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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Claims 11-20 in the reply filed on 7/15/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 11-13, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. “Ferromagnetic CoPt3 Nanowires: Structural Evolution from fcc to Ordered L12.” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 131, no. 43, 6 Oct. 2009, pp. 15794–15801 (“Chen et al.”).
With regards to Claim 11, Chen et al. teaches an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure comprising a substrate and an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire formed on or above the substrate, having a width of 100 nm or less and a length of at least twice the width, and made of an ordered alloy of an iron group element and a platinum group element (Abstract and Morphological Analysis of CoPt Nanowires section on Page 15796).
With regards to Claim 12, Chen et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire has a length of 800 nm or more (Morphological Analysis of CoPt Nanowires section on Page 15796).
With regards to Claim 13, Chen et al. teaches the substrate is an alumina substrate (Abstract and Morphological Analysis of Template section on Page 15796).
With regards to Claim 15, Chen et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is a L12-ordered alloy (Abstract).
With regards to Claim 18, Chen et al. teaches the iron group element is Co and the platinum group element is Pt (Abstract).
With regards to Claims 19 and 20, the preamble language of the limitation(s) "A TMR head" and "a magnetoresistive random access memory" has been considered to be a recitation of intended use because the body of each of Claims 19 and 20 do not depend on the preamble for completeness. Intended use limitations are not further limiting in so far as the structure of the product is concerned. Note that "in apparatus, article, and composition claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art." In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458,459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP § 2111.02." In the instant case, the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure of Chen et al. is deemed capable of using it as a TMR head and "a magnetoresistive random access memory” (Please also see Introduction section on Page 15794 disclosing many known applications).
Claims 11, 13, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pub. No. 20090263595 (“Ellrich et al.”).
With regards to Claim 11, Ellrich et al. teaches an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure comprising a substrate and an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire formed on or above the substrate, having a width of 100 nm or less and a length of at least twice the width, and made of an ordered alloy of an iron group element and a platinum group element (Abstract [0015], [0016], [0020], [0024], and [0025]).
With regards to Claim 13, Ellrich et al. teaches the substrate is a magnesium oxide substrate, an alumina substrate, or a strontium titanate substrate ([0015] and [0016]).
With regards to Claim 14, Ellrich et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is a L10-ordered alloy [0028].
With regards to Claim 18, Ellrich et al. teaches the iron group element is Co, Fe, or Ni and the platinum group element is Pt or Pd [0020].
With regards to Claims 19 and 20, the preamble language of the limitation(s) "A TMR head" and "a magnetoresistive random access memory" has been considered to be a recitation of intended use because the body of each of Claims 19 and 20 do not depend on the preamble for completeness. Intended use limitations are not further limiting in so far as the structure of the product is concerned. Note that "in apparatus, article, and composition claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art." In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458,459 (CCPA 1963). See MPEP § 2111.02." In the instant case, the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure of Ellrich et al. is deemed capable of using it as a TMR head and "a magnetoresistive random access memory” (Please also see [0002] and [0003] disclosing many known applications).
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 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. as applied to Claim 11 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 20060078457 (“Ziani et al.”).
With regards to Claim 14, Chen et al. teaches its ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is an L12-ordered alloy of Co and Pt (Abstract).
Chen et al. does not teach the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is an L10-ordered alloy.
However, Ziani et al. teaches ferromagnetic ordered L10 or L12 alloys of Co and Pt (Abstract, Table 1, [0002]-[0004], and [0012]-[0013]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Chen et al.’s ordered-alloy ferromagnetic material be an L10-ordered alloy of Co and Pt in order to provide a ferromagnetic material with specific magnetic properties for use in many different magnetic applications ([0002]-[0004]).
With regards to Claim 17, Chen et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure as set forth above.
Chen et al. does not teach the nanowire contains a plurality of grains connected together, each of the plurality of grains made of a single crystal including twinned crystals.
However, Ziani et al. teaches ordered-alloy ferromagnetic structure comprising a plurality of grains connected together, each of the plurality of grains made of a single crystal including twinned crystals (Abstract, Fig. 4, [0002]-[0004], [0012]-[0013], and [0024]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the claimed structure in order to appropriately provide strain/distortion to transform into an L10 or L12 type crystalline structures (Abstract and [0024]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. as applied to Claim 11 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 20090263595 (“Ellrich et al.”).
Chen et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure as set forth above.
Chen et al. does not teach a contact width of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire with the substrate is smaller than a maximum width of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire in a cross-section perpendicular to a direction in which the order-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire extends.
However, Ellrich et al. teaches an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure formed on or above a substrate, having a width of 100 nm or less and a length of at least twice the width, and made of an ordered alloy of an iron group element and a platinum group element. Ellrich et al. further teaches a contact width (e.g. 20 nm) of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire with the substrate is smaller than a maximum width (e.g. 100 nm) of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire in a cross-section perpendicular to a direction in which the ordered alloy ferromagnetic nanowire extends (Abstract, [0015], [0016], [0020], [0024], and [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the claimed structure in Chen et al.’s ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire in order to produce a self-ordered array of nanowires that are spaced apart ([0028] and [0032]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20090263595 (“Ellrich et al.”) as applied to Claim 11 above, and further in view of Chen et al. “Ferromagnetic CoPt3 Nanowires: Structural Evolution from fcc to Ordered L12.” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 131, no. 43, 6 Oct. 2009, pp. 15794–15801 (“Chen et al.”).
Ellrich et al. does not teach its ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire has a length of 800 nm or more.
However, Chen et al. teaches an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure comprising a substrate and an ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire formed on or above the substrate, having a width of ~50 nm and a length of ~10 μm, and made of an ordered alloy of an iron group element and a platinum group element (Abstract and Morphological Analysis of CoPt Nanowires section on Page 15796). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Ellrich et al.’s nanowires have a length as claimed in order to obtain appropriate sized nanowires to be used in many different applications (Introduction on Page 15794).
Claim 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20090263595 (“Ellrich et al.”) as applied to Claim 11 above, and further in view of US Pub. No. 20060078457 (“Ziani et al.”).
With regards to Claim 15, Ellrich et al. teaches its ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is an L10-ordered alloy [0028].
Ellrich et al. does not teach the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire is an L12-ordered alloy.
However, Ziani et al. teaches ferromagnetic ordered L10 or L12 alloys (Abstract, Table 1, [0002]-[0004], and [0012]-[0013]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Ellrich et al.’s ordered-alloy ferromagnetic material be an L12-ordered alloy in order to provide a ferromagnetic material with desirable magnetic properties for use in many different magnetic applications ([0002]-[0004]).
With regards to Claim 17, Ellrich et al. teaches the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire structure as set forth above.
Ellrich et al. does not teach the nanowire contains a plurality of grains connected together, each of the plurality of grains made of a single crystal including twinned crystals.
However, Ziani et al. teaches ordered-alloy ferromagnetic structure comprising a plurality of grains connected together, each of the plurality of grains made of a single crystal including twinned crystals (Abstract, Fig. 4, [0002]-[0004], [0012]-[0013], and [0024]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the claimed structure in order to appropriately provide strain/distortion to transform into an L10 or L12 type crystalline structures (Abstract and [0024]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20090263595 (“Ellrich et al.”) as applied to Claim 11 above.
Ellrich et al. teaches a contact width (e.g. 20 nm) of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire with the substrate is smaller than a maximum width (e.g. 10 nm to 100 nm, for example 20 nm to 50 nm) of the ordered-alloy ferromagnetic nanowire in a cross-section perpendicular to a direction in which the ordered alloy ferromagnetic nanowire extends (Abstract, [0015], [0016], [0020], [0024], and [0032]). It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness, In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA CHAU whose telephone number is (571)270-5496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11 AM-730 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291. 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.
/LC/
Lisa Chau
Art Unit 1785
/Holly Rickman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights