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 claims 1 - 10 in the reply filed on 08/31/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/31/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 07/23/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Par. [0010] states “…a method of manifesting a magnetic memory device…”. It appears that the term “manifesting” should be “manufacturing”, as the specification describes a method of making a device and the term “manifesting” does not match the claims or the rest of the specification.
Par. [0040] states “…for example, silicon nitride (SiCN)…”. SiCN is the chemical formula for silicon carbon nitride, but the specification states silicon nitride. The paragraph should be corrected to state either silicon carbon nitride or the formula should be corrected to match silicon nitride (SiN).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20230217835 A1 Eom.
For claim 1, Eom teaches “A magnetic memory device (fig. 12) comprising: a substrate (fig. 12 numeral 100); an interlayer insulating layer on the substrate (fig. 12 numeral 137); a data storage structure on the interlayer insulating layer (fig. 12 numeral MS); and a plurality of metal oxides on at least one side surface of the data storage structure (fig. 12 numeral 320; fig. 11C numeral 30b), wherein the data storage structure comprises a lower electrode (fig. 12 numeral 140), a magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 12 numeral MS) and an upper electrode sequentially stacked on the interlayer insulating layer (fig. 12 numeral 240), and wherein at least one metal oxide of the plurality of metal oxides contacts a side surface of the upper electrode (fig. 12 shows oxides 320 contacting the side surfaces of upper electrode 240).”
For claim 4, Eom teaches “The memory device of claim 1, further comprising a protective insulating layer on a side surface of the interlayer insulating layer (fig. 12 numeral 340), wherein the protective insulating layer covers at least one metal oxide of the plurality of metal oxides (fig. 12 shows the protective insulating layer 340 covering the metal oxide 320).”
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
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) 2 – 3, and 6, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230217835 A1 Eom in further view of US 20110233697 A1 hereinafter Kajiyama.
For claim 2, Eom teach all of claim 1. Eom also teaches the lower electrode, the magnetic tunnel junction pattern, and the upper electrode comprise metallic materials (Eom, Par. [0039 – 0047]) and that the plurality of metal oxides are formed from the metal present in the device (Par. [0063 – 0065]). Eom is silent regarding the plurality of metal oxides are oxides of at least one of the metallic materials.
Kajiyama teaches a magnetic memory device (Kajiyama, fig. 10) comprising a lower electrode (fig. 10 numeral 19A), a magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 10 numeral 11 - 15), and an upper electrode (fig. 10 numeral 19B) which comprise metallic materials (Par. [0067]). Kajiyama also teaches the electrodes and magnetic tunnel junction pattern formed on an insulating layer (fig. 10 numeral 33) and a metal oxide formed on the sidewalls of the electrodes and the magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 10 numeral 17X). The metal oxide includes the same metal as the metallic materials (Par. [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention to combine the metallic oxide materials in Kajiyama with the metal oxides and layers in Eom in order to minimize the number of metallic materials needed to manufacture the device by matching the metals used in the electrodes and magnetic tunnel patterns with the metal that is oxidized in Eom. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
For claim 3, Eom and Kajiyama teach all of claim 2. Eom also teaches the metallic material used includes at least one of titanium (Ti), tantalum (Ta), platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), copper (Cu), tungsten (W), molybdenum (Mo), ruthenium (Ru), cobalt (Co), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), zirconium (Zr), copper (Cu), iridium (Ir), and rhodium (Rh) (Eom, Par. [0039 – 0042]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention that the oxides used in Eom and Kajiyama could be at least one of titanium (Ti), tantalum (Ta), platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), copper (Cu), tungsten (W), molybdenum (Mo), ruthenium (Ru), cobalt (Co), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), zirconium (Zr), copper (Cu), iridium (Ir), and rhodium (Rh), as Eom already uses the materials in the manufacturing process and as it would be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
For claim 6, Eom teaches a magnetic memory device (Eom, fig. 12) comprising: a substrate (fig. 12 numeral 100); an interlayer insulating layer on the substrate (fig. 12 numeral 137); a data storage structure on the interlayer insulating layer (fig. 12 numeral MS); and a plurality of metal oxides (fig. 12 numeral 320) and a plurality of the metal oxides are on at least one side surface of the data storage structure (fig. 12 numeral 320), wherein the data storage structure comprises a lower electrode (fig. 12 numeral 140), a magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 12 numeral MS), and an upper electrode sequentially stacked on the interlayer insulating layer (fig. 12 numeral 240p), wherein the magnetic tunnel junction pattern comprises a first magnetic pattern (fig. 12 numeral 160p), a tunnel barrier pattern on the first magnetic pattern (fig. 12 numeral 180p), and a second magnetic pattern on the tunnel barrier pattern (fig. 12 numeral 200p), wherein the second magnetic pattern is between the tunnel barrier pattern and the upper electrode (fig. 12 shows the second magnetic pattern 200p between the tunnel barrier pattern 180p and the upper electrode 240p), and wherein some of the metal oxides on the at least one side surface of the data storage structure are above the second magnetic pattern (fig. 12 shows the plurality of oxides 320 going on the top corner of the second electrode 240p). Eom does not explicitly state that the plurality of oxides includes a first plurality of oxides and a second plurality of oxides. However, Eom shows a plurality of oxides present (fig. 11C) and the claims makes no clear distinction between the first plurality of oxides and the second plurality of oxides. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention that the oxides in Eom can include a first plurality and a second plurality of oxides present in different locations on the device, as Eom teaches a plurality of metal oxides present throughout the device (fig. 11C numeral 30b). Eom is silent regarding the plurality of metal oxides being present on an upper surface of the interlayer insulating layer.
Kajiyama teaches a memory device (Kajiyama, fig. 10) with a metal oxide (fig. 10 numeral 17X; Par. [0084]) on a sidewall of a data storage structure (fig. 10 numeral 1) and on an interlayer insulating layer (fig. 10 numeral 33; Par. [0044]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention to combine the coverage of the metal oxide in Kajiyama with the metal oxides in Eom in order to improve the protective and insulating properties of the metal oxides by increasing the area covered and preventing exposure or more surfaces.
For claim 8, Eom and Kajiyama teach all of claim 6. Eom also teaches the lower electrode, the magnetic tunnel junction pattern, and the upper electrode comprise metallic materials (Eom, Par. [0039 – 0047]) and that the plurality of metal oxides are formed from the metal present in the device (Par. [0063 – 0065]). Eom is silent regarding the plurality of metal oxides are oxides of at least one of the metallic materials.
Kajiyama teaches a magnetic memory device (Kajiyama, fig. 10) comprising a lower electrode (fig. 10 numeral 19A), a magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 10 numeral 11 - 15), and an upper electrode (fig. 10 numeral 19B) which comprise metallic materials (Par. [0067]). Kajiyama also teaches the electrodes and magnetic tunnel junction pattern formed on an insulating layer (fig. 10 numeral 33) and a metal oxide formed on the sidewalls of the electrodes and the magnetic tunnel junction pattern (fig. 10 numeral 17X). The metal oxide includes the same metal as the metallic materials (Par. [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention to combine the metallic oxide materials in Kajiyama with the metal oxides and layers in Eom in order to minimize the number of metallic materials needed to manufacture the device by matching the metals used in the electrodes and magnetic tunnel patterns with the metal that is oxidized in Eom. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
For claim 10, Eom and Kajiyama teaches all of claim 6. Eom also teaches a lower interconnection structure between the substrate and the interlayer insulating layer (Eom, fig. 12 numeral 134); a contact plug between the lower interconnection and the data storage structure (fig. 12 numeral 138), and an upper interconnection layer on the data storage structure (fig. 12 numeral 280).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230217835 A1 Eom in further view of US 20210359198 A1 hereinafter Jeong.
For claim 5, Eom teaches all of claim 4. Eom is silent regarding the interlayer insulating layer comprising silicon oxide and the protective insulating layer comprises silicon nitride.
Jeong teaches a memory device (Jeong, fig. 3) including an interlayer insulating layer comprising silicon oxide (fig. 3 numeral 110; Par. [0028]) and a protective insulating layer comprising silicon nitride (fig. 3 numeral 132; Par. [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the materials in Jeong with the interlayer insulating layer and the protective insulating layer in Eom in order to control the density and size of the layers (Jeong, Par. [0068]) and as it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 9 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.
For claim 7, Eom, Kajiyama, and Jeong are silent regarding the amount of metal oxides per unit area on the upper surface of the interlayer insulating layer is higher than a second amount of metal oxides per unit area on the at least one side surface of the data structure.
For claim 9, Eom, Kajiyama, and Jeong are silent regarding an amount of metal oxides per unit area on the at least one side surface of the data storage structure increases from a side surface of the lower electrode to a side surface of the upper electrode in a first direction perpendicular to a second direction parallel to an upper surface of the substrate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB T NELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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.
/J.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2815
/MONICA D HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
