UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

Transcription

1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 95/002,074 08/14/ B /30/2015 KINNEY & LANGE, P.A. THE KINNEY & LANGE BUILDING 312 SOUTH THIRD STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MN EXAMINER NGUYEN, MINH T ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3992 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 12/30/2015 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

2 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Requester, v. NVE Corporation, Patent Owner and Appellant. Appeal Patent No. US 6,538,921 B2 2 Technology Center 3900 Before JAMES T. MOORE, MARC S. HOFF, and JEREMY J. CURCURI, Administrative Patent Judges. MOORE, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Patent Owner appeals under 35 U.S.C. 134(b) and 315(a) (2002) from the rejection of claims 1 12, 14 20, 22 24, 29, 30, 37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 1 Filed by Everspin Technologies, Inc. August 14, Issued March 25, 2003 to James M. Daughton and Arthur V. Pohm and assigned to NVE Corporation (the 921 patent ). The 921 patent issued from Application 09/929,435, filed August 14, 2001, which claimed priority to Provisional Application 60/225,966, filed August 17, 2000.

3 The 921 Patent concerns ferromagnetic thin-film based digital Appeal , 52, 53, 55 58, 60, 61, 66 69, 92, 93, 95 97, 99, and as set forth in the Right of Appeal Notice ( RAN ) mailed June 14, Requester filed a Respondent Brief on October 16, The Examiner mailed an Examiner s Answer on April 15, 2014, which incorporated much from the original Request by reference. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. 134 and 315. We AFFIRM. The 921 Patent was involved in litigation in the District of Minnesota. We are informed that the civil action was dismissed June 11, memory. 921 Patent 5: The claims more specifically recite a layered bit structure with read/write circuitry. See, e.g., Claim 1, below. The as-issued patent contained 100 claims. Claims 1 12, 14 20, 22 24, 29, 30, 37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 50, 52, 53, 55 58, 60, 61, 66 69, 92, 93, 95 97, 99, and newly added claims are subject to reexamination. Claims 13, 21, 25 28, 31 36, 38, 41, 42, 45 49, 51, 54, 59, 62 65, 70 91, 94, 98, and 100 are not subject to reexamination. Ans. 2. Claim 1 has been amended and is reproduced below, with underlining indicating the material added during this reexamination proceeding. 1. A ferromagnetic thin-film based digital data memory cell, said memory cell comprising: a substrate; and a bit structure supported on said substrate comprising: 3 NVE Corporation v. Everspin Technologies, Inc., No. 0:12-cv JRT- JGG (D. Minn.). Report on Status of Related Litigation, filed June 16,

4 a nonmagnetic intermediate layer, said nonmagnetic intermediate layer having two major surfaces on opposite sides thereof; a memory film of an anisotropic ferromagnetic material on each of said nonmagnetic intermediate layer major surfaces; an electrically insulative intermediate layer on said memory film and across said memory film from one of said nonmagnetic intermediate layer major surfaces, said electrically insulative intermediate layer having a major surface on a side thereof opposite said memory film; and a magnetization reference layer on said major surface of said electrically insulative layer having an antiferromagnetic material therein to provide said magnetization reference layer with a relatively fixed magnetization direction; and circuitry electrically coupled to the bit structure that selectively allows a magnetic state setting current to flow through the bit structure to write binary data into the bit structure and selectively allows a sense current to flow through the bit structure to retrieve the binary data from the bit structure. EVIDENCE OF RECORD The Examiner relies upon the following prior art in rejecting the claims on appeal: Chen et al. ( Chen 323 ) US 5,966,323 October 12, 1999 Chen et al. ( Chen 499 ) US 5,659,499 August 19, 1997 Zhu et al. ( Zhu ) US 5,734,605 March 31, 1998 Chen et al. ( Chen 248 ) US 5,953,248 September 14, 1999 Sather et al. ( Sather ) US 6,178,111 B1 January 23,

5 Perner et al. ( Perner ) US 6,185,143 B1 February 6, 2001 Monsma et al. ( Monsma ) US 6,269,018 B1 July 31, 2001 PCT Publication WO 98/20496 of Daughton et al. published May 14, 1998 ( Daughton ) PCT Publication WO 99/14758 of Tedrow published March 25, 1999 ( Tedrow ) European Patent Application EP A2 of Nishimura et al. published April 21, 1999 ( Nishimura ) European Patent Publication EP A2 of Parkin published May 6, 1999 ( Parkin ) James Daughton, Magnetoresistive Random Access Memory (MRAM) 1 13 (2000) ( the Daughton paper ) THE REJECTIONS I. Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Chen 323 and 496 PCT Publication. RAN 4, Rejection 4. II. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, 496 PCT Publication, and the Daughton Paper. RAN 5, Rejection 5. III. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, 496 PCT Publication, and Chen 499. RAN 6, Rejection 6. IV. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323 and the Daughton Paper. RAN 6, Rejection 7. 4

6 V. Claims 16, 17, 56, and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Perner. RAN 6, Rejection 9. VI. Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323 and Zhu. RAN 6, Rejection 12. VII. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, Zhu, and the Daughton Paper. RAN 6 7, Rejection 13. VIII. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Chen 499. RAN 7, Rejection 14. IX. Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather. RAN 7, Rejection 15. X. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Chen 499. RAN 7, Rejection 16. XI. Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Sather. RAN 7, Rejection 17. XII. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Zhu, Sather, and Chen 499. RAN 8, Rejection 18. XIII. Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication and Parkin. RAN 8, Rejection 19. 5

7 XIV. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and the Daughton Paper. RAN 8, Rejection 20. XV. Claim 30 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin and Chen 499. RAN 9, Rejection 21. XVI. Claims 16, 17, 56, and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Perner. RAN 9, Rejection 22. XVII. Claims 16, 17, 56, and 57stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Tedrow. RAN 9, Rejection 25. XVIII. Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Nishimura. RAN 9, Rejection N1. XIX. Claims 1, 4 6, 9, 37, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin in view of Nishimura. RAN 12, Rejection N2. XX. Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 in view of Nishimura. RAN 12, Rejection N3. XXI. Claims 2 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 40, 43, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of the 496 PCT Publication and Nishimura. RAN 12, Rejection N4. XXII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of the PCT 496 Publication, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 12 13, Rejection N5. 6

8 XXIII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 13, Rejection N6. XXIV. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 13, Rejection N7. XXV. Claim 44 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 13, Rejection N8. XXVI. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Nishimura. RAN 14, Rejection N9. XXVII. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 14, Rejection N10. XXVIII. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 14, Rejection N11. XXIX. Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 23, 40, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, 96, and 97 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Nishimura. RAN 14, Rejection N12. XXX. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 15, Rejection N13. XXXI. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 15, Rejection N14. 7

9 XXXII. Claims 3, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 43, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather and Nishimura. RAN 15, Rejection N15. XXXIII. Claims 29, 96, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 15, Rejection N16. XXXIV. Claims 18 20, 23, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Nishimura. RAN 16, Rejection N17. XXXV. Claims 96 and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 16, Rejection N18. XXXVI. Claims 1 9, 18 20, 22, 23, 37, 39 40, 43, 50, 58, 60, 61, 67 69, 92, and 93 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura. RAN 16, Rejection N19. XXXVII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 16, Rejection N20. XXXVIII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 17, Rejection N21. XXXIX. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, and Nishimura. RAN 17, Rejection N22. 8

10 XL. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 17, Rejection N23. XLI. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 17, Rejection N24. XLI. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, and Nishimura. RAN 18, Rejection N25. XLIII. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura. RAN 18, Rejection N26. XLIV. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, Chen 499, and Nishimura. RAN 18, Rejection N27. XLV. Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Monsma. RAN 18, Rejection M1. XLVI. Claims 1, 4 6, 9, 37, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Monsma. RAN 21, Rejection M2. XLVII. Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Monsma. RAN 21, Rejection M3. 9

11 XLVIII. Claims 2 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 40, 43, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma. RAN 21, Rejection M4. XLIX. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 21, Rejection M5. L. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 22, Rejection M6. LI. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 22, Rejection M7. LII. Claim 44 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 22, Rejection M8. LIII. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma. RAN 22, Rejection M9. LIV. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 23, Rejection M10. LV. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 23, Rejection M11. LVI. Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 23, 40, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, 96, and 97 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Monsma. RAN 23, Rejection M12. 10

12 LVII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 23, Rejection M13. LVIII. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 24, Rejection M14. LIX. Claims 3, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 43, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Monsma. RAN 24, Rejection M15. LX. Claims 29, 96, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 24, Rejection M16. LXI. Claims 18 20, 23, 58, 67, 92, 93 and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Monsma. RAN 24, Rejection M17. LXII. Claims 96 and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 25, Rejection M18. LXIII. Claims 1 9, 18 20, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 58, 60, 61, 67 69, 92, and 93 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma. RAN 25, Rejection M19. LXIV. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 25, Rejection M20. LXV. Claims 29, 44, and 99 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 25, Rejection M21. 11

13 LXVI. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, and Monsma. RAN 26, Rejection M22. LXVII. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 26, Rejection M23. LXVIII. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 26, Rejection M24. LXIX. Claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin, Tedrow, and Monsma. RAN 26, Rejection M25. LXX. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma. RAN 27, Rejection M26. LXXI. Claim 99 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, Chen 499, and Monsma. RAN 27, Rejection M27. LXXII. Claim 102 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. RAN 27, Rejection D1. LXXIII. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Sather. RAN 28, Rejection P1. LXXIV. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Sather. RAN 28, Rejection P2. 12

14 LXXV. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Nishimura. RAN 28, Rejection Q1. LXXVI. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Nishimura. RAN 29, Rejection Q2. LXXVII. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Nishimura. RAN 29, Rejection Q3. LXXVIII. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Nishimura. RAN 29, Rejection Q4. LXXIX. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura. RAN 29, Rejection Q5. LXXX. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma. RAN 30, Rejection R1. LXXXI. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Monsma. RAN 30, Rejection R2. LXXXII. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Monsma. RAN 30, Rejection R3. LXXXIII. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Monsma. RAN 30, Rejection R4. LXXXIV. Claims 105 and 106 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma. RAN 31, Rejection R5. 13

15 LXXXV. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Nishimura. RAN 31, Rejection S1. LXXXVI. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Nishimura. RAN 31, Rejection S2. LXXXVII. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Nishimura. RAN 31, Rejection S3. LXXXVIII. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura. RAN 32, Rejection S4. XC. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Monsma. RAN 32, Rejection T1. XCI. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Monsma. RAN 32, Rejection T2. XCII. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Monsma. RAN 33, Rejection T3. XCIII. Claims and 107 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma. RAN 33, Rejection T4. ANALYSIS I. Arguments Directed to Rejection 4 The Appellant directs argument to Rejections 4 7, 9, 12 22, and 25, all on the same basis. Br A. The Rejection of Claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323 in view of the 496 PCT Publication. Claim 10 reads as follows: 14

16 B1. Ans (Original) A ferromagnetic thin-film based digital memory, said memory comprising: a plurality of bit structures interconnected with manipulation circuitry having a plurality of transistors so that each said bit structure has a selection transistor in said plurality of transistors electrically coupled thereto that selectively substantially prevents current in at least one direction along a current path through that bit structure and said manipulation circuitry further includes storage switching transistors in said plurality of transistors to permit selecting a direction of current flow through a said bit structure if current is permitted to be established therein by said selection transistor coupled thereto, each said bit structure comprising: a nonmagnetic intermediate layer, said nonmagnetic intermediate layer having two major surfaces on opposite sides thereof; and a memory film of an anisotropic ferromagnetic material on each of said nonmagnetic intermediate layer major surfaces. This rejection was adopted from the claim chart of the Request, CC- For ease of reference, we paraphrase the Examiner s adopted findings from pages of Exhibit CC-B1. The Examiner has found that Chen 323 describes a ferromagnetic thin-film based digital memory, citing Chen 323 1:11 15; Figure 1; 3:7 9, 5:60 63; Figure 11; 8:22 25; and 8: Ex. CC B1, 12. The Examiner has also found that Chen 323 describes a plurality of bit structures interconnected with manipulation circuitry that is used to read and write information stored in the bit structures. Ex. CC-B1, 12 13, citing Figure 11; 8:

17 Chen s sense lines and word lines, utilized to sense the state of each bit structure (tunneling cells 86), are illustrated in Chen 323 Figure 11, reproduced below. Figure 11 is a simplified view in top plan of a high density array of multi-layer tunneling magnetic memory cells. Chen 323, 3:1 3. The Examiner has also found alternatively that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to include a plurality of transistors in the manipulation circuitry in a ferromagnetic memory with the bit structures disclosed in Chen 323, where each bit structure has a selection transistor coupled thereto that selectively substantially prevents current in at least one direction along a current path through that bit structure and where the manipulation circuitry further includes that a storage current is permitted to be established therein by the selection transistor coupled thereto. Ex. CC- B1, 13 14, citing 496 PCT Publication, Figure 9A. 16

18 Figure 9A of the PCT publication is reproduced below: Figure 9A is a circuit schematic diagram of a portion of an alternative digital memory system. The Examiner has found that the 496 PCT Publication discloses a plurality of bit structures interconnected with manipulation circuitry having a plurality of transistors so that each bit structure has a transistor electrically coupled thereto that selectively substantially prevents current in at least one direction along a current path through that bit structure. Ex. CC-B1, According to the Examiner, one of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the manipulation circuitry including transistors, as disclosed in the 496 PCT Publication, with the bit structures in Chen 323 in order to provide the electrical isolation and control of current flow that the 496 PCT Publication teaches is advantageous for reading data stored in the bit structures. The Examiner relies upon the testimony of Dr. Caroline A. Ross that one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that transistors were well known circuit elements that were commonly used to select and 17

19 manipulate bit structures in memory devices, well known in magnetic memories, and additional transistors utilized as needed. See, e.g., Ross Del. at and Ex. CC-B1, 16. The Examiner found combining these references is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way and yields predictable results. Id. The Examiner next found that the bit structure disclosed in Chen 323 includes a nonmagnetic intermediate layer having two major surfaces on opposite sides thereof, referencing layers 54 and 64 in Figure 8 of Chen 323 as discussed in Chen 323 5:63 66; 6:2 6, and Ex. CC-B1, Finally, the Examiner found that Chen 323 describes a memory film of an anisotropic ferromagnetic material on each of the nonmagnetic intermediate layer major surfaces. Referencing Figure 8 of Chen 323, the Examiner points to magnetic memory films 52 and 53 on the major surfaces of non-magnetic intermediate layer 54 and memory films 62 and 63 on the major surfaces of non-magnetic intermediate layer 64. Ex. CC-B1, The Appellant urges that independent claim 10 includes storage switching transistors that permit selecting the direction of current flow through the bit structure. According to the Appellant, the storage switching transistors are those that control the direction of current, which current writes a 1 or a 0 magnetic state in the bit structure. The term storage in the phrase storage switching transistors is urged to emphasize that the purpose of the storage switching transistor is for storing data by writing that data into the bit structure. Br

20 Br. 20. According to the Appellant: The Examiner, like the Requestor, has chosen to ignore explicit language contained in claim 10. The highlighted language in claim 10 does not simply refer to switching transistors... to permit selecting a direction of current flow through a said bit structure. Rather, claim 10 explicitly requires storage switching transistors. The word storage has been entirely ignored, which changes the meaning of claim 10. The Requester and the Examiner both urge that this is a new argument and it should be disregarded. Resp. Br. 1., Ans. 25. We exercise our discretion to address this argument, as the record at this stage appears developed enough for us to adequately consider it. We turn to the alternative finding provided by Requester, and made by the Examiner, in the original Request: To the extent the Office determines that Chen 323 does not disclose the transistor features recited in claim 10, these features would have been obvious in view of the 496 PCT Publication. Specifically, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to include a plurality of transistors in the manipulation circuitry in a ferromagnetic memory with the bit structures disclosed in Chen 323, where each bit structure has a selection transistor coupled thereto that selectively substantially prevents current in at least one direction along a current path through that bit structure and where the manipulation circuitry further includes storage switching transistors to permit selecting a direction of current flow through a bit structure if current is permitted to be established therein by the selection transistor coupled thereto. For example, the 496 PCT Publication discloses such features. 19

21 The 496 PCT Publication discloses a plurality of bit structures interconnected with manipulation circuitry having a plurality of transistors so that each bit structure has a transistor electrically coupled thereto that selectively substantially prevents current in at least one direction along a current path through that bit structure. An annotated version of Fig. 9A of the 496 PCT Publication, reproduced below, shows these features: As shown in Fig. 9A, the 496 PCT Publication discloses manipulation circuitry that allows the state of the bit structures to be sensed, where the circuitry includes a transistor coupled to each bit structure that, when turned off, prevents current from flowing through the bit structure. Fig. 9A also shows additional storage switching transistors, including transistors 75, to permit selecting a direction of current flow through a bit structure if current is permitted to be established therein by the selection transistor coupled thereto. 20

22 In addition, the 496 PCT Publication discloses that [t]he opposite side of each cell 17 is electrically connected through an interconnection, 77, to a further conductor, 78, which in turn is electrically connected to allow the switching therefore to an electrical energization source, not shown, which either draws operating current from any selected one of cells 17 connected thereto, or supplies a magnetic field generating current for adding in the switching of the magnetization direction of a ferromagnetic layer or layers in cell 17. ( 496 PCT Publication at p. 55, p. 56, 1. 3.) One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the switching of the current through the bit structures in either direction would be controlled by additional transistors not shown in Fig. 9A. (Ross Decl. at 19.). Ex. CC-B1, The Appellant s counsel urges, somewhat vaguely, that the Examiner does not justify Rejection #4 on the basis that Chen 323 and the 496 Publication teach or suggest writing data to a magneto resistive bit structure by selecting a direction of current flow through that bit structure. Br. 20. It appears to us that the Examiner did address this issue in the Request, as quoted immediately above. It also appears that Dr. Ross testified to this very point in her Declaration at paragraph 19 on page 9 of the Declaration. We reproduce that paragraph in full below: 19. For example, Figure 9A of the 496 PCT Publication, reproduced below in annotated form, shows such transistors in the manipulation circuitry of the memory. The 496 PCT Publication also discloses that the direction of current flow through the bit structures is via the conductors 78 that is electrically connected to allow the switching therefore to an electrical energization source, not shown, which either draws operating current from any selected one of cells 1 7 connected 21

23 thereto, or supplies a magnetic field generating current for adding in the switching of the magnetization direction of a ferromagnetic layer or layers in cell 17. ( 496 PCT Publication at p. 55, p. 56, 1. 3.) Similarly, an electrical energization source is switched onto conductor 74 to provide operating current through the transistor and the corresponding selected cell which is carried away on conductor 78. (Id. at p. 56, ) One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the switching of the current through the bit structures in either direction would be controlled by additional transistors not shown in Fig. 9A. Ross Decl. 19. The Examiner has put forth persuasive evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the switching of the current from an unshown source through the bit structures in either direction would be controlled by additional transistors also not shown in Fig. 9A. We are unable to locate within the record evidence provided by the Appellant to rebut the Examiner s finding or to support a different conclusion. Ans. 27, ll

24 We are provided only with the argument of counsel that this issue was not addressed. We disagree with the Appellant, as noted above. Consequently, we are unpersuaded of error in this regard. We therefore affirm this rejection, and rejections 5 7, 9, 12 22, and 25. II. Rejections involving Nishimura N1 N27 A. The Rejection of Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Nishimura. RAN 9, Rejection N1. Claim 1 was reproduced above. The newly added limitation which forms the basis for the issues discussed in the instant briefing on appeal is as follows: circuitry electrically coupled to the bit structure that selectively allows a magnetic state setting current to flow through the bit structure to write binary data into the bit structure and selectively allows a sense current to flow through the bit structure to retrieve the binary data from the bit structure. The Examiner found that Chen 323 taught the limitations of the unamended claim. Determination, September 19, 2012, Page 9, citing Request, Ex. CC-A1, adopted by the Examiner. The Appellant did not challenge that determination, but amended the claim to recite the above new limitation. Response, November 19, In the response, the Patent Owner (now Appellant) stated: None of the cited references describe a magnetoresistive memory cell in which data is written to the bit structure by flowing a current through the bit structure. With this amendment, independent claims 1, 18, 37, and 92 have been amended to require circuitry that writes data to 23

25 the bit structure with a current that flows through the bit structure. Response, November 19, 2012, page 26. The Requester then proposed a new rejection including Nishimura in comments filed December 12, 2012, which the Examiner adopted in the RAN. More specifically, the Examiner found that writing data to or retrieving data from by applying current through the bit structure were well known in the art at the time of the application of the 921 patent, illustrated by Nishimura. RAN 10. The Examiner found that Nishimura describes magnetic memories having a bit structure having a free magnetic layer and a fixed magnetic layer. The Examiner also found that current flowing through the memory cell generates a magnetic field that can flip the magnetization of the free layer to write a data state into the bit structure. Nishimura 6, lines The Examiner further found that Nishimura describes flowing current through a memory cell in one direction writes a binary 1 value, whereas flowing the current in the opposite direction writes a binary 0 value. Id. at 6, line 56 7, line 2. The Examiner found the bit structures of Nishimura to be very similar to those disclosed in Chen 323, Chen 248, and Parkin, including two magnetic layers separated by an insulating material that creates a magnetic tunnel junction. RAN 11. The information recorded in the memory cell can be read by applying a read current through the bit structure, where the resistance encountered by the read current varies based on the relative 24

26 magnetization directions of the magnetic layers. Chen 323 7, lines 9 17; Chen , lines 14 18; Parkin 12, lines The Examiner additionally found that Nishimura describes current flowing through the bit structure for data storage eliminates undesirable antimagnetic fields, which allows for smaller bit cells in a memory and, therefore, improved integration. Nishimura 3, lines The Examiner then concluded that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Nishimura with the bit structures disclosed in Chen 323, Parkin, or Chen 248 in order to decrease undesirable magnetic fields in the memory and allow for increased storage densities. The Examiner specifically found that this combination amounts to nothing more than the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way and yields nothing more than predictable results. RAN The Appellant now on appeal urges that the isotropic structure of Nishimura could not be modified to be used in an anisotropic type of structure, although the arguments assert that position somewhat indirectly. See Br. 27. This position appears to be based on a factual allegation in the Appellant s Brief at page 26: Br. 26. Nishimura requires this type of shape for the magnetic layers of the bit structure because the magnetic state is stored in the form of a closed circular or vortex shaped magnetization loop within the layer. That magnetization loop may be circular, square, or other isotropic shape that causes magnetization to go around a loop within the magnetic layer in a generally circular clockwise or counterclockwise direction. 25

27 statement. Id. at 27. We are not provided with citation to an evidentiary basis for this The Appellant then reaches the conclusion that: It is unclear how the teaching of Nishimura could be modified in such a way to make use of Nishimura s concepts in an anisotropic rather than an isotropic type of structure. The references with which Nishimura is combined do not provide that missing teaching. Simply because the various prior art references relate to magnetic thin film memory devices, and to magnetic tunnel junctions, does not mean that a design taught by Nishimura that has very specific design constraints requiring an isotropic structure, could be applied to a device of a very different anisotropic structure. We are not provided with any persuasive or credible evidence to support the statement of counsel that the anisotropic material of the instant claims would not, in some manner, be suitable to be combined for use with the Nishimura current structure. Moreover, the Nishimura ferromagnetic materials appear to be the same materials as used in the instant patent. Cf. Nishimura and 921 Patent 11:56 and 13: Finally, the claims are not specific as to whether the functioning of the overall structure is isotropic or anisotropic. Consequently, we are not persuaded of error. III. Rejections involving Monsma M1 M27 A. The Rejection of Claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being obvious over Chen 323 in view of Monsma. Claim 1 is as reproduced above. 26

28 The Examiner found Chen 323 to describe ferromagnetic thin-film based digital data memory cells. Request, Ex. CC-A1, 1, citing Chen 323 3:7 9; 5:60 63; 8:22 25, and The Examiner further found that Chen 323 describes a substrate (Chen 323 Figure 8, reference numeral 75) and a bit structure supported on the substrate (Chen 323 6:24 28 and 8:22 27). Request, Ex. CC-A1, 3 4. The Examiner found that the bit structure includes a nonmagnetic intermediate layer having opposing major surfaces. Chen 323, Figure 8, reference numeral 64 and 6:2 6 and Request, Ex. CC-A1, 4 5. The intermediate layer is sandwiched within anisotropic ferromagnetic memory films on each of the major surfaces. Chen 323 Figure 8, reference numerals 62 and 63. Request, Ex. CC-A1, 6. An electrically insulative layer is across the memory film from one of the nonmagnetic intermediate layers. Chen 323, Figure 8, reference numeral 7. Request, Ex. CC-A1, 7. Chen 323 was further found to describe a magnetization reference layer with a fixed magnetization direction having antiferromagnetic material. Chen 323 5: Request, Ex. CC-A1, 8 9. The Examiner next turns to Monsma as describing current passing through a magnetic tunnel junction ( MTJ ) device to write, or assist in writing, the MTJ cell. RAN, 19 citing Monsma 4:26 28 and 5: The Examiner makes the following additional findings: The MTJ bit cells described by Monsma are the same type of cells that are discussed in each of Chen 323, Parkin, and Chen 248 in that they include a free magnetic layer separated from a fixed magnetic layer by an insulating layer, which forms a tunnel junction. In order to decrease the 27

29 disturbance of unselected cells and improve write selectivity, Monsma describes individually selecting the desired bit structure with a selection device, and then using current flow through the bit structure to write data into the bit structure depending on the direction of current flow. Monsma 5:67 6: 2; 6: RAN 20. Moreover, current flowing in one direction though the bit structure would store a 1 whereas current flowing in the opposite direction would store a 0, and that it is preferable to use a transistor as the selection device in order to facilitate bi-directional current flow used in writing to the bit structures. Monsma 4: RAN 20. We observe that the Requester s witness Ross has testified that Monsma described using the self-field of a current passing through the MTJ device to write, or assist in writing the MTJ cell. Ross Suppl. Decl. 11. After noting certain benefits of the MTJ structure, the Examiner then concluded it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Monsma with the bit structures disclosed in Chen 323, Parkin, and Chen 248 in order to improve write selectivity, provide higher switching speeds, and reduce power consumption by using the known technique to improve a similar device in a predictable way. RAN The Appellant, on the other hand, urges that Monsma is similar to Nishimura, in that Monsma describes a clockwise or counterclockwise circular or vortex magnetization in the magnetic layers to store data. Br. 28. The Appellant asserts that the writing of data in the isotropic structure shown in FIG. 13 of Monsma is unique to that particular physical structure. Id. at 29. According to the Appellant, Monsma explicitly teaches away from 28

30 write current flow through an anisotropic bit structure with the example shown in FIGS. 4A 4C which flows horizontally through the bit structure instead of vertically. Appellant points us to the statement that: For conventional anisotropic MTJ s in which the magnetization within the ferromagnetic electrodes is predominantly aligned in one direction (48 in FIG. 4C), the self-field does not aid in switching the MTJ device. Br. 30, citing Monsma 6: We are not persuaded by this argument. First, the argument does not direct attention to what specific aspect of the claims Monsma does not describe. Even were exemplary Figures 4A 4C somehow found to teach away from the claimed subject matter, the Patent Owner has not addressed the testimony of Ross, which observes that Monsma in fact describes using the self-field of a current passing through the MTJ device to write. It appears to us that Figures 5a and 5B, as observed by the Requester, and agreed to by the Examiner (Ans ) show passing a write current through a non-circularly shaped anisotropic MTJ device. Monsma 6: Accordingly, we affirm this rejection. The Appellant has made no substantive argument concerning the remaining rejections. Accordingly, the decision of the Examiner to reject those claims shall not be disturbed. CONCLUSION We have carefully considered the evidence of record. The weight of the objective evidence leads us to the conclusion that the Examiner did not err in concluding the claims at issue would have been obvious to one of only ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. 29

31 We, therefore, sustain the rejections of record. ORDER I. The rejection of claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Chen 323 and 496 PCT Publication is II. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, 496 PCT Publication, and the Daughton Paper is III. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, 496 PCT Publication, and Chen 499 is IV. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323 and the Daughton Paper is V. The rejection of claims 16, 17, 56, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Perner is VI. The rejection of claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323 and Zhu is VII. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen 323, Zhu, and the Daughton Paper is VIII. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Chen 499 is IX. The rejection of claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather is 30

32 X. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Chen 499 is XI. The rejection of claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Sather is XII. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Zhu, Sather, and Chen 499 is XIII. The rejection of claims 10 12, 14 17, 24, 52, 53, 55 57, and 66 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication and Parkin is XIV. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and the Daughton Paper is XV. The rejection of claim 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin and Chen 499 is XVI. The rejection of claims 16, 17, 56, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Perner is XVII. The rejection of claims 16, 17, 56, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Tedrow is XVIII. The rejection of claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Nishimura is XIX. The rejection of claims 1, 4 6, 9, 37, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin in view of Nishimura is XX. The rejection of claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 in view of Nishimura is 31

33 XXI. The rejection of claims 2 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 40, 43, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of the 496 PCT Publication and Nishimura is XXII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of the PCT 496 Publication, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XXIII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXIV. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XXV. The rejection of claim 44 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXVI. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Nishimura is XXVII. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XXVIII. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXIX. The rejection of claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 23, 40, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Nishimura is 32

34 XXX. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XXXI. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXXII. The rejection of claims 3, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 43, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather and Nishimura is XXXIII. The rejection of claims 29, 96, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 in view of Sather, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXXIV. The rejection of claims 18 20, 23, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Nishimura is XXXV. The rejection of claims 96 and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XXXVI. The rejection of claims 1 9, 18 20, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 58, 60, 61, 67 69, 92, and 93 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura is XXXVII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XXXVIII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Chen 499, and Nishimura is 33

35 XXXIX. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, and Nishimura is XL. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XLI. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XLI. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, and Nishimura is XLIII. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, the Daughton Paper, and Nishimura is XLIV. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, Chen 499, and Nishimura is XLV. The rejection of claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Monsma is XLVI. The rejection of claims 1, 4 6, 9, 37, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Monsma is XLVII. The rejection of claims 1 9, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 60, 61, 68, and 69 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Monsma is 34

36 XLVIII. The rejection of claims 2 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 40, 43, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma is XLIX. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is L. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen '323, the PCT 496 Publication, Chen 499, and Monsma is LI. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LII. The rejection of claim 44 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Chen 499, and Monsma is LIII. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma is LIV. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LV. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the PCT 496 Publication, Perner, Chen 499, and Monsma is LVI. The rejection of claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18 20, 23, 40, 58, 61, 67, 92, 93, 96, and 97 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Monsma is 35

37 LVII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LVIII. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Chen 499, and Monsma is LIX. The rejection of claims 3, 18 20, 22, 23, 39, 43, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Monsma is LX. The rejection of claims 29, 96, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, Chen 499, and Monsma is LXI. The rejection of claims 18 20, 23, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Monsma is LXII. The rejection of claims 96 and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, Chen 499, and Monsma is LXIII. The rejection of claims 1 9, 18 20, 22, 23, 37, 39, 40, 43, 50, 58, 60, 61, 67 69, 92, and 93 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma is LXIV. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LXV. The rejection of claims 29, 44, and 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Chen 499, and Monsma is 36

38 LXVI. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, and Monsma is LXVII. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LXVIII. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Perner, Chen 499, and Monsma is LXIX. The rejection of claims 18 20, 58, 67, 92, 93, and under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication in view of Parkin, Tedrow, and Monsma is LXX. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, the Daughton Paper, and Monsma is LXXI. The rejection of claim 99 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, Tedrow, Chen 499, and Monsma is LXXII. The rejection of claim 102 under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is LXXIII. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Sather is LXXIV. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Sather is LXXV. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Nishimura is 37

39 LXXVI. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Nishimura is LXXVII. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Nishimura is LXXVIII. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Nishimura is LXXIX. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura is LXXX. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, the 496 PCT Publication, and Monsma is LXXXI. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, and Monsma is LXXXII. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Sather, and Monsma is LXXXIII. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323, Zhu, Sather, and Monsma is LXXXIV. The rejection of claims 105 and 106 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma is LXXXV. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Nishimura is LXXXVI. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Nishimura is LXXXVII. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Nishimura is 38

40 LXXXVIII. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Nishimura is XC. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 323 and Monsma is XCI. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Parkin and Monsma is XCII. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over Chen 248 and Monsma is XCIII. The rejection of claims and 107 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) over the 496 PCT Publication, Parkin, and Monsma is No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R (a). AFFIRMED 39

41 Patent Owner: KINNEY & LANGE, P.A. THE KINNEY & LANGE BUILDING 312 SOUTH THIRD STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MN Third Party Requester: FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARAB OW, GARRET & DUNNER LLP 901 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC