Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/960,779

Dual FGL and Dual SPL Spintronic Device To Reduce Perpendicular Field At Writing Location

Non-Final OA §102§112§DP
Filed
Nov 26, 2024
Examiner
RENNER, CRAIG A
Art Unit
2688
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Western Digital Technologies, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
687 granted / 818 resolved
+22.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
837
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 818 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §DP
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. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of “Species IX, Figures 4E, claims 1-15 and 18-20” in the reply filed on 08 December 2025 is acknowledged. Claim 15, however, is generic/linking and allowable over the prior art of record. Accordingly, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on 27 October 2025 has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable generic/linking claim. Specifically, claims 16 and 17 have not been withdrawn from consideration because these claims require all the limitations of an allowable generic/linking claim. In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 26 November 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings were received on 26 November 2024. These drawings are accepted. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: a. In line 9 of paragraph [0024], “arrow 233” should be changed to --arrow 234-- in order to be consistent with the remainder of the disclosure. b. In line 3 of paragraph [0045], “third NBM layer 488” should be changed to --third NBM layer 428-- in order to be consistent with the remainder of the disclosure. c. In lines 1-2 of claim 12, “a first one negative beta material layer” should be corrected to read --a first negative beta material layer--. d. In lines 1-2 of claim 13, “a second one negative beta material layer” should be corrected to read --a second negative beta material layer--. e. In lines 1-2 of claim 18, “a first one negative beta material layer” should be corrected to read --a first negative beta material layer--. f. In lines 1-2 of claim 19, “a second one negative beta material layer” should be corrected to read --a second negative beta material layer--. Appropriate correction is required. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 13, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. a. In lines 1-2 of claim 13, it is indefinite as to whether or not there is a first one negative beta material layer by virtue of the existence of “a second one negative beta material layer.” b. In lines 1-2 of claim 17, “wherein the second spin kill layer is disposed in contact with the first field generation layer” is indefinite because it is misdescriptive of the disclosure, which teaches/shows that second spin kill layer SK2 316 is disposed in contact with second field generation layer FGL2 320. See Figs. 4A-4C, for instance. c. In lines 1-2 of claim 19, it is indefinite as to whether or not there is a first one negative beta material layer by virtue of the existence of “a second one negative beta material layer.” 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. Claims 1, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2024/0029759). Chen et al. (US 2024/0029759) teach a magnetic recording head (see FIGS. 2A 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance) comprising a shield (TS 110); a main pole (MP 102); and a spintronic device (300A, see FIG. 3A, for instance) disposed between the shield and the main pole (see paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “in FIG. 3A, the stack can include MP\sink\SIL1\spacer\FGL1\sink\SIL2\spacer\FGL2\sink\TS”), the spintronic device comprising a first spin kill layer (302A, see paragraphs [0057] and [0069], for instance, i.e., layer 302A is identified as a “sink” and “a non-magnetic spin sink (short spin diffusion length<20 nm materials, such as Ta, Pt, Ir, etc.),” which is a spin kill material) disposed over the main pole (as shown in FIG. 3A relative to FIG. 2A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “MP\sink\...”); a first spin polarization layer (SIL1 304A) disposed over the first spin kill layer (as shown in FIG. 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “MP\sink\SIL1\...”); a first field generation layer (FGL1 308A) disposed over the first spin polarization layer (as shown in FIG. 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “MP\sink\SIL1\...\FGL1\…”); a second spin kill layer (310A or 318A); a second spin polarization layer (SIL2 312A); and a second field generation layer (FGL2 316A) disposed between the first field generation layer (FGL1 308A) and the shield (TS 110, as shown in FIG. 3A relative to FIG. 2A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “…\FGL1\...\FGL2\...\TS”) [as per claim 1]; wherein the spintronic device further comprises a first spacer layer (306A) disposed between the first field generation layer (FGL1 308A) and the first spin kill layer (302A, as shown in FIG. 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “…\sink\...\spacer\FGL1…”); a second spacer layer (310A, although layer 310A is identified as a “sink”, it would equally perform the duties of a spacer) disposed between the first field generation layer (FGL1 308A) and the second spin polarization layer (SIL2 312A, as shown in FIG. 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “…\FGL1\sink\SIL2\…”); and a third spacer layer (318A, although layer 310A is identified as a “sink”, it would equally perform the duties of a spacer) disposed between the second field generation layer (FGL2 316A) and the shield (TS 110, as shown in FIG. 3A, and paragraph [0069], for instance, i.e., “…\FGL2\sink\TS”) [as per claim 6]; and wherein the magnetic recording head is a component of a magnetic recording device (as shown in FIG. 2A, for instance) comprising the magnetic recording head, the magnetic recording device configured to flow a current from the main pole through the spintronic device to the shield (see paragraph [0070], for instance, i.e., “an applied current that has negative electrons flowing from the MP (e.g., 202) to the TS (e.g., 210)”) [as per claim 7]. Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 8,274,811). Zhang et al. (US 8,274,811) teach a magnetic recording head (see FIG. 5, for instance) comprising a shield (26); a main pole (20); and a spintronic device (includes layers 21, 32, 29, 27b, 27a, and 25, for instance) disposed between the shield and the main pole (as shown in FIG. 5, for instance), the spintronic device comprising a first spin kill layer (a layer in 21, for instance, see line 64 in column 5, i.e., “layer 21 is Ta/Ru/Cu” and “Ta” is a spin kill material) disposed over the main pole (as shown in FIG. 5, for instance); a first spin polarization layer (32) disposed over the first spin kill layer (as shown in FIG. 5, for instance); a first field generation layer (29) disposed over the first spin polarization layer (as shown in FIG. 5, for instance); a second spin kill layer (a layer in 25, for instance, see line 66 in column 5, i.e., “layer 25 is Ru/Ta/Ru” and “Ta” is a spin kill material); a second spin polarization layer (27a); and a second field generation layer (27b) disposed between the first field generation layer (29) and the shield (26, as shown in FIG. 5, for instance) [as per claim 1]; wherein the spintronic device further comprises a first spacer layer (31, for instance) disposed between the first field generation layer (29) and the first spin kill layer (in 21, as shown in FIG. 5, for instance); a second spacer layer (28, for instance) disposed between the first field generation layer (29) and the second spin polarization layer (27a, as shown in FIG. 5, for instance); and a third spacer layer (23, for instance) disposed between the second field generation layer (27b) and the shield (26, as shown in FIG. 5, for instance) [as per claim 6]. Claim Considerations - 35 USC § 103 This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Pertinent Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This includes Igarashi et al. (US 9,099,107) and Igarashi et al. (US 9,336,797), which each individually teaches a magnetic recording head comprising a shield, a main pole, and a spintronic device disposed between the shield and the main pole and including a first field generation layer and a second field generation layer. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-12, 14-16, 18 and 20 are allowable over the prior art of record. Claims 13, 17 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Claims 2-5 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig A. Renner whose telephone number is (571) 272-7580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 7:30 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, Steven Lim can be reached on (571) 270-1210. 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. /CRAIG A. RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 26, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112, §DP
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597437
Rear Soft Bias Dual Free Layer Sensor With Patterned Decoupling Layer
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592254
REMOVABLE ROBOT FOR AUTOMATED DATA STORAGE LIBRARY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592252
HARD DISK DRIVES WITH PIEZOELECTRIC ULTRASONIC MOTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573422
FLEXURE OF SUSPENSION FOR DISK DRIVE AND SUSPENSION FOR DISK DRIVE, THE FLEXURE HAVING AN AREA WITH REDUCED THICKNESS WHERE AN ELECTRONIC COMPONENT IS MOUNTED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567438
Magnetic Heads Having Low Magnetic Coercivity (Hc) and High Saturated Magnetic Flux Density (Bs) in Ferromagnetic (FM) Layer(s) or Shield(s) With Minimized Saturation
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.9%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 818 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month