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 . 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 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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee
set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since
this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed
on 13 January 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 9 is 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.
In line 1 of claim 9, “The method” is indefinite because it lacks clear and/or positive antecedent basis.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299).
Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) teach a device (112, see FIG. 7, for instance) comprising a main pole (32, see paragraph [0027], for instance, i.e., “magnetic pole 32 may be the major magnetic pole”) that is configured to generate a write field which is directed through a pole tip at an air bearing surface (facing medium 80), and to generate a write gap field in a down-track direction across a spin torque oscillator device (20S) in a write gap (between 31 and 32), and between a main pole trailing side and a trailing shield (31, see paragraph [0027], for instance, i.e., “magnetic pole 31 may be the trailing shield”); the trailing shield (31) with a side at the air bearing surface (as shown in FIG. 7, for instance), and a bottom surface facing the main pole (as shown in FIG. 7, for instance); and the spin torque oscillator device (20S) comprising a first spin polarization preserving layer (41) disposed adjacent to a positive spin polarization layer (21, see paragraph [0063], for instance) and a flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) that has a negative spin polarization (see paragraph [0040], for instance), wherein the positive spin polarization layer (21) is adjacent to the main pole (32); a second spin polarization preserving layer (42) disposed adjacent to the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) and a first negative spin injection layer (23, see paragraph [0063], for instance); and a third spin polarization preserving layer (43) disposed adjacent to the first negative spin injection layer (23) and a second negative spin injection layer (24, see paragraph [0081], for instance), wherein the first negative spin injection layer (23) is in contact with both the second spin polarization preserving layer (42) and third spin polarization preserving layer (43), and wherein the second negative spin injection layer (24) is disposed adjacent to a non-spin polarization preserving layer (44) contacting the trailing shield (31, as shown in FIG. 7, for instance), wherein a magnetization (22M, see FIGS. 5A and 5C, for instance) of the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) is configured to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the write gap field in response to a current (je1) of sufficient current density being applied from the trailing shield (31) to the main pole (32) across the spin torque oscillator device (20S, as shown in FIG. 5C relative to FIG. 5A, for instance), and wherein the first negative spin injection layer (23) and second negative spin injection layer (24) are configured to exert an additive spin torque on the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) to cause a magnetization (22M) of the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the write gap field (as shown in FIG. 5C relative to FIG. 5A, for instance) [as per claim 1]; wherein the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) comprises a magnetization (22M) pointing substantially parallel to the write gap field without a current bias (as shown in FIG. 5A, for instance) and formed between the first spin polarization preserving layer (41) and the second spin polarization preserving layer (42, as shown in FIG. 7, for instance) [as per claim 2]; wherein the second spin polarization preserving layer (42) comprises a non-magnetic material (see paragraph [0066], for instance, i.e., “Cu”) [as per claim 3]; wherein the non-spin polarization preserving layer (44) is an alloy or multilayer made of one or more of Cr, Ir, NiCr, Ta, W, Pt, Pd, Rh, Ti and Ru such that a net spin polarization in electrons transiting the non-spin polarization preserving layer is effectively lost (see paragraph [0085], for instance, i.e., “at least one selected from the group consisting of Ta, Ru, and Cr”) [as per claim 5]; wherein the first spin polarization preserving layer (41), the second spin polarization preserving layer (42), and the third spin polarization preserving layer (43) are one or more of Cu, Au, Ag, Ru, Al, Cr, V, or alloys thereof, and having sufficient spin diffusion length to allow spin polarization in essentially an unaltered orientation for electrons traversing through the first spin polarization preserving layer (41), the second spin polarization preserving layer (42), and the third spin polarization preserving layer (43) (see paragraphs [0065]-[0067], for instance, i.e., “Cu” with respect to the first spin polarization preserving layer and the second spin polarization preserving layer, and “at least one selected from the group consisting of… Ru, and Cr” with respect to the third spin polarization preserving layer) [as per claim 6]; wherein the positive spin polarization layer (21) has a magnetization (21M) ferromagnetically coupled to the trailing shield (as shown in FIG. 7, for instance, i.e., due to contact therewith), and substantially aligned in the write gap field direction with or without an application of a direct current across the spin torque oscillator device (as shown in FIGS. 5A-5C, for instance) [as per claim 8]; wherein the device is a part of a head gimbal assembly (160, see FIG. 14, for instance) with a suspension (158) that elastically supports the device, wherein the suspension (158) has a flexure (154) to which the device is joined, a load beam (155) with one end connected to the flexure (154), and a base plate (161) connected to the other end of the load beam (155) [as per claim 10]; and wherein the device is a part of a magnetic recording apparatus (150, see FIG. 13, for instance) with a magnetic recording medium (180) positioned opposite to a slider (159) on which the device is formed [as per claim 11].
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 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) in view of Applicant's Admitted (Examiner Officially Noticed) Prior Art.
Since the applicant did not traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice, the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement(s) were taken to be admitted prior art. See MPEP 2144.03.
Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) teach the spin transfer torque reversal assisted magnetic recording structure as detailed in paragraph 6, supra, wherein at least one of the first negative spin injection layer, the second negative spin injection layer, and the flux guiding layer is a negative spin polarization material with a spin polarization, and is made of an alloy that is of one or more of Fe, Co, and Ni with Cr, V, and Mn, or a multilayer thereof (see paragraph [0040], for instance, i.e. the flux guiding layer) as per claim 7; wherein each of the positive spin polarization layer, the flux guiding layer, the first negative spin injection layer, and the second negative spin injection layer have a saturation magnetization (inherently as they are made of magnetic material), and a thickness from 1 to 4 nm (see paragraph [0070], i.e., the flux guiding layer is “not less than 2 nm and not more than 7 nm,” paragraph [0072], i.e., the positive spin polarization layer is “not less than 1 nm and not more than 3 nm,” paragraph [0073], i.e., the first negative spin injection layer is “not less than 1 nm and not more than 5 nm,” and paragraph [0081], i.e., the second negative spin injection layer is “not less than 2 nm and not more than 5 nm,” each include values within the claimed range) as per claim 9.
Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299), however, remain silent as to the spin polarization being “from -0.4 to 0” as per claim 7, and the saturation magnetization being “from 6 kiloGauss (kG) to 15 kG” as per claim 9.
Applicant's Admitted (Examiner Officially Noticed) Prior Art teaches that it is notoriously old and well known in the spin transfer torque reversal assisted magnetic recording structure art to modify the parameters of spin transfer torque reversal assisted magnetic recording structure components during the course of routine optimization/ experimentation. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have had the spin polarization in Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) be from -0.4 to 0, and the saturation magnetization in Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) be from 6 kiloGauss (kG) to 15 kG. The rationale is as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have had the spin polarization in Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) be from -0.4 to 0, and the saturation magnetization in Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) be from 6 kiloGauss (kG) to 15 kG since such ranges, absent any criticality (i.e., unobvious and/or unexpected result(s)), are generally achievable through routine optimization/experimentation, and since discovering the optimum or workable ranges, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Moreover, in the absence of any criticality (i.e., unobvious and/or unexpected result(s)), the parameter set forth above would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 13 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the applicant “respectfully submits that the present claims as amended obviate the present rejection.”
This argument, however, is not found to be persuasive as claim 9 has not been amended to obviate the rejection.
With respect to the prior art rejection(s), the applicant argues that Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) “fails to teach or suggest a magnetization of the nFGL is configured to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the WG field in response to a current of sufficient current density (J) being applied from the TS to the MP across the STO device, and wherein the nSIL1 and nSIL2 are configured to exert an additive spin torque on the nFGL to cause a magnetization of the nFGL to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the WG field, as recited in claim 1 as amended.”
This argument, however, is not found to be persuasive as Iwasaki et al. (US 2022/0068299) do teach a magnetization (22M, see FIGS. 5A and 5C, for instance) of the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) is configured to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the write gap field in response to a current (je1) of sufficient current density being applied from the trailing shield (31) to the main pole (32) across the spin torque oscillator device (20S, as shown in FIG. 5C relative to FIG. 5A, for instance), and wherein the first negative spin injection layer (23) and second negative spin injection layer (24) are configured to exert an additive spin torque on the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) to cause a magnetization (22M) of the flux guiding layer (includes 22b, for instance) to flip to a direction substantially antiparallel to the write gap field (as shown in FIG. 5C relative to FIG. 5A, for instance).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig A. Renner whose telephone number is (571) 272-7580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 7:30 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, Steven Lim can be reached on (571) 270-1210. 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.
/CRAIG A. RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688