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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 12-13 and 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species II-IV, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/03/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsushita et al. [WO 2018/212273].
Regarding Claim 1, Matsushita et al. shows a multilayer-type coil component (Fig. 13 with general teachings from Figs. 1-12) comprising:
an element body (30) including a plurality of insulating layers (a-m) laminated (see Fig. 13 with teachings from Figs. 1-12, see English translation) in a laminating direction (X-direction);
a first coil (10) inside the element body (see Fig. 13);
a second coil (20) inside the element body (see Fig. 13) and insulated from the first coil (see Fig. 13);
a first outer electrode (51a) on a surface (5) of the element body (see Fig. 13, see also Fig. 1 for general teachings) and electrically connected to the first coil (element 51a electrically connected to element 10);
a second outer electrode (51b) on the surface (5) of the element body (see Fig. 13, see also Fig. 1 for general teachings) and electrically connected to the first coil (element 51b electrically connected to element 10);
a third outer electrode (52a) on the surface (5) of the element body (see Fig. 13, see also Fig. 1 for general teachings) and electrically connected to the second coil (element 52a electrically connected to element 20); and
a fourth outer electrode (52b) on the surface (5) of the element body (see Fig. 13, see also Fig. 1 for general teachings) and electrically connected to the second coil (element 52b electrically connected to element 20), wherein
the laminating direction (X-direction), a direction of a coil axis of the first coil (a direction of a coil axis of element 10 is in the X-direction), and a direction of a coil axis of the second coil (a direction of a coil axis of element 20 is in the X-direction) are parallel to a mount surface (also element 5) of the element body along a same direction (a direction of a coil axis of element 10 is in the X-direction and a direction of a coil axis of element 20 is in the X-direction are parallel to element 5 along a same direction),
the first coil (10) comprises a plurality of first coil conductors (11a, 11b) laminated in the laminating direction being electrically connected (see Fig. 13),
each of the first coil conductors has a length smaller than one turn of the first coil (see Fig. 13 with teachings from Figs. 1-12, each of elements 11a, 11b has a length smaller than one turn of element 10, see English translation),
the second coil (20) comprises a plurality of second coil conductors (21a, 21b) laminated in the laminating direction being electrically connected (see Fig. 13), and
each of the second coil conductors has a length smaller than one turn of the second coil (see Fig. 13 with teachings from Figs. 1-12, each of elements 21a, 21b has a length smaller than one turn of element 20, see English translation).
Regarding Claim 10, Matsushita et al. shows when viewed from the laminating direction (X-direction), the first coil conductors (11a, 11b) and the second coil conductors (21a, 21b) take a shape in a relation of non-rotational symmetry (see Fig. 13 with teachings from Figs. 1-12, elements 11a, 11b and elements 21a, 21b take a shape in a relation of non-rotation symmetry).
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) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Iwao [JP H08-55726] and Iwao [U.S. Patent No. 6,218,925] (hereinafter as “Iwao ‘925”).
Regarding Claim 2, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry.
Iwao shows a device (Figs. 13-14) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 13), at least one set of the first coil conductors (element 22 on elements K1-K2) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (see Figs. 13-14, element 22 on elements K1-K2 adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to obtain stable electrical characteristics (see English translation).
In addition, Iwao ‘925 clearly discloses in the specification (Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22) when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
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 at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao ‘925 for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. in view of Iwao to achieve desirable symmetry that avoid a difference in inductance so that magnetic resistance and inductance of the laminated inductor remain the same (Col. 2, Lines 19-21, Col. 11, Lines 38-53, Col. 13, Lines 8-10).
Regarding Claim 3, Iwao shows when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 13), at least one set of the first coil conductors (element 22 on elements K1-K2) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (see Figs. 13-14, element 22 on elements K1-K2 adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry).
Iwao ‘925 shows when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
Regarding Claim 4, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry.
Iwao shows a device (Figs. 13-14) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 13), at least one set of the second coil conductors (element 23 on elements K1-K2) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (see Figs. 13-14, element 23 on elements K1-K2 adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to obtain stable electrical characteristics (see English translation).
In addition, Iwao ‘925 clearly discloses in the specification (Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22) when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
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 at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao ‘925 for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. in view of Iwao to achieve desirable symmetry that avoid a difference in inductance so that magnetic resistance and inductance of the laminated inductor remain the same (Col. 2, Lines 19-21, Col. 11, Lines 38-53, Col. 13, Lines 8-10).
Regarding Claim 5, Iwao shows when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 13), at least one set of the second coil conductors (element 23 on elements K1-K2) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (see Figs. 13-14, element 23 on elements K1-K2 adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry).
Iwao ‘925 shows when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
Claim(s) 2, 4, and 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. [JP H04-123405].
Regarding Claim 2, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry.
Ooshima et al. shows a device (Fig. 1) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 1), at least one set of the first coil conductors (11b, 11c) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (see Fig. 1, elements 11b, 11c adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Ooshima et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to prevent current to flow between both coils through the interwire distributed capacitance and improve the function as an inductor (Abstract, Purpose).
Regarding Claim 4, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry.
Ooshima et al. shows a device (Fig. 1) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 1), at least one set of the second coil conductors (12b, 12c) adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry (see Fig. 1, elements 12b, 12c adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of rotational symmetry as taught by Ooshima et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to prevent current to flow between both coils through the interwire distributed capacitance and improve the function as an inductor (Abstract, Purpose).
Regarding Claim 6, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Ooshima et al. shows a device (Fig. 1) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors (11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11m, 11n) does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors (12a, 12b, 12c, 12l, 12m, 12n) that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Fig. 1).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Ooshima et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to prevent current to flow between both coils through the interwire distributed capacitance and improve the function as an inductor (Abstract, Purpose).
Regarding Claim 7, Ooshima et al. shows in the laminating direction, two of the second coil conductors (11b, 11c) adjacent to one of the first coil conductors (12b) which interpose the one first coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a second coil via conductor (31b) which penetrates through the insulating layers (3b) in the laminating direction (see Fig. 1), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the second coil via conductor (31b) overlaps each one end of the two second coil conductors (11b, 11c) on an outer side of perimeter of the one first coil conductor (12b, see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 8, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Ooshima et al. shows a device (Fig. 1) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors (12a, 12b, 12c, 12l, 12m, 12n) does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors (11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, 11m, 11n) that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Fig. 1).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Ooshima et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship to prevent current to flow between both coils through the interwire distributed capacitance and improve the function as an inductor (Abstract, Purpose).
Regarding Claim 9, Ooshima et al. shows in the laminating direction, two of the first coil conductors (12b, 12c) adjacent to one of the second coil conductors (11c) which interpose the one second coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a first coil via conductor (32b) which penetrates through the insulating layers (3c) in the laminating direction (see Fig. 1), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the first coil via conductor (32b) overlaps each one end of the two first coil conductors (12b, 12c) on an outer side of perimeter of the one second coil conductor (11c, see Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. as applied to claims 2 and 4 above, and further in view of Iwao [U.S. Patent No. 6,218,925] (hereinafter as “Iwao ‘925”).
Regarding Claim 3, Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry.
Iwao ‘925 shows when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the first coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao ‘925 for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. to achieve desirable symmetry that avoid a difference in inductance so that magnetic resistance and inductance of the laminated inductor remain the same (Col. 2, Lines 19-21, Col. 11, Lines 38-53, Col. 13, Lines 8-10).
Regarding Claim 5, Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry.
Iwao ‘925 shows when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry (Col. 1, Lines 5-6, Col. 12, Lines 45-58, see Figs. 17, 19, 20, 22).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, at least one set of the second coil conductors adjacent to each other in the laminating direction takes a shape in a relation of 90-degree rotational symmetry as taught by Iwao ‘925 for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. in view of Ooshima et al. to achieve desirable symmetry that avoid a difference in inductance so that magnetic resistance and inductance of the laminated inductor remain the same (Col. 2, Lines 19-21, Col. 11, Lines 38-53, Col. 13, Lines 8-10).
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Choi [U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0042860].
Regarding Claim 6, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Choi shows an inductor (Figs. 1-2) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors (120) does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors (130) that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Figs 1-2).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to further reinforce an electromagnetic coupling that is advantageous to miniaturization which improves production efficiency (Paragraphs [0009]-[0010]).
Regarding Claim 7, Choi shows in the laminating direction, two of the second coil conductors (130) adjacent to one of the first coil conductors (120) which interpose the one first coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a second coil via conductor (132) which penetrates through the insulating layers (111) in the laminating direction (see Figs. 1-2), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the second coil via conductor (132) overlaps each one end of the two second coil conductors (130) on an outer side of perimeter of the one first coil conductor (120, see Figs. 1-2).
Regarding Claim 8, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Choi shows an inductor (Figs. 1-2) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors (130) does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors (120) that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Figs. 1-2).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Choi for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to further reinforce an electromagnetic coupling that is advantageous to miniaturization which improves production efficiency (Paragraphs [0009]-[0010]).
Regarding Claim 9, Choi shows in the laminating direction, two of the first coil conductors (120) adjacent to one of the second coil conductors (130) which interpose the one second coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a first coil via conductor (122) which penetrates through the insulating layers (112) in the laminating direction (see Figs. 1-2), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the first coil via conductor (122) overlaps each one end of the two first coil conductors (120) on an outer side of perimeter of the one second coil conductor (130, see Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Yoshida et al. [JP 2006-352568].
Regarding Claim 6, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Yoshida et al. shows a device (Fig. 2) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors (32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors (71, 72, 73, 74, 75) that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Fig. 2).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the first coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the second coil conductors that is adjacent to the first coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Yoshida et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship between the coils to obtain desirable operating characteristics and inductance values; and improve attenuation characteristics (Abstract, Problem to be Solved).
Regarding Claim 7, Yoshida et al. shows in the laminating direction, two of the second coil conductors (71, 72) adjacent to one of the first coil conductors (33) which interpose the one first coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a second coil via conductor (91) which penetrates through the insulating layers (14) in the laminating direction (see Fig. 2), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the second coil via conductor (91) overlaps each one end of the two second coil conductors (71, 72) on an outer side of perimeter of the one first coil conductor (33, see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 8, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above but does not show when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction.
Yoshida et al. shows a device (Fig. 2) teaching and suggesting when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors (71, 72, 73, 74, 75) does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors (32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction (see Fig. 2).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, each of the second coil conductors does not overlap one end of one of the first coil conductors that is adjacent to the second coil conductor in the laminating direction as taught by Yoshida et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship between the coils to obtain desirable operating characteristics and inductance values; and improve attenuation characteristics (Abstract, Problem to be Solved).
Regarding Claim 9, Yoshida et al. shows in the laminating direction, two of the first coil conductors (32, 33) adjacent to one of the second coil conductors (71) which interpose the one second coil conductor are electrically connected to each other via a first coil via conductor (61) which penetrates through the insulating layers (13) in the laminating direction (see Fig. 2), and when viewed from the laminating direction, the first coil via conductor (61) overlaps each one end of the two first coil conductors (32, 33) on an outer side of perimeter of the one second coil conductor (71, see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Matsushita et al. shows the claimed invention as applied above.
In addition, Yoshida et al. shows when viewed from the laminating direction (see Fig. 2), the first coil conductors (32, 33) and the second coil conductors (71, 72) take a shape in a relation of non-rotational symmetry (see Fig. 1, element 32 and element 71 take a shape in a relation of non-rotational symmetry and element 33 and element 72 take a shape in a relation of non-rotational symmetry).
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 when viewed from the laminating direction, the first coil conductors and the second coil conductors take a shape in a relation of non-rotational symmetry as taught by Yoshida et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to achieve a desirable positional relationship between the coils to obtain desirable operating characteristics and inductance values; and improve attenuation characteristics (Abstract, Problem to be Solved).
Claim(s) 11 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Murakami [U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0244741] and Tozawa et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0348212].
Regarding Claim 11, Matsushita et al. shows a non-magnetic layer (a-m).
Matsushita et al. does not show the element body includes a non-magnetic layer and magnetic layers, both of which are the insulating layers, the magnetic layers interpose the non-magnetic layer in the laminating direction, and the first coil and the second coil are inside the non-magnetic layer.
Murakami shows the element body (Figs. 1-4) includes a non-magnetic layer (32) and magnetic layers (33, 34), both of which are the insulating layers (elements 32, 33, 34 can be considered insulating layers), the magnetic layers (33, 34) interpose the non-magnetic layer (32) in the laminating direction (see Figs. 1-4), and the first coil (501, 504, 505) and the second coil (502, 503, 506) are inside the non-magnetic layer (see Figs. 1-4).
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 element body includes a non-magnetic layer and magnetic layers, both of which are the insulating layers, the magnetic layers interpose the non-magnetic layer in the laminating direction, and the first coil and the second coil are inside the non-magnetic layer as taught by Murakami for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to provide a high common mode impedance and high cut-off frequency (Paragraphs [0005], [0022]).
In addition, Tozawa et al. clearly teaches in the specification that a non-magnetic layer (4) and magnetic layers (6), both of which are the insulating layers (Paragraphs [0037]-[0038]).
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 non-magnetic layer and magnetic layers, both of which are the insulating layers, as taught by Tozawa et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. in view of Murakami to achieve desirable operating and coupling characteristics.
Regarding Claim 14, Murakami shows the non-magnetic layer (32) includes a dielectric glass material which contains a glass material containing K, B, and Si, and a filler containing quartz (Paragraphs [0021]-[0022]).
Regarding Claim 15, Murakami shows the non-magnetic layer (32) includes a non-magnetic ferrite material which contains Fe, Cu, and Zn (Paragraph [0021]).
Claim(s) 11 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita et al. in view of Matsuura et al. [U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0152365].
Regarding Claim 11, Matsushita et al. shows a non-magnetic layer (a-m).
Matsushita et al. does not show the element body includes a non-magnetic layer and magnetic layers, both of which are the insulating layers, the magnetic layers interpose the non-magnetic layer in the laminating direction, and the first coil and the second coil are inside the non-magnetic layer.
Matsuura et al. shows the element body (Figs. 1-4) includes a non-magnetic layer (80) and magnetic layers (86, 87), both of which are the insulating layers (Paragraphs [0124], [0129]), the magnetic layers (86, 87) interpose the non-magnetic layer (80) in the laminating direction (see Figs. 1-4), and the first coil (20) and the second coil (30) are inside the non-magnetic layer (see Figs. 1-4).
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 element body includes a non-magnetic layer and magnetic layers, both of which are the insulating layers, the magnetic layers interpose the non-magnetic layer in the laminating direction, and the first coil and the second coil are inside the non-magnetic layer as taught by Matsuura et al. for the coil component as disclosed by Matsushita et al. to improve high frequency characteristics of the electronic component (Paragraph [0047]) and achieve high relative permeability which tends to improve impedance characteristics (Paragraph [0048]).
Regarding Claim 14, Matsuura et al. shows the non-magnetic layer (80) includes a dielectric glass material which contains a glass material containing K, B, and Si, and a filler containing quartz (Paragraph [0028]).
Regarding Claim 15, Matsuura et al. shows the non-magnetic layer (80) includes a non-magnetic ferrite material which contains Fe, Cu, and Zn (Paragraph [0048]).
Conclusion
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