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 I, claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 08/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 7 and 15 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 claims 7 and 15, the metes and bounds of the claimed invention are vague and ill-defined as a result of uncertainty in the different boundaries “a projection layer in contact with the layer of phase change material.”
The claim is indefinite because of the following: The term “projection” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For purposes of examination, the examiner will use the projection layer as an insulation or insulating layer in contact with the layer of phase change material.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pinnow et al. US 2005/0212037.
PNG
media_image1.png
498
686
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pinnow et al. US 2005/0212037
Regarding claim 1, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose a non-volatile memory unit cell 10, comprising:
a top electrode 18 in contact with a bit line M1;
a bottom electrode P [0070] in contact with a select line T [0070];
a thin film electrode 14 [0070] in contact with the bottom electrode P;
a dielectric 40 [0067] in contact with the top electrode 18 and the thin film electrode 14; and
a layer of phase change material 16 [0065]-[0071] comprising a plurality of memristive channels 11, wherein the layer of phase change material is in contact with the dielectric 40, and wherein the plurality of memristive channels 11 are in contact with:
the top electrode 18,
the thin film electrode 14, and
the dielectric 40.
Regarding claim 2, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, wherein the plurality of memristive channels 11 are in edge contact with the thin film electrode 14.
Regarding claim 3, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of memristive channels 11 comprises a portion of the layer of phase change material 16.
Regarding claim 6, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, wherein the top electrode 18 comprises an edge electrode [0069], (e.g. top electrode 18 is in direct electrical contact via the upper contact surfaces 16a, i.e. edges of 16).
Regarding claim 7, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, further comprising a projection layer 30 in contact with the layer of phase change material 16.
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(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinnow et al. US 2005/0212037.
Regarding claim 8, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the non-volatile memory unit cell is configured to enable electric current to flow horizontally between the thin film electrode and the memristive channel.
However, the claim limitation, wherein the non-volatile memory unit cell is configured to enable electric current to flow horizontally between the thin film electrode and the memristive channel, is drawn to a method of use or a device under test. The intended use and other types of functional language 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 re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). In this case the structure is capable of performing this use.
Regarding claim 9, Pinnow et al. in Fig. 9 and [0061]-[0071] disclose the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the non-volatile memory unit cell is configured to enable electric current to flow vertically from the bottom electrode to the top electrode, and through the thin film electrode and the memristive channel.
However, the claim limitation, wherein the non-volatile memory unit cell is configured to enable electric current to flow vertically from the bottom electrode to the top electrode, and through the thin film electrode and the memristive channel, is drawn to a method of use or a device under test. The intended use and other types of functional language 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 re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963). In this case the structure is capable of performing this use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 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:
Regarding claim 4, the prior art neither anticipates nor renders obvious, the non-volatile memory unit cell 10 of claim 1, further comprising an access device, wherein the select line is in contact with the access device. Claim 5 directly depends on claim 4, and is therefore allowable.
Claims 10-17 are allowed over the prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 10, the prior art neither anticipates nor renders obvious, a non-volatile memory unit cell, comprising: a first top electrode in contact with a first bit line; a second top electrode in contact with a second bit line, wherein a differential pair comprises the first bit line and the second bit line; a first diode in contact with the first top electrode; a second diode in contact with the second top electrode; a bottom electrode in contact with a select line; a thin film electrode in contact with the bottom electrode; a dielectric in contact with the first top electrode, the second top electrode, the first diode, the second diode, and the thin film electrode; a layer of phase change material comprising a first memristive channel and a second memristive channel, wherein the layer of phase change material is in contact with the dielectric, and wherein the first memristive channel is in contact with: the thin film electrode, the first diode, and the dielectric; and wherein the second memristive channel is in contact with: the thin film electrode, the second diode, and the dielectric. Claims 11-17 directly depend from claim 10 and are therefore allowed.
Although various prior art references disclose several individual limitations in the claims, these references, and their combinations, neither anticipate nor render obvious the above identified limitation(s), as structured and interrelated in the context of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONYA D MCCALL-SHEPARD whose telephone number is (571)272-9801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30 AM-5:00 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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached at (571)272-1864. 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.
/Sonya McCall-Shepard/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights