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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 25-29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 25, line 5, recites “resin.” which should be --resin,--.
Claim 25, line 8, recites “a surface” which should be --the surface--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, 13, 20, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0260535] in view of Lee et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0169807] (hereinafter as “Lee ‘807”) and Moon et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0086714].
Regarding Claim 1, Kubota et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 5-7 with teachings from Figs. 1-4) comprising:
a body (10);
a coil unit (element 30 having elements 32, 37) disposed in the body (see Figs. 5-7);
external electrodes (20, 25) disposed on the body and connected to the coil unit (see Figs. 5-7, Paragraphs [0092]-[0095]); and
a surface insulating layer (9) disposed on the body (see Figs. 5-7), and including inorganic fillers (15).
Kubota does not explicitly disclose fluorine coating layers disposed on surfaces of the inorganic fillers and the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm.
Lee ‘807 shows a surface insulating layer (Figs. 1-3) teaching and suggesting inorganic fillers (120, Paragraph [0053]) with fluorine coating layers (121 or 124) disposed on surfaces thereof (see Figs. 1-3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have fluorine coating layers disposed on surfaces of the inorganic fillers as taught by Lee ‘807 for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. to achieve a high thermally stable surface insulating layer (Paragraphs [0015], [0098]).
Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 does not show the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm.
Moon et al. shows an electronic component (Figs. 1-2) teaching and suggesting the surface insulating layer (60) has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm (Paragraph [0071]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm as taught by Moon et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body (Paragraph [0072]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 2, Kubota et al. shows the surface insulating layer (9) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0039]), and the inorganic fillers (15) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 7).
Regarding Claim 3, Kubota et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (15) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially exposed from a surface of element 9).
Regarding Claim 5, Kubota et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (15) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially protrude from a surface of element 9).
Regarding Claim 6, Lee ‘807 shows a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (Paragraph [0081]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to achieve a high thermally stable surface insulating layer. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 7, Kubota et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0042]), and titanium oxide (TiO2).
Lee ‘807 shows the inorganic fillers include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0018]), and titanium oxide (TiO2).
Regarding Claim 10, Kubota et al. shows the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (32a or 37a) extending from one surface of the body (element 32a extending from one surface of element 10 or element 37a extending from one surface of element 10).
Regarding Claim 11, Kubota et al. shows a substrate (16) disposed in the body (see Figs. 5-7), with the coil unit being (30) disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 5-7).
Regarding Claim 13, Kubota et al. shows the lead-out portion (32a, 37a) includes a first lead-out portion (32a) extending from the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and a second lead-out portion (37a) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and
the external electrodes (20, 25) include a first external electrode (20) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (32a, see Figs. 5-7), and a second external electrode (25) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (37a, see Figs. 5-7).
Regarding Claim 20, Kubota et al. shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0103]).
Regarding Claim 23, Kubota et al. shows the surface insulating layer (9) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (32a or 37a, see Fig. 7, Paragraph [0092]).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Mawatari [JP 2016046476].
Regarding Claim 3, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from a surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Mawatari shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 30b of Mawatari) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a of Mawatari).
Regarding Claim 5, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially protrude from a surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Harazono et al. [KR 2019-0047597].
Regarding Claim 3, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from a surface of element 2a or 2b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Harazono et al. shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 3a of Harazono et al.) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b of Harazono et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially protrude from a surface of element 2a or 2b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al. [CN 112103362].
Regarding Claim 6, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Yang et al. shows a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (see English translation).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less as taught by Yang et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to facilitate stability, resistance, and performance (see English translation).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to facilitate stability, resistance, and performance. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 12, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Claim(s) 14, 19, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1, 10, and 13 above, and further in view of Choi [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0225517].
Regarding Claim 14, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show the surface insulating layer covers regions where the first and second external electrodes are not disposed on surfaces of the body.
Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed on surfaces of the body (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the surface insulating layer covers regions where the first and second external electrodes are not disposed on surfaces of the body as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to have generation of plating spread in the region of the magnetic body except thereof on which external electrodes will be formed may be prevented by performing plating after forming the insulating layer (Paragraph [0098]).
Regarding Claim 19, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer.
Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve excellent electrical conductivity and improve adhesive strength (Paragraphs [0105], [0122]).
Regarding Claim 24, Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of the regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mawatari [JP 2016046476].
Regarding Claim 25, Kubota et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane ((SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0042]), and titanium oxide (TiO2),
wherein the surface insulating layer (9) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0039]),
wherein the inorganic fillers (15) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 7),
wherein some of the inorganic fillers (15) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially protrude from a surface of element 9),
wherein some of the inorganic fillers (15) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially exposed from a surface of element 9).
Lee ‘807 shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. does not explicitly show some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially protrude from a surface of element 30/30a), some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from a surface of element 30/30a) and on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 30b) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, the combination of Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Mawatari shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 30b of Mawatari) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a of Mawatari) to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Mawatari as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 26, Kubota et al. shows a substrate (16) disposed in the body (see Figs. 5-7), with the coil unit (30) being disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 5-7), and wherein the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (32a or 37a) extending from one surface of the body (element 32a extending from one surface of element 10 or element 37a extending from one surface of element 10).
Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Mawatari does not explicitly show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Mawatari to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 27, Kubota et al. shows the lead-out portion (32a, 37a) includes a first lead-out portion (32a) extending from the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and a second lead-out portion (37a) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and
the external electrodes (20, 25) include a first external electrode (20) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (32a, see Figs. 5-7), and a second external electrode (25) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (37a, see Figs. 5-7).
Claim(s) 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Mawatari, and Jeong et al. as applied to claims 26-27 above, and further in view of Choi [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0225517].
Regarding Claim 28, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Mawatari, and Jeong et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer.
Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Mawatari, and Jeong et al. to achieve excellent electrical conductivity and improve adhesive strength (Paragraphs [0105], [0122]).
Regarding Claim 29, Kubota et al. shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0103]), wherein the surface insulating layer (9) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (32a or 37a, see Fig. 7, Paragraph [0092]).
Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harazono et al. [KR 2019-0047597].
Regarding Claim 25, Kubota et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane ((SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0042]), and titanium oxide (TiO2),
wherein the surface insulating layer (9) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0039]),
wherein the inorganic fillers (15) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 7),
wherein some of the inorganic fillers (15) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially protrude from a surface of element 9),
wherein some of the inorganic fillers (15) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 7, some of elements 15 are partially exposed from a surface of element 9).
Lee ‘807 shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. does not explicitly show some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially protrude from a surface of element 2a or 2b), some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from a surface of element 2a or 2b), and some of the inorganic fillers (elements 3a) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807 and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Therefore, the combination of Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Harazono et al. shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 3a of Harazono et al.) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b of Harazono et al.) to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Harazono et al. as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 26, Kubota et al. shows a substrate (16) disposed in the body (see Figs. 5-7), with the coil unit (30) being disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 5-7), and wherein the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (32a or 37a) extending from one surface of the body (element 32a extending from one surface of element 10 or element 37a extending from one surface of element 10).
Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Harazono et al. does not explicitly show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., and Harazono et al. to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 27, Kubota et al. shows the lead-out portion (32a, 37a) includes a first lead-out portion (32a) extending from the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and a second lead-out portion (37a) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Figs. 5-7), and
the external electrodes (20, 25) include a first external electrode (20) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (32a, see Figs. 5-7), and a second external electrode (25) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (37a, see Figs. 5-7).
Claim(s) 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Harazono et al., and Jeong et al. as applied to claims 26-27 above, and further in view of Choi [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0225517].
Regarding Claim 28, Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Harazono et al., and Jeong et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer.
Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have each of the first and second external electrodes includes a first metal layer contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions, and a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Kubota et al. in view of Lee ‘807, Moon et al., Harazono et al., and Jeong et al. to achieve excellent electrical conductivity and improve adhesive strength (Paragraphs [0105], [0122]).
Regarding Claim 29, Kubota et al. shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0103]), wherein the surface insulating layer (9) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (32a or 37a, see Fig. 7, Paragraph [0092]).
Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-7, 10-11, 13-14, 19-20, and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0225517] in view of Lee et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0028430], Lee et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0169807] (hereinafter as “Lee ‘807”), and Moon et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0086714].
Regarding Claim 1, Choi shows a coil component (Figs. 1-7) comprising:
a body (50);
a coil unit (element 40 having elements 41, 42) disposed in the body (see Figs. 1-7);
external electrodes (left and right elements 80) disposed on the body and connected to the coil unit (see Figs. 1-7, Paragraph [0046]); and
a surface insulating layer (60) disposed on the body (see Figs. 1-7).
Choi does not explicitly disclose the surface insulating layer including inorganic fillers with fluorine coating layers disposed on surfaces thereof and the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm.
Lee et al. shows an inductor (Fig. 2) teaching and suggesting the surface insulating layer (150) including inorganic fillers (151) with coating layers disposed on surfaces thereof (Paragraph [0050]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the surface insulating layer including inorganic fillers with coating layers disposed on surfaces thereof as taught by Lee et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi to achieve strong directivity where the effect of suppressing shrinkage and expansion in a flow direction is excellent (Paragraph [0047]) and has an effect of minimizing deformation due to external heat impact (Paragraph [0048]).
Choi in view of Lee et al. does not explicitly disclose fluorine coating layers disposed on surfaces of the inorganic fillers and the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm.
Lee ‘807 shows a surface insulating layer (Figs. 1-3) teaching and suggesting inorganic fillers (120, Paragraph [0053]) with fluorine coating layers (121 or 124) disposed on surfaces thereof (see Figs. 1-3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have fluorine coating layers disposed on surfaces of the inorganic fillers as taught by Lee ‘807 for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al. to achieve a high thermally stable surface insulating layer (Paragraphs [0015], [0098]).
Choi in view of Lee et al. and Lee ‘807 does not show the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm.
Moon et al. shows an electronic component (Figs. 1-2) teaching and suggesting the surface insulating layer (60) has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm (Paragraph [0071]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm as taught by Moon et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al. and Lee ‘807 to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body (Paragraph [0072]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 2, Lee et al. shows the surface insulating layer (150) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0057]), and the inorganic fillers (151) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 6, Lee ‘807 shows a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (Paragraph [0081]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to achieve a high thermally stable surface insulating layer. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 7, Lee et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0008]), and titanium oxide (TiO2).
Lee ‘807 shows the inorganic fillers include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0018]), and titanium oxide (TiO2).
Regarding Claim 10, Choi shows the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3) extending from one surface of the body (end portion of element 41 extending from one surface of element 50 or end portion of element 42 extending from one surface of element 50, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 11, Choi shows a substrate (20) disposed in the body (see Figs. 1-7), with the coil unit being (40) disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 1-7, Paragraph [0035]).
Regarding Claim 13, Choi shows the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 and end portion of element 42) includes a first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41) extending from the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and a second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and
the external electrodes (left and right elements 80) include a first external electrode (left element 80) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41, see Fig. 3), and a second external electrode (right element 80) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 14, Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed on surfaces of the body (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding Claim 19, Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 20, Choi shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0083]).
Regarding Claim 23, Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 24, Choi shows the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of the regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Mawatari [JP 2016046476].
Regarding Claim 3, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin.
Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from a surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Choi in view of Lee ‘807 and Mawatari shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 30b of Mawatari) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a of Mawatari).
Regarding Claim 5, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin.
Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially protrude from a surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Harazono et al. [KR 2019-0047597].
Regarding Claim 3, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin.
Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from a surface of element 2a or 2b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Choi in view of Lee ‘807 and Harazono et al. shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 3a of Harazono et al.) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b of Harazono et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin.
Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially protrude from a surface of element 2a or 2b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al. [CN 112103362].
Regarding Claim 6, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Yang et al. shows a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less (see English translation).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less as taught by Yang et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to facilitate stability, resistance, and performance (see English translation).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a mean content ratio of fluorine (F) in the surface insulating layer is 1 wt% or more and 20 wt% or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art to facilitate stability, resistance, and performance. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 12, Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mawatari [JP 2016046476].
Regarding Claim 25, Lee et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0008]), and titanium oxide (TiO2),
wherein the surface insulating layer (150) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0057]),
wherein the inorganic fillers (151) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 2).
Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. does not explicitly show wherein some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin, wherein some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin, and wherein the fluorine coating layers on some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Mawatari shows some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially protrude from a surface of element 30/30a), some of the inorganic fillers (30b, Paragraph [0033]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from a surface of element 30/30a), and on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 30b) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin, wherein some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin, and on some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin as taught by Mawatari for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, the combination of Choi in view of Lee ‘807 and Mawatari shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 30b of Mawatari) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Fig. 2, some of elements 30b are partially exposed from the surface of element 30/30a of Mawatari) to achieve both suppression of the occurrence of cracks and improvement of heat dissipation (Paragraph [0007]).
Claim(s) 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Mawatari as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 26, Choi shows a substrate (20) disposed in the body (see Figs. 1-7), with the coil unit (40) being disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 1-7, Paragraph [0035]), and wherein the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3) extending from one surface of the body (end portion of element 41 extending from one surface of element 50 or end portion of element 42 extending from one surface of element 50, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3).
Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Mawatari does not explicitly show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Mawatari to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 27, Choi shows the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 and end portion of element 42) includes a first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41) extending from the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and a second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and
the external electrodes (left and right elements 80) include a first external electrode (left element 80) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41, see Fig. 3), and a second external electrode (right element 80) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 28, Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 29, Choi shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0083])), wherein the surface insulating layer (60) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3), and wherein the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harazono et al. [KR 2019-0047597].
Regarding Claim 25, Lee et al. shows the inorganic fillers (15) include at least one selected from the group consisting of silane (SiH4), silica (SiO2) (Paragraph [0008]), and titanium oxide (TiO2),
wherein the surface insulating layer (150) further includes an insulating resin (Paragraph [0057]),
wherein the inorganic fillers (151) are disposed in the insulating resin (see Fig. 2).
Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. does not explicitly show wherein some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin, wherein some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin, and wherein the fluorine coating layers on some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin.
Harazono et al. shows some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially protrude from a surface of element 2a or 2b), some of the inorganic fillers (3a, Paragraph [0017]) are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from a surface of element 2a or 2b), and on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 3a) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have some of the inorganic fillers partially protrude from a surface of the insulating resin, wherein some of the inorganic fillers are partially exposed from a surface of the insulating resin, and on some of the inorganic fillers are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin as taught by Harazono et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al. to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Therefore, the combination of Choi in view of Lee ‘807 and Harazono et al. shows the fluorine coating layers (element 121 or 124 of Lee ‘807) on some of the inorganic fillers (elements 120 of Lee ‘807 and elements 3a of Harazono et al.) are at least partially exposed from the surface of the insulating resin (see Figs. 2-3, some of elements 3a are partially exposed from the surface of element 2a or 2b of Harazono et al.) to achieve excellent in the transmission characteristics and adhesion between wiring conductor and the insulating layer (Paragraph [0006]).
Claim(s) 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Harazono et al. as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0219645].
Regarding Claim 26, Choi shows a substrate (20) disposed in the body (see Figs. 1-7), with the coil unit (40) being disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (see Figs. 1-7, Paragraph [0035]), and wherein the coil unit includes a lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3) extending from one surface of the body (end portion of element 41 extending from one surface of element 50 or end portion of element 42 extending from one surface of element 50, Paragraph [0046], Figs. 2-3).
Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Harazono et al. does not explicitly show an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body.
Jeong et al. shows a coil component (Figs. 1-4) teaching and suggesting an insulating film (600) disposed between the coil unit (300) and the body (100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have an insulating film disposed between the coil unit and the body as taught by Jeong et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Choi in view of Lee et al., Lee ‘807, and Moon et al., and Harazono et al. to facilitate insulation to prevent unwanted connections and/or electrical shorts (Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding Claim 27, Choi shows the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 and end portion of element 42) includes a first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41) extending from the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and a second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42) extending from an other surface facing the one surface of the body (see Fig. 3), and
the external electrodes (left and right elements 80) include a first external electrode (left element 80) disposed on the one surface of the body and connected to the first lead-out portion (end portion of element 41, see Fig. 3), and a second external electrode (right element 80) disposed on the other surface of the body and connected to the second lead-out portion (end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 28, Choi shows each of the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) includes a first metal layer (left and right elements 81) contacting each of the first and second lead-out portions (see Fig. 3), and a second metal layer (left and right elements 82) disposed on the first metal layer (see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 29, Choi shows the coil unit is a wire-wound type coil (Paragraph [0083])), wherein the surface insulating layer (60) is not disposed on the lead-out portion (end portion of element 41 or end portion of element 42, see Fig. 3), and wherein the surface insulating layer (60) covers an entirety of regions where the first and second external electrodes (left and right elements 80) are not disposed (see Figs. 3 and 6A-6B, Paragraph [0085]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that Moon et al. does not show “the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm” is found not persuasive because Moon et al. shows the surface insulating layer (60) has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm (Paragraph [0071]). Moon et al. discloses the surface insulating layer (60) has a mean thickness of 0.1 μm to 50 μm which overlaps and fully encompasses the claim limitations a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm. According to the rejection above, Moon et al. is a 103 rejection so therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm as taught by Moon et al. to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body (Paragraph [0072]).
In addition, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have “the surface insulating layer has a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm”, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art to prevent plating spreading phenomenon and increase inductance based on increased volume of the magnetic body, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Therefore, the “obvious to try” rationale is proper in the instant case.
The broad range of Moon et al. overlaps and fully encompasses the claim limitations of “a mean thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm” so therefore can anticipate or obvious to the claim limitations claim 1. According to Table 1, Experimental example #3-#5 only provides three thickness of surface insulating layer of 2.9 µm, 5.5 µm, and 10.1 µm, respectively. Table 1 does not provide any additional thicknesses between 1 µm and 2.9 µm; 2.9 µm and 5.5 µm; 5.5 µm and 10.1 µm; and 10.1 µm and 11 µm. The specification also does not provide any additional thicknesses. Therefore, Table 1 and the specification does not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate criticality and the claimed ranges are actually still a broad range. The broad range of Moon et al. also overlaps other thicknesses of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm besides 2.9 µm, 5.5 µm, and 10.1 µm. Table 1 does not provide any criticality for thickness between 1 µm and 2.9 µm; 2.9 µm and 5.5 µm; 5.5 µm and 10.1 µm; and 10.1 µm and 11 µm. Therefore, the claimed broad ranges are obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103 and the examiner can assert obviousness of the claimed broad ranges using rationale of “routine experimentation”.
In response to Applicant's allegations of criticality/unexpected results, Examiner notes that the cited portions in the specification and Table 1 do not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate criticality. Objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support. In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. See MPEP §716.02. Since applicant has not provided objective evidence commensurate in scope with the claims (e.g., experimental data and/or graph for thickness of 1 µm or more and less than 11 µm besides 2.9 µm, 5.5 µm, and 10.1 µm), Applicant's argument is not found convincing.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSZFUNG J CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7981. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at (571)272-3985. 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.
/TSZFUNG J CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837