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 – 26 are pending.
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.
(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, 2, and 4 – 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deak et al. (EP 2818884 A1; hereinafter Deak). Deak is cited by the Applicant.
Regarding Claim 1, Deak suggests a sensor device (Fig. 13), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
470
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of magnetic field sensing elements (para [0110]; use of biasing magnets side-by-side with MR elements) formed into bridge circuits on a first side of a semiconductor die (Fig. 13, item 70 and para [0112]; MR sensor 70 formed on the top surface of the underlying semiconductor substrate); and
a plurality of magnet structures embedded in a second side of the semiconductor die (Fig. 13; magnets 71, para [0112]; MR sensor 70 formed on the top surface of the underlying semiconductor substrate).
Regarding Claim 2, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of magnetic field sensing elements comprise one or more giant magnetoresistance (GMR) elements, one or more tunneling magnetoresistance (TMR) elements, or one or more Hall plate elements (para [0010]; preferably, the magnetic sensor element is a Magnetic tunnel junction or GMR element).
Regarding Claim 4, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1, wherein a first magnet structure of the plurality of magnet structures has a first volume and a second magnet structure of the plurality of magnet structures has a second volume different than the first volume (para[0019]; preferably, the length of the reference arm MR element along X-axis is linger than length of the reference arm MR element along the Y-axis and longer than the length of the sensing arm MR element along the X-axis).
Regarding Claim 5, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1, wherein the semiconductor die has a first axis and the plurality of magnet structures are symmetrical about the first axis (para [0055]; permanent magnets with respect to an MTJ sensor element whose long axis is parallel to the sense axis).
Regarding Claim 6, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 5, wherein the semiconductor die has a second axis and the plurality of magnet structures are symmetrical about the second axis (para [0064]; arrows shown in magnets 5, 6, and 7 indicate the magnetic field directions (bias magnetic field directions). In other words, the magnetic poles of magnets 5-7 are located on respective sides thereof facing each other).
Regarding Claim 7, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 6, wherein the first axis is orthogonal to the second axis (para [0064]; arrows shown in magnets 5, 6, and 7 indicate the magnetic field directions (bias magnetic field directions). In other words, the magnetic poles of magnets 5-7 are located on respective sides thereof facing each other).
Regarding Claim 8, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1, wherein walls of the semiconductor die (Fig. 13, item 70) surround the plurality of magnet structures (Fig. 13, magnets 71).
Regarding Claim 9, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1, wherein at least some of the plurality of magnet structures have dimensions that differ from others of the plurality of magnet structures (para[0019]; preferably, the length of the reference arm MR element along X-axis is linger than length of the reference arm MR element along the Y-axis and longer than the length of the sensing arm MR element along the X-axis).
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) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deak in view of Godoy et al. (US 7,208,943 B2; hereinafter Godoy).
Regarding Claim 15, Deak suggests the sensor device of claim 1. But Deak does not specifically teach wherein each of the plurality of magnet structures is formed in a respective cavity in the second side of the semiconductor die.
However, Godoy suggests wherein each of the plurality of magnet structures is formed in a respective cavity in the second side of the semiconductor die (column 8, lines 2 – 23; sensing element is positioned within cavity in precise axial alignment with permanent magnet with web imposed there between).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Deak in view of Godoy in order to reduce cost and manufacturing complexity (Godoy, column 8, lines 48 – 51).
Regarding Claim 16, Deak and Godoy suggest the sensor device of claim 15, Godoy also suggests wherein at least one of the cavities has a top along the second side of the semiconductor die and a bottom within the semiconductor die, wherein the at least one cavity is formed with an undercut such that the bottom is wider than the top (column 10, lines 43 – 47; each recess functions to effectively lower the vertical height of barrier wall from "H-max" to "H-fill", where "H-max" is the maximum total height of potting cavity).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 – 26 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding Claim 17, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “generating a mask for etching cavities into the second side of the semiconductor die based at least in part on the dimensioning of the plurality of magnet structures; and causing the cavities to be etched into the second side of the semiconductor die based on the mask” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 17.
Regarding Claims 18 – 26, the claims are allowed as they further limit allowed claim 17.
Claims 3 and 10 – 14 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 3, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “wherein the plurality of magnet structures generate a magnetic field that biases the plurality of magnetic field sensing elements along a first axis, and wherein the plurality of magnetic field sensing elements are maximally sensitive to the magnetic field along a second axis that is orthogonal to the first axis” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 3.
Regarding Claim 10, the prior art of record does not teach claimed limitation: “wherein the plurality of magnet structures generate a magnetic field, and wherein the plurality of magnetic field sensing elements comprise at least four magnetic field sensing elements configured to sense a deflection of the magnetic field caused by a target that rotates in proximity to the sensor device” in combination with all other claimed limitations of claim 10.
Regarding Claims 11 – 14, the claims would be allowable as they further limit claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lassalle-Balier et al. (US 2023/0332878 A1) suggest an angle sensor comprising: a first plurality of magnetoresistance elements located at a first location on an axis, the first plurality of magnetoresistance elements comprises: a first one or more magnetoresistance elements each having a reference direction in a first direction; and a second one or more magnetoresistance elements each having a reference direction in a second direction; and a second plurality of magnetoresistance elements located at a second location on the axis, the second plurality of magnetoresistance elements comprises: a third one or more magnetoresistance elements each having a reference direction in the first direction (see claim 1).
Kim et al. (US 2022/0155102 A1) teach a contactless magnetic sensing system comprising: multiple magnetic sensors each configured to measure a magnetic field in one axial direction in a three-dimensional (3-D) space; a rotating magnet having a rotation axis placed at an intersection or center point of a diagonal line formed by the magnetic sensors; and a substrate on which the magnetic sensors are disposed (see claim 1).
Kulla et al. (US 2020/0340833 A1) disclose a magnetic field sensor comprising: at least one magnetoresistance element configured to generate a magnetic field signal indicative of a magnetic field associated with a target having features and spaced from the at least one magnetoresistance element by an airgap; a detector responsive to the magnetic field signal and to a threshold level to generate a sensor output signal containing transitions, each transition associated with a feature of the target and occurring in response to the magnetic field signal crossing the threshold level (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 7/11/2026
Prosecution Insights