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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-12, 16-18, and 21-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 4-9, 12, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Takeuchi et al. (US 2010/0328842).
PNG
media_image1.png
342
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi et al. disclose in Fig. 1-2, a multilayer electronic component comprising:
a body including a dielectric layer (2) and internal electrodes (3, 3) alternately disposed with the dielectric layer in a first direction (top-bottom), the internal electrodes including Ni (3, 3 – [0037]); and
an external electrode (8) disposed on the body (5) and connected to the internal electrodes (3, 3),
wherein the external electrode (8) includes a base electrode layer (see annotated figure above) including Ni and Pd (interdiffusion of Pd plating layer [0037] and Ni internal electrode [0037], [0016]-[0017]), and
at least one of the internal electrodes includes a first region (11, see annotated figure above), and a content of Pd (interdiffusion of Pd plating layer [0037]) included in the first region (11) is greater than a content of Pd included in a remaining region (Ni), excluding the first region in the internal electrodes (3).
Takeuchi et al. do not disclose a specific example where the internal electrodes include Ni, the external electrodes comprise Pd and the interdiffusion layer comprises Pd and Ni.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the device of Takeuchi et al. so that the internal electrodes include Ni, the external electrodes comprise Pd and the interdiffusion layer comprises Pd and Ni, since external electrode and internal electrode materials are selected based on design considerations and tradeoffs between cost, mechanical properties, and electrical properties.
It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 4, Takeuchi et al. disclose the first region includes a greater content of Ni (Ni) than the content of Pd (interdiffusion of Pd) included in the first region (11).
Regarding claim 5, Takeuchi et al. disclose at least one of the internal electrodes (3, 3) include a plurality of first regions (11, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Takeuchi et al. disclose the body includes a first surface (top) and a second surface (bottom) opposing each other in the first direction (top-bottom), a third surface (left) and a fourth surface (right) connected to the first surface (left) and the second surface (right) and opposing each other in a second direction (left-right), and a fifth surface (front – not illustrated) and a sixth surface (back – not illustrated) connected to the first surface to the fourth surface and opposing each other in a third direction, and the external electrode (8, 9) is disposed on the third surface (left) and the fourth surface (right).
Regarding claim 7, Takeuchi et al. disclose the first region (11) is disposed within 6.5 µm (A – [0035]) in the second direction (left – right) from an interface between the internal electrode (3) and the external electrode (8).
Regarding claim 8, Takeuchi et al. disclose the base electrode layer (see annotated figure above) includes a second region (outside Ni-Pd first region), and a content of Pd (non-interdiffusion layer) included in the second region is greater than a content of Pd included in a remaining region, excluding the second region in the base electrode layer (see annotate figure above).
Regarding claim 9, Takeuchi et al. disclose the base electrode layer includes a plurality of second regions. It should be noted that “regions” can be any arbitrary areas within the base electrode.
Regarding claim 12, Takeuchi et al. disclose the base electrode layer (see Fig. 1 & annotated figure above) is disposed between a plane along which the first surface (top) is disposed and a plane along which the second surface (bottom) is disposed.
Regarding claim 16, Takeuchi et al. disclose in fig. 2, a multilayer electronic component comprising:
a body including a dielectric layer (2) and internal electrodes (3, 3) alternately arranged with the dielectric layer (2) in a first direction (top-bottom), the body including a first surface (top) and a second surface (bottom) opposing each other in the first direction, a third surface (left) and a fourth surface (right) connected to the first surface (top) and the second surface (bottom) and opposing each other in a second direction (left-right), and a fifth surface (front) and a sixth surface (back) connected to the first surface to the fourth surface and opposing each other in a third direction (front-back); and
an external electrode (8, 9) disposed on the third surface (left) and the fourth surface (right), wherein the internal electrodes (3, 3) include a first region (see annotated figure above) away from a center of the internal electrodes in the second direction (left-right), and wherein a content of Pd (Pd) included in the first region is greater than a content of Pd included in a remaining region (Ni), excluding the first region in the internal electrodes (3, 3).
Takeuchi et al. do not disclose a specific example where the internal electrodes include Ni, the external electrodes comprise Pd and the interdiffusion layer comprises Pd and Ni.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the device of Takeuchi et al. so that the internal electrodes include Ni, the external electrodes comprise Pd and the interdiffusion layer comprises Pd and Ni, since external electrode and internal electrode materials are selected based on design considerations and tradeoffs between cost, mechanical properties, and electrical properties.
It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 17, Takeuchi et al. disclose wherein the first region is disposed within 6.5 µm in the second direction (A – [0035]) from the interface between the internal electrodes (3) and the external electrode (8).
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Osawa et al. (H10-135065).
PNG
media_image2.png
233
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Osawa et al. disclose in fig. 1-2, a multilayer electronic component comprising:
a body including a dielectric layer (1) and internal electrodes (2a, 2b) alternately arranged with the dielectric layer (1) in a first direction (top-bottom), the body including a first surface (top – Fig. 1) and a second surface (bottom – Fig. 1) opposing each other in the first direction, a third surface (left – Fig. 1) and a fourth surface (right – Fig. 1) connected to the first surface (top) and the second surface (bottom) and opposing each other in a second direction (left-right – Fig.1), and a fifth surface (front – Fig. 1 or left Fig. 2) and a sixth surface (back – Fig. 1 or right Fig. 2) connected to the first surface to the fourth surface and opposing each other in a third direction (front-back - Fig. 1 or left-right – Fig. 2); and
an external electrode (4, 4) disposed on the third surface (left) and the fourth surface (right), wherein the internal electrodes include a first region (see annotated figure above) away from a center of the internal electrodes in the second direction (left-right), and wherein a content of Pd (Pd) included in the first region is greater than a content of Pd included in a remaining region (Ni), excluding the first region in the internal electrodes (2a, 2b).
Regarding claim 18, Osawa et al. disclose the content of Pd included in the first region is 0.5 at% or more (Pd).
Claim(s) 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saito et al. (US 2014/0321025).
Regarding claim 21, Saito et al. disclose in fig. 1, multilayer electronic component comprising:
a body (12) including a dielectric layer (14) and internal electrodes (16a, 16b) alternately disposed with the dielectric layer (14) in a first direction (top-bottom), the internal electrodes including Ni [0020]; and
an external electrode (18a, 18b) disposed on the body (12) and connected to the internal electrodes (16a, 16b),
wherein the external electrode (16a, 16b) comprises a base electrode layer (20a-22a, 20b-22b) including a first layer (20a, 20b) contacting the body (12) and a second layer (22a, 22b) disposed on the first layer (22a, 22b), the first layer having more Pd content (Ag-Pd - [0090]) relative to a remainder of the base electrode layer (22a, 22b – Ni - [0023]).
Regarding claim 22, Saito et al. disclose the external electrode (16a, 16b) further comprises an intermediate electrode layer (26a, 26b) disposed on the base electrode layer (20a(b), 22a (b)), the intermediate electrode layer (26a, 26b) disposed to extend to at least a portion of a surface of the body on which the base electrode layer (20a(b), 22a(b)) is disposed.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osawa et al. (H10-135065) in view of Saito et al. (US 2014/0321025).
Regarding claim 1, Osawa et al. disclose in Fig. 1-2, a multilayer electronic component comprising:
a body (3) including a dielectric layer (1) and internal electrodes (2, 2) alternately disposed with the dielectric layer (1) in a first direction (top-bottom), the internal electrodes (2, 2) including Ni (Ni); and an external electrode (4, 4) disposed on the body (3) and connected to the internal electrodes (2, 2); and
at least one of the internal electrodes (2, 2) includes a first region (Pd), and a content of Pd included in the first region (Pd) is greater than a content of Pd included in a remaining region (Ni), excluding the first region (Pd) in the internal electrodes.
Osawa et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the external electrode includes a base electrode layer including Ni and Pd.
Saito et al. disclose in fig. 1, multilayer electronic component comprising: an external electrode (18a, 18b) disposed on a body (12) and connected to internal electrodes (16a, 16b),
wherein the external electrode (16a, 16b) comprises a base electrode layer (20a-22a, 20b-22b) including a Ni (20b, 22b - [0023]) and Pd (20a, 22b - Ag-Pd - [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the external electrode art to form the capacitor of Osawa et al. to that the external electrode includes a base electrode layer including Ni and Pd, since such a modification would form a multilayer ceramic capacitor having external electrodes where whisker-inhibiting ability is enhanced.
Regarding claim 2, Osawa et al. disclose the content of Pd included in the first region is 0.5 at% or more (Pd).
Regarding claim 10, Osawa et al. disclose the internal electrodes (Osawa et al. - Ni) and the base electrode (Saito et al. – [0023]) includes Ni as a main component.
Regarding claim 11, Saito et al. disclose wherein the external electrode (16a, 16b) comprises a base electrode layer (20a-22a, 20b-22b) including a first layer (20a, 20b) in contact with the body (12) and a second layer (22a, 22b) disposed on the first layer (22a, 22b), the first layer having more Pd content (Ag-Pd - [0090]) than a content of Pd included in the second layer (22a, 22b – Ni - [0023]).
Claim(s) 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito et al. (US 2014/0321025) in view of Osawa et al. (H10-135065).
Regarding claim 23, Saito et al. disclose the claimed invention except for at least one of the internal electrodes comprise a first region having Pd content greater than a remainder of the at least one internal electrode.
Osawa et al. disclose in Fig. 2, a multilayer ceramic capacitor comprising internal electrodes, wherein at least one of the internal electrode (2) comprises a first region (Pd) having Pd content greater than a remainder (Ni) of the at least one internal electrode.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the internal electrode art to form the capacitor device of Saito et al. so that at least one of the internal electrodes comprise a first region having Pd content greater than a remainder of the at least one internal electrode, since such a modification would form a multilayer ceramic capacitor where an effective electrode area can be enlarged and a rate of temperature change of electrostatic capacity can be reduced.
Regarding claim 24, the modified Saito et al. disclose the first region (Pd -Osawa et al.) is disposed relatively closer to an interface between the at least one internal electrode (2) and the external electrode (Saito et al.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 13-15, 19-20, and 25 are 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In combination with the other claim limitations, the prior art does not teach or suggest a multilayer electronic component wherein:
a content of Pd in the first region is 3.0 at% or less (claims 3 and 19);
an intermediate electrode layer disposed on the base electrode layer, and including Cu and glass (claims 13 and 20); and
a content of Pd in the first region is in a range from 0.5 at% to 3.0 at% (claim 25).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00 AM-2:30 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, Timothy Dole can be reached at 571-272-2229. 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.
/ERIC W THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2848
ERIC THOMAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2848