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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on the date: June 02, 2026.
Claims 1-8 are currently pending. Claims 1-5 have been amended. Claims 7 and 8 are new. No claims have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Objection to the Claims
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS pages 4-5, with respect to the objection of claims 1-5 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 1-5 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103
The applicant has argued that the prior art Han fails to teach “a conductive protective film covering a surface of the conductive functional film” and “a lead layer applying a voltage to the conductive functional film through the conductive protective film,” (see REMARKS pages 5-7). The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s arguments. The description of the alumina layer of Han is indeed described as a insulating dielectric, however the claim limitation of “conductive” is a broad term which includes materials that allow any amount of electricity. In this case, the alumina layer has a low electrical conductivity, but it is not a perfect insulator, thus the alumina layer does allow some electrical conductivity which teaches the argued claim limitations as presented.
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 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. US2004/0047082 (called Han hereinafter and applicant disclosed art).
Regarding independent claim 1, Han teaches a sensor element (Fig. 6) comprising:
a conductive functional film (Fig. 2a; para [0019]; bottom spin valve sensor element 10) whose electrical characteristics vary based on a predetermined physical amount to be detected (para [0019]);
a conductive protective film (Fig. 5; alumina layer 22) covering a surface of the conductive functional film (Figs. 2a-5; alumina layer 22 covers a surface of bottom spin valve sensor element 10); and
a lead layer (Fig. 6; lead layer 46) applying a voltage to the conductive functional film through the conductive protective film (para [0004 and 0024]; conducting lead layer 46 applies a voltage/current to the bottom spin valve sensor 10 through the alumina layer 22),
wherein the conductive protective film has a connected area covered with the lead layer and a non-connected area not covered with the lead layer (Figs. 5 and 6; a portion of lead layer 46 covers the alumina layer 22),
wherein a surface of the non-connected area of the conductive protective film is covered with an insulating film (Fig. 6; dielectric layer 60 covers the surface of the exposed alumina layer 22),
wherein a surface of the connected area of the conductive protective film contacts the lead layer without being covered with the insulating film (Fig. 6; the portion of lead layer 46 that contacts the alumina layer 22 does not have the dielectric layer 60 between the lead layer and the alumina layer), and
wherein a thickness of the conductive protective film in the connected area is larger than a thickness of the conductive protective film in the non-connected area (Fig. 6; the left and right edge portions of alumina layer 22 that connected to the lead layer 46 is thicker than the non-connected area of alumina layer 22).
Regarding claim 3, Han teaches the sensor element as claimed in claim 1, and further teaches wherein the conductive protective film is a single film (Figs. 5 and 6; alumina layer 22 is a single layer).
Regarding claim 4, Han teaches the sensor element as claimed in claim 1, and further teaches wherein the conductive functional film constitutes a part of a magnetoresistive effect element whose resistance value varies based on a magnetic field (para [0004 and 0019]), wherein the conductive functional film has first and second element pieces (Figs. 2a and 6; left and right ends of the bottom spin valve sensor element 10), wherein a hard magnetic body (Fig. 6; para [0024]; hard magnetic material biasing layer 44) is provided between the first element piece and the second element piece (Figs. 2a, 5 and 6; the tip portions of biasing layer 44 that are towards the middle are positioned between the left and right ends of element 10), the hard magnetic body applying a magnetic bias to the conductive functional film (para [0004-0005]), and wherein the lead layer electrically connects the first element piece and the second element piece by covering a surface of the hard magnetic body (Figs. 2a and 6; lead layer 46 connects to the element 10 and covers biasing layer 44), the connected area of the first element piece (Fig. 6), and the connected area of the second element piece (Fig. 6).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Apostolos et al. US9413063 (called Apostolos hereinafter).
Regarding claim 2, Han teaches the sensor element as claimed in claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the insulating film is a native oxide film formed by oxidation of a surface of the conductive protective film.
Apostolos teaches wherein the insulating film is a native oxide film formed by oxidation of a surface of the conductive protective film (Column 1 lines 15-20; Column 2 lines 51-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the dielectric layer as described by Han with the native oxide insulator as described by Apostolos for the purpose of obtaining a highly asymmetric device with efficient current generation needed for high conversion efficiency (Abstract).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Kakihara US6201669 (previously cited art).
Regarding claim 7, Han teaches the sensor element as claimed in claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the conductive protective film is made of Ta, Ti, or nichrome.
Kakihara teaches wherein the conductive protective film is made of Ta, Ti, or nichrome (Fig. 9; Column 2 lines 20-27; protective layer 23 is made of Ta).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the alumina layer as described by Han with the protective layer material as described by Apostolos for the purpose of protecting the sensor elements from external environments that could potentially damage the sensor elements.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Mauri et al. US2004/0061987 (called Mauri hereinafter).
Regarding claim 8, Han teaches the sensor element as claimed in claim 2, but fails to teach wherein the lead layer is exposed so as not to be covered with the insulating film.
Mauri teaches wherein the lead layer is exposed so as not to be covered with the insulating film (Figs. 3, 4 and 5E; lead layer 86,116 or 150 are not covered by an insulating film).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to modify the dielectric layer as described by Han with the exposure of the lead layer as described by Mauri for the purpose of balancing Barkhausen noise suppression and improved sensor sensitivity (para [0016]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 are indicated as allowable subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claim 5, this claim was indicated as allowable subject matter in the previous Office Action mailed on March 11, 2026.
Claim 6 is indicated as allowable subject matter for depending on claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Guo et al. discloses “Method for forming a GMR sensor having improved longitudinal biasing” (see US6944939)
Guo discloses “Novel spin-valve GMR with patterned synthetic exchange bias” (see US2004/0047084_
Ju et al. discloses “Magnetoresistive (MR) sensor element with sunken lead structure” (see US2001/0000603)
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID B FREDERIKSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8152. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am - 5pm.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at (571)272-7924. 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.
/DAVID B FREDERIKSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights