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 (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.
Claims 1 – 16 are pending.
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) 1 – 6, 9 – 11, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raberg et al. (US 2017/0168122 A1; hereinafter Raberg) in view of Kubota et al. (US 2021/0382123 A1; hereinafter Kubota).
Regarding Claim 1, Raberg discloses a magnetoresistive sensor (Fig. 1, item 100) sensitive to an out-of-plane applied magnetic field (para [0006]; an external magnetic field to be measured) comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
412
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a sensing layer (Fig. 1, item 170);
a reference layer (Fig. 1, item 150);
a non-magnetic spacer layer (Fig. 1, item 160) separating said sensing layer and said reference layer (para[0047]; 160 which is electrically insulating and separates reference layer 150 from a ferromagnetic free layer 170);
said sensing layer having a magnetization vortex configuration in the absence of an applied magnetic field (para [0049]; providing a layer having this structure may lead to spontaneous formation of a closed flux magnetization pattern in free layer 170; occurrence of such a field may also be called a vortex state or vortex configuration), a vortex core diameter varying in the presence of an applied magnetic field perpendicular to the plane of said reference layer (para [0020]; in a magneto-resistive element having a magnetic vortex structure, as the disk diameter (disk aspect ratio=film pressure of free layer/disk diameter) decreases, the difference between the saturated magnetic field and the nucleation magnetic field increases; that is, the linear range of the magneto-resistive element having the magnetic vortex structure enlarges as the disk diameter (disk aspect ratio) decreases).
But Raberg does not specifically teach with a fixed magnetization, a direction of said fixed magnetization being perpendicular to the plane of said reference layer.
However, Kubota suggests with a fixed magnetization (abstract; fixed magnetization), a direction of said fixed magnetization being perpendicular to the plane of said reference layer (para [0087]; a width increase of the vortex nucleation field range plotted against biasing field strength in y-direction for different disk diameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Raberg in view of Kubota because the linearity of the output characteristics is improved (Kubota, para [0194]).
Regarding Claim 2, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Raberg also suggests wherein the sensing layer is chosen with an aspect ratio defined as a thickness of the sensing layer divided by the in-plane characteristic dimension of the sensing layer comprised between 0.2 and 2 (para [0086]; a relationship between diameter-to-thickness ratio d/t and magnetic flux density in mT for nucleation field and annihilation field).
Regarding Claim 3, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 2, Raberg also suggests wherein characterized in that t said aspect ratio is comprised between 0.2 and 1 (para [0086]; a relationship between diameter-to-thickness ratio d/t and magnetic flux density in mT for nucleation field and annihilation field).
Regarding Claim 4, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Raberg also suggests wherein the non-magnetic spacer layer (Fig. 1, item 160) is a tunnel barrier layer or a metallic spacer (para [0047]; a tunnel barrier 160 which is electrically insulating…).
Regarding Claim 5, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Kubota also suggests wherein the reference layer is magnetically coupled to a synthetic antiferromagnetic layer with perpendicular anisotropy (para [0158]; magnetostatic (Shape anisotropy)).
Regarding Claim 6, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Raberg also suggests wherein the non-magnetic spacer layer is a tunnel barrier layer (para [0047]; a tunnel barrier 160 which is electrically insulating…) and the sensing layer (Fig. 1, item 170) comprises a first layer made of an alloy based on iron, cobalt and an amorphising element (para [0047]; Free layer 170, reference layer 150 and pinned layer 130 may in some embodiments comprise iron, cobalt or nickel, and in some further embodiments alloys of these), said first layer being in contact with the tunnel barrier layer (para [0047]; a tunnel barrier 160 which is electrically insulating and separates reference layer 150 from a ferromagnetic free layer 170).
Regarding Claim 9, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, wherein the sensing layer (Fig. 1, item 170) comprises one or several laminations of oxide layers (para [0168]; silicon oxide film).
Regarding Claim 10, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Raberg also suggests further comprising an arrangement of one or more layers avoiding switching of the vortex core magnetization direction (para [0057]; a combination of a magnetic vortex sensor with a magnetic bias field perpendicular to the sensing direction in order to improve the nucleation performance of the magnetic vortex state).
Regarding Claim 11, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Kubota also suggests wherein any of the previous claims characterized in that the reference layer is magnetically coupled to a layer made in a hard material with perpendicular anisotropy (para [0158]; magnetostatic (Shape anisotropy)).
Regarding Claim 14, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Raberg also suggests wherein a geometry and the dimensions of the vortex sensing layer are chosen such that the vortex configuration of the sensing layer is not annihilated over a range of applied magnetic field to be sensed of at least + or - 200 mT (para [0086]; a relationship between diameter-to-thickness ratio d/t and magnetic flux density in mT for nucleation field and annihilation field).
Regarding Claim 15, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 1, Kubota also suggests a sensing device characterized in that it comprises comprising a plurality of magnetoresistive sensors according to claim 1 that are electrically coupled in series and/or in parallel (para [0027]; magneto-resistive elements and magnetic sensors which each have a magnetic vortex structure, para [0068]; series connection of element 10, and para [0069]; parallel connection of the first half-bridge circuit).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raberg in view of Kubota, and further in view of Chatterjee et al. (US 2019/0051822 A1; hereinafter Chatterjee).
Regarding Claim 7, Raberg and Kubota disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 6. But Raberg and Kubota do not specifically teach wherein characterized in that the sensing layer comprises at least another layer of material adapted to absorb at least part of the amorphising element present in the first layer and to ensure a structural transition between the layers comprised in the sensing layer.
However Chatterjee suggests wherein characterized in that the sensing layer comprises at least another layer of material adapted to absorb at least part of the amorphising element present in the first layer and to ensure a structural transition between the layers comprised in the sensing layer (para [0008]; amorphous CoFeB alloys are used as electrode material in contact with the MgO barrier and para [0103]; peculiarity of these stacks is that they also comprise a second MgO layer added in contact with the composite storage layer CSL on its interface opposite to the first MgO tunnel barrier; this type of stacks is especially interesting in the case of out-of-plane magnetized MTJs since the second MgO layer allows to further increase the perpendicular anisotropy of the composite storage layer CSL).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Raberg and Kubota in view of Chatterjee because this type of stacks is especially interesting in the case of out-of-plane magnetized MTJs since the second MgO layer allows to further increase the perpendicular anisotropy of the composite storage layer CSL and this increases the thermal stability factor (Chatterjee, para [0103]).
Regarding Claim 8, Raberg, Kubota, and Chatterjee disclose the magnetoresistive sensor according to claim 7, Chatterjee wherein characterized in that the material adapted to absorb the at least part of the amorphising element is chosen among the following materials: Ta, Mo, W, or Hf or a mixed of them (para [0103]; NM layer is intended to absorb the B away from the MgO interfaces. NM can be made of B absorbing materials such as Ta, W, Ru, Mo, or an alloy or MLs thereof).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12, 13, and 16 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 12, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “further comprising an antiferromagnetic layer inducing a perpendicular exchange bias on the sensing layer, said antiferromagnetic layer being magnetically coupled to the sensing layer” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 12.
Regarding Claims 13, the claim would be allowable as it further limit claim 12.
Regarding Claim 16, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “wherein the plurality of magnetoresistive sensors comprises four magnetoresistive sensors, said four magnetoresistive sensors being arranged according to a Wheatstone bridge configuration and configured so that the reference layer of the two of the four magnetoresistive sensors located in the two opposite branches of the Wheatstone bridge are magnetized in a first out-of-plane direction while the reference layer of the other two of the four magnetoresistive sensors located in the other two other branches of the Wheatstone bridge are magnetized in the opposite out-of-plane direction” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ducruet (US 2025/0372300 A1) suggests forming a series of layers for a magnetoresistive element including: forming a sense layer; forming a tunnel barrier layer between the sense layer and a reference layer; forming the reference layer (see claim 1).
Muehlenhoff et al. (US 2021/0096195 A1) teach a magnetoresistive sensor having a layer stack, the layer stack comprising: a reference layer having a reference magnetization, which is fixed and has a first magnetic orientation; a magnetically free layer, wherein the magnetically free layer has a magnetically free magnetization, which is variable in a presence of an external magnetic field, and which has a second magnetic orientation in a ground state, wherein one of the first magnetic orientation or the second magnetic orientation is oriented in-plane and another of the first magnetic orientation or the second magnetic orientation is oriented out-of-plane; and a metal multilayer, wherein the metal multilayer is arranged adjacent to the magnetically free layer, or wherein the metal multilayer constitutes the magnetically free layer (see claim 1).
Lassalle-Balier et al. (US 2020/0066790 A1) disclose an electronic circuit, comprising: a first magnetoresistance element, comprising: a first reference pinning layer having a first magnetic direction; a first variable resistance layer; and a first reference pinned layer disposed between the first reference pinning layer and the first variable resistance layer and proximate to the first variable-resistance layer, the first reference pinned layer having the first magnetic direction, the electronic circuit further comprising: a second magnetoresistance element disposed under or over the first magnetoresistance element, comprising: a second reference pinning layer having the first magnetic direction; a second variable-resistance layer; and a second reference pinned layer disposed between the second reference pinning layer and the second variable resistance layer and proximate to the second variable-resistance layer, the second reference pinned layer having a second magnetic direction opposite to the first magnetic direction, resulting in the first and second magnetoresistance elements having opposite responses to an external magnetic field (see claim 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIOVANNI ASTACIO-OQUENDO whose telephone number is (571)270-5724. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/GIOVANNI ASTACIO-OQUENDO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858 6/27/2026
Prosecution Insights