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 .
Election/Restrictions
An election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-11 and 15-18. Claims 12-14 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/30/2024 is considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Burger et al. (US 20160181227), hereinafter ‘Burger’.
Regarding Claim 1, Burger discloses a substrate (Fig. 1A, integrated circuit 100), comprising: a wire-on-chip (WoC) layer, wherein the WoC layer has one or more conductive WoC wires for generating a magnetic field (Fig. 1A, 104; Para [0021] The inductive element 104 can be used to generate and transmit a magnetic field in order to couple with a receiving element (e.g., inductive element 110). The current path may be a wire trace or other path formed from conductive material), the one or more conductive WoC wires being integrated in a chip plane (Para [0021] The first silicon substrate 102 may be a first chip in the three-dimensional integrated circuit 100); and a heating layer (Fig. 1A, 120 in Para [0030] The resistor 120 may be a heater resistor used to generate heat to maintain or modify a temperature of the tree-dimensional circuit; or in the alternative Fig. 1A, 108 with heater 110 per Para [0031] a current (e.g., direct current (DC)) of a known or pre-determined value may be transmitted to either the first inductive element 104, the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element to adjust the temperature (e.g., output more heat) inside the three-dimensional circuit 100. The inductive elements may be used to produce more heat in the three-dimensional circuit 100 to maintain a temperature near the Curie temperature or the Neel temperature), wherein the heating layer has one or more conductive heating wires for increasing a temperature of the substrate (Para [0030] resistor 120 may be a heater resistor used to generate heat to maintain or modify a temperature of the tree-dimensional circuit; or in the alternative the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element to adjust the temperature (e.g., output more heat) inside the three-dimensional circuit 100. The inductive elements may be used to produce more heat in the three-dimensional circuit 100 to maintain a temperature near the Curie temperature or the Neel temperature).
Regarding Claim 2, Burger further discloses wherein the heating layer is in thermal contact with the WoC layer (Para [0030] 120 used to generate heat to maintain or modify a temperature of the tree-dimensional circuit 100 in Fig. 1A).
Regarding Claim 6, Burger further discloses wherein the one or more conductive WoC wires are configured to generate a predefined magnetic field at a predefined current (Para [0023, 0029] elements 104 controlled by the current thereby controlling the magnetic flux).
Regarding Claim 7, Burger further discloses wherein each heating wire of the one or more conductive heating wires has a meandering pattern, and wherein each section of each heating wire of the one or more conductive heating wires is aligned either in a first direction or in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Para [0021] element 104 formed as a loop, a portion of a loop, a u-shaped path, a spiral coil, first inductive loop, etc.).
Regarding Claim 11, Burger further discloses wherein the heating layer includes an integrated temperature sensor (Para [0052] temperature sensor can be component of integrated circuit comprising layer 108 with heating layer).
Regarding Claim 17, Burger further discloses wherein the one or more conductive heating wires are configured to receive a first electric current in order to regulate the temperature of the substrate (Para [0030] the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element to adjust the temperature (e.g., output more heat) inside the three-dimensional circuit 100. The inductive elements may be used to produce more heat in the three-dimensional circuit 100 to maintain a temperature near the Curie temperature or the Neel temperature), and wherein the one or more conductive WoC wires are configured to receive a second electric current for generating a magnetic field (Para [0021] The inductive element 104 can be used to generate and transmit a magnetic field in order to couple with a receiving element (e.g., inductive element 110; Para [0031] The first inductive element 104, the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element may be used to regulate and control the temperature of the three-dimensional integrated circuit 100. For example, a current (e.g., direct current (DC)) of a known or pre-determined value may be transmitted to either the first inductive element 104, the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element to adjust the temperature (e.g., output more heat) inside the three-dimensional circuit 100).
Regarding Claim 18, Burger further discloses wherein the one or more conductive heating wires are configured to receive a varying first electric current that is adjusted in order to sequentially increase the temperature of the substrate over a multiplicity of temperatures, and wherein for each respective temperature of a multiplicity of temperatures, the conductive WoC wires are configured to receive a varying second electric current that is adjusted in order to sequentially change a magnetic field generated by the conductive WoC wires over a multiplicity of predefined magnetic fields (Para [0031] a current (e.g., direct current (DC)) of a known or pre-determined value may be transmitted to either the first inductive element 104, the second inductive element 110, or an additional inductive element to adjust the temperature (e.g., output more heat) inside the three-dimensional circuit 100; Para [0065] sequence of process or method steps may be varied).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burger et al. (US 20160181227), hereinafter ‘Burger’ as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sato (US 20040104724), hereinafter ‘Sato’.
Regarding Claim 3, Burger discloses an xMR layer, wherein the xMR layer includes a magnetoresistive sensor (Para [0036, 0004]) however fails to explicitly disclose an xMR layer in direct contact with the heating layer, the magnetoresistive sensor including a pinned layer having a fixed magnetization direction and a free layer having a magnetization direction corresponding to a surrounding magnetic field.
Sato discloses an xMR layer (Fig. 3, GMR element 11) in direct contact with the heating layer (Fig. 3, layer S3 with embedded heating coil 21 in direct contact with GMR layer 11; Para [0077]), wherein the xMR layer includes a magnetoresistive sensor including a pinned layer having a fixed magnetization direction and a free layer having a magnetization direction corresponding to a surrounding magnetic field (Para [0064]) for the benefit of providing a magnetic sensor, which is capable of measuring a temperature-dependent characteristic inexpensively, within a short period of time, and with precision, and to provide a method for precisely compensating a temperature-dependent characteristic of a magnetic sensor as taught by Sato in Para [0007, 0077] and in Fig. 3.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide an xMR layer in direct contact with the heating layer, the magnetoresistive sensor including a pinned layer having a fixed magnetization direction and a free layer having a magnetization direction corresponding to a surrounding magnetic field for the benefit of providing a magnetic sensor, which is capable of measuring a temperature-dependent characteristic inexpensively, within a short period of time, and with precision, and to provide a method for precisely compensating a temperature-dependent characteristic of a magnetic sensor as taught by Sato in Para [0007, 0077] and in Fig. 3.
Claim(s) 8, 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burger et al. (US 20160181227), hereinafter ‘Burger’.
Regarding Claim 8, Burger discloses the substrate according to Claim 7 above. Burger discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the one or more conductive heating wires have a wire width of at most 2 μm, and wherein a spacing between any two adjacent sections of the one or more conductive heating wires aligned parallel to one another is within 5 μm. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to vary the dimensions and spacing of the heating wires, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 uspq 237 (CCPA 1955), In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 8 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 9, Burger discloses the substrate according to Claim 1 above. Burger further discloses wherein the one or more conductive heating wires are configured to cause a predefined temperature increase of at least one section of the substrate at a predefined current (Para [0053-0055] the temperature is controlled and modified to a temperature value within the specified range of the critical temperature). Burger teaches the general structures of the claims, but not wherein the temperature increase is above 50 K. Nonetheless, modifying the substrate with a controlled and modifiable heat source to have the relative dimensions as recited in the claims would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation because where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation and the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.05(ii). It would have thus have been obvious to optimize the ranges of controllable temperature because such optimization would be routine skill in the art to maximize the performance of the known art structures.
Regarding Claim 16, Burger further discloses wherein the one or more conductive heating wires include at least two conductive heating wires (Fig. 1A, showing multiple 104).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burger et al. (US 20160181227), hereinafter ‘Burger’ as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Roizin et al. (US 20170160248), hereinafter ‘Roizin’.
Regarding Claim 10, Burger fails to disclose wherein the one or more conductive heating wires are polycrystalline silicon wires.
Roizin discloses a semiconductor sensor using magnetic elements wherein one or more conductive heating wires are polycrystalline silicon wires (Para [0039] heating element 145 comprises a coil structure that is formed using polycrystalline silicon) for the benefit of providing a heating current from a voltage source to control heating by increasing or decreasing the temperature of the magnetic elements.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide wherein the one or more conductive heating wires are polycrystalline silicon wires for the benefit of providing a heating current from a voltage source to control heating by increasing or decreasing the temperature of the magnetic elements as taught by Roizin in Para [0039].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, and 15 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 4, the closest prior art fails to disclose nor would it be obvious to combine “wherein at least 75% of the length of the one or more conductive heating wires is aligned parallel to the fixed magnetization direction and at least 75% of the length of the one or more conductive WoC wires is aligned orthogonally to the fixed magnetization direction” in combination with all other limitations of the claim and respective base claims renders the claim allowable over the prior art. All subsequent claims are also allowable due to dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALESA ALLGOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-5811. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-3:30 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/ALESA ALLGOOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights