [0024]) located on the opposite side of the first ferromagnetic layer as the first conductive layer, and a nonmagnetic layer (24, [0024]) located between the first ferromagnetic layer and the second ferromagnetic layer ([0024]).
Regarding claim 19, Shirotori_A teaches (annotated Fig. 8 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, further comprising: a substrate (not shown, [0110]) on which the stacked film (10, [0023]), the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1), and the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2) are provided, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are located on the opposite side of the stacked film as the substrate (stacked film is between the magnetoresistive effect elements and the substrate, see annotated Fig. 8 above).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirotori_A as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US PGPub 2020/0176511; herein known as Park).
Regarding claim 20, Shirotori_A teaches the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, further comprising: a substrate (not shown, [0110]) on which the stacked film (10, [0023]), the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1), and the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2) are provided, but does not explicitly teach wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are provided between the substrate and the stacked film.
In analogous art, Park teaches (Fig. 12) wherein the magnetoresistive effect element (67, [0036]) is provided between the substrate (51, [0036]) and the stacked film (71, 72, [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shirotori_A and Park to include wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive element are provided between the substrate and the stacked film for top-down manufacture and ease of wafer handling.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Claims 10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirotori et al. (US PGPub 2017/0179379). This rejection will be made using an embodiment of Shirotori, herein known as Shirotori_B. Examiner notes that claim 11 and claims 12-13 are directed toward different embodiments of an invention, necessitating the format of this rejection.
Regarding claim 10, Shirotori_B teaches (Fig. 10) a magnetic memory device comprising: a stacked film (10E, [0100]); and a first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1, [0100]) wherein the stacked film includes a first conductive layer (14c, [0086]) in contact with the first magnetoresistive effect element (20, [0100]), and a second conductive layer (12, [0086]), that is on the opposite side (below) of the first conductive layer as the first magnetoresistive effect element, and that is in contact with the first conductive layer (14c), and a resistance of the second conductive layer is lower than a resistance of the first conductive layer ([0027]).
Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, does not explicitly teach a second magnetoresistive effect element. Shirotori_B teaches an embodiment, Fig. 8 embodiment, containing a plurality of magnetoresistive elements ([0086]). The instant application does not teach an unexpected result of inclusion of a second magnetoresistive element, only teaching wherein a magnetic memory device includes a magnetoresistive effect element as a storage element. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of the embodiment of Fig. 10 of Shirotori_B with the embodiment of Fig. 8 of Shirotori_B to include a plurality of magnetoresistive elements in order to provide suitable storage for a memory device having columns and rows for read and write capability.
Examiner has included a depiction of the above embodiment for visual clarity, below.
PNG
media_image2.png
299
391
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Shirotori_B teaches (annotated Fig. 10, above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the stacked film further includes a third conductive layer (Fig. 8 embodiment, C3) provided in contact with the second magnetoresistive effect element (Fig. 8 embodiment, MTJ2) and apart from the first conductive layer (Fig. 10 embodiment, C1) and the second conductive layer (Fig. 10 embodiment, 12, [0086]) is in contact with each of the first conductive layer and the third conductive layer.
Regarding claim 13, Shirotori_B teaches (annotated Fig. 10, above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 12, wherein the first conductive layer (Fig. 10 embodiment, C1) and the third conductive layer (Fig. 8 embodiment, C3) are electrically connected to each other via the second conductive layer (Fig. 10 embodiment, 12). C1, C3, and the second conductive layer are all conductive materials, therefore C1 and C3 are necessarily electrically connected by the second conductive layer.
Regarding claim 14, Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, teaches (annotated Fig. 10 below) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1, [0086]) and the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1, [0086]) each extends in a first direction (vertical direction), and the first conductive layer (C1, [0086]) includes a portion (Overlap) that overlaps with both the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1) and the second conductive layer (12) when viewed in the first direction.
PNG
media_image3.png
299
391
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, teaches (annotated Fig. 10 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first conductive layer (C1, [0039]) contains at least tantalum (Ta) ([0039]).
Regarding claim 16, Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, teaches (annotated Fig. 10 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first conductive layer (C1, [0039]) is formed from a single conductive layer ([0093]).
Regarding claim 17, Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, teaches (annotated Fig. 10 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the second conductive layer (12, [0086]) contains at least tungsten (W) ([0041]).
Regarding claim 18, Shirotori_B, Fig. 10 embodiment, teaches (annotated Fig. 10 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1) includes a first ferromagnetic layer (22, [0024]) in contact with the first conductive layer (C1, [0039]), a second ferromagnetic layer (26, [0024]) located on the opposite side of the first ferromagnetic layer as the first conductive layer, and a nonmagnetic layer (24, [0024]) located between the first ferromagnetic layer and the second ferromagnetic layer ([0024]).
Regarding claim 19, Shirotori_B teaches (annotated Fig. 10 above) the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, further comprising: a substrate (not shown, [0110]) on which the stacked film (Fig. 10 embodiment, 10, [0023]), the first magnetoresistive effect element (Fig. 10 embodiment, MTJ1), and the second magnetoresistive effect element (Fig. 8 embodiment, MTJ2) are provided, wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are located on the opposite side of the stacked film as the substrate (stacked film is between the magnetoresistive effect elements and the substrate, see annotated Fig. 10 above).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shirotori_B as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Park.
Regarding claim 20, Shirotori_B teaches the magnetic memory device according to claim 10, further comprising: a substrate (not shown, [0110]) on which the stacked film (10, [0023]), the first magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ1), and the second magnetoresistive effect element (MTJ2) are provided, but does not explicitly teach wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive effect element are provided between the substrate and the stacked film.
In analogous art, Park teaches (Fig. 12) wherein the magnetoresistive effect element (67, [0036]) is provided between the substrate (51, [0036]) and the stacked film (71, 72, [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Shirotori_B and Park to include wherein the first magnetoresistive effect element and the second magnetoresistive element are provided between the substrate and the stacked film for top-down manufacture and ease of wafer handling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY N FARMER whose telephone number is (703)756-1472. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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.
/EMILY FARMER/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights