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 09/11/2023 and 07/24/2026 have 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desaki (hereinafter Desaki), Japanese Patent JP2020095988A, in view of Tsuchiya, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0193362.
Regarding Claim 1, Desaki teaches (except where italicized), a coil component comprising:
a base body including a first group of metal magnetic particles (“the largest particle size is called particle group α” [0010]) and a resin binder (“[a] compacted magnetic core containing soft magnetic powder and resin” [0010]),
the first group of metal magnetic particles having a plurality of first metal magnetic particles (id.),
the first group of metal magnetic particles having a first average circularity greater than 0.8 (“the average circularity of particle group α is 1 to 0.8” [0010]),
each of the first metal magnetic particles containing a main component and an additive (“an alloy powder of 90.5Fe-4.5Si-5Cr” [0045]), the main component including at least one of Fe or Ni (id.), the additive accounting for less than 10wt% (id.);
a coil conductor (“a coil-type electronic component” [0015]) provided in the base body;
a first external electrode electrically connected to the coil conductor; and
a second external electrode electrically connected to the coil conductor. (Desaki: Fig. 1, machine translation, para. [0010], [0015], [0018], [0028], [0037], [0039], [0045]).
Desaki does not explicitly teach, a first external electrode electrically connected to the coil conductor; and
a second external electrode electrically connected to the coil conductor.
However, Tsuchiya teaches (Fig. 1), a first external electrode (21) electrically connected to the coil conductor (25); and
a second external electrode (22) electrically connected to the coil conductor (25). (Tsuchiya: Figs. 1-4, para. [0033]).
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 coil-type electronic component of Desaki to include the first and second external electrode of Tsuchiya, the motivation being so that “[t]he coil component 1 may be mounted on the mounting substrate 102a by joining the external electrodes 21, 22 to the corresponding land portions 103 of the mounting substrate 102a” [0033]. (Tsuchiya: Figs. 1-4, para. [0033]). 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 Desaki in view of Tsuchiya further teaches, wherein the additive contains Si (“an alloy powder of 90.5Fe-4.5Si-5Cr” [0045]). (Desaki: Fig. 1, machine translation, para. [0045]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desaki, in view of Tsuchiya, and further in view of Oshima et al., (hereinafter Oshima), Japanese Patent JP2019096816A.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Desaki in view of Tsuchiya is silent on including a second group of metal magnetic particles including a plurality of second metal magnetic particles, the second metal magnetic particles containing Si, the second group of metal magnetic particles having a second average circularity greater than 0.8. (Desaki: Fig. 1, machine translation, para. [0010], [0015], [0018], [0028], [0037], [0039], [0045]).
The combination of Desaki in view of Tsuchiya does not explicitly teach, wherein the base body further includes a second group of metal magnetic particles including a plurality of second metal magnetic particles, the second metal magnetic particles containing Si, the second group of metal magnetic particles having a second average circularity greater than 0.8.
However, Oshima teaches, wherein the base body further includes a second group of metal magnetic particles including a plurality of second metal magnetic particles (“as a second mixing step, Fe-6.5%Si alloy powder (circularity 0.988) with an average particle size of 13.6 μm was added” [0067]), the second metal magnetic particles containing Si (id.), the second group of metal magnetic particles having a second average circularity greater than 0.8 (“the circularity of the first magnetic powder is 0.90 or higher, and the circularity of the second magnetic powder is 0.90 or higher” [0023]. (Oshima: machine translation, para. [0023], [0067]).
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 circularity of the first and second group of metal magnetic particles of Desaki in view of Tsuchiya to include the second group of metal magnetic particles having a second average circularity greater than 0.8 of Oshima, the motivation being “because the gaps between the first magnetic powders become smaller, and more of the second magnetic powder can easily enter these gaps, thereby improving density and magnetic permeability” [0023]. (Oshima: machine translation, para. [0023]). Therefore, the limitation of Claim 3 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ishida (US 20230317343), Okuda et al. (JP2017054910A) and Sakurai et al. (JP2016167477A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if any of claims 4 or 5 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitation of the base claims and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 recites, inter alia, “…wherein an Si content is lower in the second metal magnetic particles than in the first metal magnetic particles, and wherein the second average circularity is greater than the first average circularity”. (Emphasis added).
Claim 5 recites, inter alia, “…wherein the base body further includes a third group of metal magnetic particles including a plurality of third metal magnetic particles, the third metal magnetic particles containing Si, the third group of metal magnetic particles having a third average circularity greater than 0.8”. (Emphasis added).
Claim 6 recites, inter alia, “…wherein an Si content is lower in the third metal magnetic particles than in the second metal magnetic particles, and wherein the third average circularity is greater than the second average circularity”. (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
9/21/2026
Prosecution Insights