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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on June 27, 2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
“BATC” should read “BARC” ([0019], line 8);
“75” should read “74” ([0021], line 6).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a top surface of the second cap layer” should read “the top surface of the second cap layer” (line 2). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the second oxide layer" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested Applicant amend “the second oxide layer” to “a second oxide layer”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: a second oxide layer. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claims 3-8 depend from claim 2 and therefore inherit the indefiniteness of claim 2.
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, 9, 10, 12, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2023/0027792 A1 (hereinafter “Chiu”).
Regarding claim 1, Chiu discloses a method for fabricating a magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) device ([0060]), comprising:
forming a spin orbit torque (SOT) layer (104; Fig. 20A; [0064]) on a substrate (100; [0023]);
forming a magnetic tunneling junction (MTJ) (MTJ2 (FL1, FL2, 113); Fig. 22; [0028]) on the SOT layer;
forming a first cap layer (107; Fig. 23; [0074]) adjacent to the MTJ;
forming a first oxide layer (108; Fig. 23; [0074]) on the first cap layer; and
forming a second cap layer (109; Fig. 26; [0077]) on sidewalls of the first oxide layer, wherein a top surface of the second cap layer is higher than a top surface of the MTJ.
Regarding claim 9, Chiu discloses in Fig. 1 and related text a magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) device (10; [0023]), comprising:
a spin orbit torque (SOT) layer (104; [0026]) on a substrate (100; [0023]);
a magnetic tunneling junction (MTJ) (MTJ2 (FL1, FL2, 113); [0028]) on the SOT layer;
a first cap layer (107; [0074]) adjacent to the MTJ;
a first oxide layer (108; [0074]) on the first cap layer; and
a second cap layer (109; [0077]) on sidewalls of the first oxide layer, wherein a top surface of the second cap layer is higher than a top surface of the MTJ.
Regarding claim 10, Chiu discloses an inter-metal dielectric (IMD) layer (100A; Fig. 1; [0024]) on the substrate;
a first metal interconnection (100B (right); Fig. 1; [0024]) and a second metal interconnection (100B (left); Fig. 1; [0024]) in the IMD layer;
the SOT layer on the first metal interconnection and the second metal interconnection;
a top electrode (TE) (124; Fig. 1; [0027]) on the MTJ;
the first cap layer on the MTJ and the SOT layer;
the first oxide layer on a top surface of the first cap layer;
the second cap layer adjacent to the first cap layer; and
a second oxide layer (101; Fig. 1; [0025]) on the first oxide layer and the second cap layer.
Regarding claim 12, Chiu discloses the top surface of the second cap layer is higher than a top surface of the TE (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Chiu discloses the first oxide layer and the second oxide layer comprise different dielectric constant (the first oxide layer may be made of silicon oxide which has a dielectric constant of 3.9, and the second oxide layer may be made of carbon-doped silicon oxide which has a dielectric constant of 2.5-3.1).
Regarding claim 16, Chiu discloses a dielectric constant of the second oxide layer (2.5-3.1 for carbon-doped silicon oxide) is less than a dielectric constant of the first oxide layer (3.9 for silicon oxide).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8 would be allowable if claim 2 were to be amended to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or suggest at least the limitations “performing a first etching process to remove the first oxide layer on the logic region” and “performing a second etching process to remove the second cap layer on the logic region” as recited in claim 2.
Claims 11, 13 and 14 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 prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or suggest at least the limitations “a top surface of the TE comprises a curve” as recited in claim 11, and “a top surface of the first oxide layer comprises a first curve and a top surface of the second cap layer comprises a second curve” as recited in claim 13. Claim 14 depends from claim 13 and therefore would be allowable at least by virtue of its dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M ALBRECHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7813. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM (CT).
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571) 272-1670. 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.
/PETER M ALBRECHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights