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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 10/06/2023 has been considered.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (hereinafter Kang), U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0013540, in view of Park et al. (hereinafter Park), U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0321155.
Regarding Claim 1, Kang teaches (except where italicized), a coil component (Fig. 10) comprising:
a body (1);
a coil (200) buried in the body;
an external electrode (300, 400) disposed on a first surface (101) of the body; and
a lead-out portion (251-254) connecting an end of the coil to the external electrode,
wherein the lead-out portion and the end of the coil have an interface formed therebetween. (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Kang does not explicitly teach, wherein the lead-out portion and the end of the coil have an interface formed therebetween.
However, Park teaches (Fig. 4), wherein the lead-out portion (410, 420) and the end of the coil (331, 332) have an interface (not labeled) formed therebetween. (Park: Figs. 1-6, para. [0025], [0044], [0045], [0049], [0059], [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the component of Kang to include the lead-out portion and the end of the coil having an interface formed therebetween of Park, the motivation being “since a seed layer is not required in forming the connection electrodes 410 and 420 by an electrolytic plating process, the connection electrodes 410 and 420 may be formed with only the electrolytic plating layer” [0060]. (Park: Figs. 1-6, para. [0060]). Therefore, the limitation of Claim 1 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, wherein the body includes a second surface (102) opposing the first surface in a first direction, the end of the coil and the lead-out portion are in contact with each other in the first direction of the body (id.). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, wherein a thickness of the end of the coil is greater than a thickness of the lead-out portion (id.). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Regarding Claim 4 and similarly claim 5, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, wherein the thickness of the end of the coil is twice or more than the thickness of the lead-out portion (id.). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, further comprising: a support substrate (IL) disposed inside the body, wherein the coil and the lead-out portion are disposed on the support substrate (id.). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0051], [0052]).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, wherein the coil includes a first conductive layer (not shown, [0063]) in contact with the support substrate and a second conductive layer (id.) disposed on the first conductive layer (“each of the second coil pattern 212, the auxiliary lead-out portions 241 and 242, and the vias 221, 222, and 223 may include a seed layer of an electroless plating layer or the like and an electrolytic plating layer” [0063]). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0063]).
Regarding Claim 8, similarly as in claim 7, the combination of Kang in view of Park further teaches, wherein the lead-out portion (251-254) includes a first metal layer (not shown) disposed on the support substrate and a second metal layer (id.) disposed on the first metal layer. (“each of the second coil pattern 212, the auxiliary lead-out portions 241 and 242, and the vias 221, 222, and 223 may include a seed layer of an electroless plating layer or the like and an electrolytic plating layer” [0063]). (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0063]).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (US 20200168375) discloses (Figs. 4 and 5) coil layers and lead-out portions including a first and second conductive layer and a first and second metal layer.
Choi et al. (US 20190198215) and Song et al. (US 20190244742)
Reason for Allowance
Claims 1-13, are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 11 recites, inter alia, “…a coil component comprising: a body; a coil buried in the body; an external electrode disposed on a first surface of the body; and a lead-out portion connecting an end of the coil to the external electrode, wherein a groove is formed in the end of the coil, and a portion of the lead-out portion extends to an interior of the groove".. (Emphasis added).
The references of record do not teach or suggest the aforementioned limitation, nor would it be obvious to modify those references to include such limitation.
US 2020/0013540 (Kang et al.) discloses (except where italicized), a coil component (Fig. 10) comprising:
a body (1);
a coil (200) buried in the body;
an external electrode (300, 400) disposed on a first surface (101) of the body; and
a lead-out portion (251-254) connecting an end of the coil to the external electrode,
wherein a groove (R1, R2) is formed in the end of the coil, and
a portion of the lead-out portion extends to an interior of the groove. (Kang: Figs. 1-7 and 10-13, para. [0034], [0035], [0037], [0086]-[0089]).
Kang doesn’t disclose, at least, a portion of the lead-out portion extends to an interior of the groove.
Further, it would not have been obvious to modify Kang with the art of record to reach the limitations of claim 11.
Claims 12-16, are allowed because each claim is directly or indirectly dependent of independent Claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if any of claims 9 and 10 are rewritten in independent form including all of the limitation of the base claims and any intervening claims.
Claim 9 recites, inter alia, “…wherein the first conductive layer and the first metal layer have an interface formed therebetween, and the second conductive layer and the second metal layer have an interface formed therebetween”. (Emphasis added).
Claim 10 recites, inter alia, “…wherein an interface between the first metal layer and the second metal layer and an interface between the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer are discontinuous with each other”. (Emphasis added).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALCOLM BARNES whose telephone number is (408)918-7512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 pm (PST).
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 on 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 http s://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.
/MALCOLM BARNES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
6/19/2026
Prosecution Insights