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 .
This office action is a response to the election of species filed on 6/11/2026.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, Sub-Species AA, claims 1, 2, 6, 7 and 10-12, in the reply filed on 6/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3-5, 8, 9 and 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/11/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takagi et al. (US PAT. 10,861,647) in view of Fujimura et al. (JP-2013026257 A).
Takagi et al. teach a process of making a multilayer ceramic electronic component, comprising steps of: cutting, at predetermined intervals, a multilayer base (35) including ceramic green sheets (31, Fig. 5A) and electrode layers (32, Fig. 5A) stacked alternately to form a plurality of base precursors extending in a first direction (col. 6, lines 34-47 and col. 8, line 56 to col. 9, line 12); placing a resin (38, Fig. 7) on at least one surface of each of the plurality of base precursors and between adjacent base precursors of the plurality of base precursors to form a flat block including the plurality of base precursors fixed to one another as shown in Fig. 7 (col. 10, lines 26-54); cutting the flat block at predetermined intervals in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction to form the plurality of base precursors aligned in a row as shown in Fig. 7; machining (or polishing) a cut surface of each of the plurality of base precursors to form a plurality of base components (col. 12, lines 40-57 and col. 13, lines 25-27); and and firing the plurality of base components to sinter the plurality of base components (col. 11, lines 31-53).
However, Takagi et al. silent cutting a multilayer base including ceramic green sheets and electrode layers stacked alternately to form a plurality of first rods and removing the resin. Fujimura et al. teach a process of making a multilayer ceramic electronic component including forming a stack by alternately ceramic green sheets and electrode layers as shown in Fig. 3, cutting, the stack to form a plurality of first rods (38, Fig. 4), placing a resin on at least one surface of each of the plurality of first rods and between adjacent first rods of the plurality of first rods to form a flat block including the plurality of first rods fixed to one another as shown in Fig. 4, cutting the flat block at predetermined intervals in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction to form a plurality of second rods including a plurality of base precursors aligned in a row as shown in Fig. 5, firing the plurality of base components to sinter the plurality of base components, and removing the resin while firing the components as shown in Fig. 9B-9C. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify a process of fabricating a multilayer ceramic electronic component of Takagi et al. by cutting, the stack to form a plurality of first rods and removing the resin during the firing as taught by Fujimura et al. in order to produce free of variations in characteristics at low cost. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable processes involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (il-A).
Re. claim 2: Takagi et al., modified by Fujimura et al., also teach that the plurality of first rods on an adhesive stretchable sheet (such as an adhesive sheet having expandability) and stretching the adhesive stretchable sheet to form, between adjacent the base precursors, a gap to receive the resin (col. 7, lines 47-58).
Re. claim 6: Takagi et al., modified by Fujimura et al., silent whether the resin is a thermoplastic resin. However, Takagi et al., teach the resin “Examples of the resin component in the ceramic green sheets include a cellulose resin, an acrylic resin, a polyvinyl alcohol resin, a polyvinyl butyral resin, a phthalate resin, a fatty acid ester resin, and glycol derivatives” (col. 8, lines 9-14). At the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the resin material as recited in the claimed invention because Applicant has not disclosed that the resin material as recited in the claimed invention provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Therefore, since such a modification would have been an obvious design consideration that is within the purview of one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the well-known benefit of obtaining a desirable electronic component. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the resin material of Takagi et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Re. claim 7: Takagi et al. also teach that the resin sheet (38, Fig. 7) is placed in contact with the at least one surface of each of the plurality of first rods follow by firing. Even though Takagi et al. silent to remove the resin sheet, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the resin sheet should be melted and removed during the firing. Therefore, it would have been an obvious to melt and removing the resin sheet of Takagi et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Re. claim 10: Takagi et al., modified by Fujimura et al., silent a characteristic of the resin including a melting point lower than or equal to a decomposition temperature of a binder included in the ceramic green sheets and the electrode layers. It is noted that Takagi et al. and Fujimura et al. teach that the multilayer ceramic electronic component is produced without the resin. One of ordinary skill in the art could easily select a resin material having a melting point lower than or equal to a decomposition temperature of a binder included in the ceramic green sheets and the electrode layers to result in the required the resin with a binder compositions.
Re. claim 11: Takagi et al. also teach processes of preparing a flat plate (220, Fig. 11) before the machining, aligning the plurality of base components on the flat plate to place the cut surfaces of the plurality of base components into contact with a surface of the flat plate, and placing adjacent base components into contact with one another to form a flat bar assembly including the plurality of second rods formed integrally by the resin (38) as shown in Fig. 11 (col. 13, lines 13-55).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mizukami (US PAT. 12,431,293), Lee et al. (US PAT. 8,630,082), and Yokota et al. (US PAT. 11,600,445) are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to a process of making multilayer ceramic electronic component.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6:00 AM-2:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/PAUL D KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights