Ex Parte Czubatyj et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardSep 17, 201411743459 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 17, 2014) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 11/743,459 05/02/2007 Wolodymyr Czubatyj 220824-112308 6875 44200 7590 09/18/2014 HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ & COHN LLP 350 East Michigan Avenue Suite 300 Kalamazoo, MI 49007-3800 EXAMINER LAURENZI, MARK A ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2894 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 09/18/2014 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) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD __________ Ex parte WOLODYMYR CZUBATYJ, TYLER LOWREY, SERGEY KOSTYLEV, and REGINO SANDOVAL __________ Appeal 2012-007761 Application 11/743,459 Technology Center 2800 ___________ Before ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and JAMES C. HOUSEL, Administrative Patent Judges. HANLON, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL A. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a final rejection of claims 25, 28-30, 35-42, 45-47, and 52-57.1 We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). 1 Claims 26, 27, 31-34, 43, 44, and 48-51 are also pending but have been withdrawn from consideration. See Office Action dated February 18, 2011, at 2 (acknowledg[ing] that applicant has elected without traverse Species II (Figs. 11A- 11D), claims 25, 28-30, 35-42, 45-47 and 52-57 in a required election-restriction correspondence received 12-13-2010”); see also Appeal Brief dated December 2, Appeal 2012-007761 Application 11/743,459 2 We AFFIRM. The subject matter on appeal is directed to a memory device comprising a phase-change material. Claim 25 is representative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced below from the Claims Appendix of the Appeal Brief dated December 2, 2011 (“App. Br.”). 25. A memory device comprising: a first electrode; a second electrode disposed above said first electrode; a first dielectric layer disposed between said first electrode and said second electrode, said first dielectric layer having an opening therethrough, said first dielectric layer not directly contacting said first electrode or said second electrode; a phase-change material in electrical communication with said first electrode and said second electrode, said phase-change material having a first area of electrical communication with said first electrode and a second area of electrical communication with said second electrode, said phase-change material having a first portion disposed between said first dielectric layer and said first electrode, a second portion disposed between said first dielectric layer and said second electrode, and a third portion disposed within said opening. App. Br. 13 (emphasis added). Claim 42, the other independent claim on appeal, also recites a memory device. The memory device comprises, in order, a first electrode, a first layer of phase-change material, a first dielectric layer, a second layer of phase-change material, and a second electrode. App. Br. 14. 2011 (“App. Br.”), at 3 (identifying claims 25, 28-30, 35-42, 45-47, and 52-57 as the rejected claims). Appeal 2012-007761 Application 11/743,459 3 The claims on appeal stand rejected as follows: claims 25, 28-30, 39, 42, and 45-47 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Kostylev;2 claims 35, 38, 52, and 55 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kostylev in view of Asano;3 claims 36, 37, 53, and 54 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kostylev in view of Asano and Maimon;4 and claims 40, 41, 56, and 57 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kostylev in view of Maimon. B. ISSUE The sole issue on appeal is whether the Examiner reversibly erred in finding that the chalcogenide threshold switching material disclosed in Kostylev is “a phase-change material” as recited in claims 25 and 42. C. DISCUSSION Referring to Kostylev Figure 4, the Examiner finds that Kostylev discloses a memory device comprising, inter alia, a phase-change material (i.e., layers 130, 150) in electrical communication with first and second electrodes. Ans. 5.5 There is no dispute on this record that the programmable resistance material of layer 130 is a phase-change material. However, the Appellants argue that the threshold switching material of layer 150 is not a phase-change material. App. Br. 8. In particular, the Appellants argue that “a phase[-]change material is capable of being electrically programmed between a crystalline state and an amorphous state” but “threshold switching materials are known to remain in an amorphous (i.e., highly resistive) state and never transition to/from a state of low resistance (i.e., a crystalline) state.” App. Br. 9 (emphasis omitted); cf. Ans. 10 (finding that 2 US 7,459,762 B2, issued December 2, 2008. 3 US 2007/0164267 A1, published July 19, 2007. 4 US 2003/0039924 A1, published February 27, 2003. 5 Examiner’s Answer dated February 14, 2012. Appeal 2012-007761 Application 11/743,459 4 the conductive channels formed within Kostylev’s resistive chalcogenide threshold switching material is a change in phase). The Appellants also argue that “Kostylev states that phase[-]change materials may be programmed ‘between three or more resistance values’” whereas “threshold switching materials . . . only includes [sic, include] two values/states associated with a high resistance” (i.e., “ON” and “OFF”). App. Br. 9 (emphasis omitted). The Appellants argue that “a phase[-]change material does not include ‘ON’ / ‘OFF’ switching properties nor a threshold voltage.” App. Br. 10; cf. Ans. 12 (finding that “ON/OFF switching properties [are] an intrinsic property of phase[-]change materials”). Kostylev generally defines phase-change materials as “capable of being electrically programmed between a first structural state where the material is generally amorphous and a second structural state where the material is generally crystalline.” Kostylev, col. 1, ll. 34-37 (emphasis added). Kostylev discloses: Materials that may be used as a phase-change material include alloys of the elements from group VI of the Periodic Table. These group VI elements are referred to as the chalcogen elements and include the elements Te and Se. Alloys that include one or more of the chalcogen elements are referred to as chalcogenide alloys. Id. at col. 1, ll. 47-52. This disclosure in Kostylev is consistent with the definition of phase-change materials provided in the Appellants’ Specification: As used herein, the term phase-change memory material refers to a material capable of changing between two or more phases that have distinct electrical characteristics. Phase-change layer 28 preferably includes at least one chalcogen element selected from Te and Se, and may further include one element selected from the group consisting of Ge, Sb, Bi, Pb, Sn, As, S, Si, P, O, N, In and mixtures thereof. Appeal 2012-007761 Application 11/743,459 5 Spec. ¶ 71 (emphasis added); see also In re ICON Health and Fitness, Inc., 496 F.3d 1374, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (during examination, “the PTO must give claims their broadest reasonable construction consistent with the specification”). Kostylev discloses: The threshold switching material [150] used is preferably a chalcogenide threshold switching material. An example of a chalcogenide alloy which may be used as a threshold switching material is the alloy Si14Te39As37Ge9X1 where X may be element In or the element P. Kostylev, col. 4, ll. 18-23. The Examiner finds that “[t]he phase[-]change property (i.e., change from insulating state to the conductive state) is an inherent property of element 150,” which is a chalcogenide alloy. Ans. 11. The Appellants do not address this finding by the Examiner. Based on the record before us, a preponderance of the evidence of record supports the Examiner’s finding that the chalcogenide threshold switching material disclosed in Kostylev is a “phase-change material” as recited in independent claims 25 and 42. D. DECISION The decision of the Examiner is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED bar Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation