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 . 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.
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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12 March 2026 has been entered. Claims 10-15, 19 and 21-25 remain pending in the application.
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.
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.
Claims 10-14, 19, and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Djebara et al. (US 20160189876) in view of Komatsu et al. (US 20070029529).
In regards to claim 10, Djebara discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising: a capacitor element (FIG. 1); and a liquid component ([0093]), wherein: the capacitor element includes an anode body (300 – FIG. 15; [0050]) and a solid electrolyte layer (layer of conductive polymer coating as described in [0061], [0077]), the anode body including a dielectric layer on a surface of the anode body ([0057]), the solid electrolyte layer covering at least a part of a surface of the dielectric layer (see FIG. 15, [0061], [0082] and [0021], noting the casing surrounding the anode and the conductive polymer coating being deposited on the interior surface of the casing members 14, 16), the solid electrolyte layer contains a conductive polymer component ([0061]), and the liquid component contains a chelating agent (described in [0093]-[0094], noting at least citric acid, tartartic acid, malic acid, gluconic acid, salicylic acid and EDTA are disclosed and further noting that a sequestering agent is considered a chelating agent).
Djebara fails to disclose the chelating agent containing a phosphonic acid-based chelating agent, and a content of the chelating agent in the liquid component ranges from 0.01 mass% to 50 mass%, inclusive.
Komatsu discloses an electrolytic capacitor (abstract), comprising a liquid component containing a chelating agent ([0044]) containing a phosphonic acid-based chelating agent ([0079]), and a content of the chelating agent in the liquid component ranges from 0.01 mass% to 50 mass%, inclusive ([0079]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the electrolytic capacitor of Djebara with a phosphonic acid-based chelating agent, as taught by Komatsu, wherein the combination amounts to a mere substitution of one known element (EDTA in Djebara [0094]) for another known equivalent element (note both EDTA and methylenephosphonic acid included as examples of the chelate compound in Komatsu [0079]) resulting in the predictable result of the chelating agent prolonging the working life of the capacitor, improving the low-temperature stability of the capacitor and improving corrosion resistance ([0079]). Furthermore, 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.
In regards to claim 11, modified Djebara further teaches wherein a content of the chelating agent ranges from 10 mass ppm to 500,000 mass ppm, inclusive, with respect to the conductive polymer component (Djebara: [0095]-[0096], noting Komatsu: [0079], wherein the similar weight percentages would lead to mass ppm within the claimed range).
In regards to claim 12, modified Djebara further discloses wherein: the liquid component contains a metal element (metal element of, for example, oxidative catalyst described in [0074]), and the metal element forms a complex with the chelating agent (see [0094], [0074], noting EDTA can serve as a sequestering agent for any metallic impurities that may be present in the particles, i.e. the metal element forms a complex with the chelating agent).
In regards to claim 13, modified Djebara further discloses wherein: the conductive polymer component is obtained by a chemical polymerization method using an oxidizing agent, and the metal element is derived from the oxidizing agent ([0074]).
In regards to claim 14, modified Djebara further discloses wherein the metal element includes at least one selected from the group consisting of iron, nickel, copper, titanium, chromium, manganese, and molybdenum ([0074]).
In regards to claim 19, modified Djebara as modified further discloses wherein the phosphonic acid-based chelating agent contains at least one selected from the group consisting of hydroxyethanediphosphonic acid, nitrilotris(methylenephosphonic acid), ethylenediaminetetra(methylenephosphonic acid) (Komatsu: [0079]), and diethylenetriaminepenta(methylenephosphonic acid).
In regards to claim 21, modified Djebara further discloses further comprising an alcohol-based solvent (described in [0057] and [0093], noting glycol compounds and derivatives thereof are disclosed).
In regards to claim 22, modified Djebara further discloses wherein the alcohol-based solvent contains at least one selected from the group consisting of a glycol compound, a glycerin compound, and a derivative thereof (described in [0057] and [0093], noting glycol compounds and derivatives thereof are disclosed).
In regards to claim 23, modified Djebara further discloses wherein the alcohol-based solvent contains at least one selected from the group consisting of ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, triethylene glycol, tetraethylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, glycerin, polyglycerin, and a derivative thereof (described in [0057] and [0093], noting glycol compounds and derivatives thereof are disclosed).
In regards to claim 24, modified Djebara further discloses wherein a content of the chelating agent in the liquid component ranges from 0.1 mass% to 30 mass%, inclusive (see Djebara: [0095], further noting [0092]-[0093]; and Komatsu: [0079]).
In regards to claim 25, modified Djebara further discloses wherein a content of the chelating agent in the liquid component ranges from 1 mass% to 30 mass%, inclusive (see Djebara: [0095], further noting [0092]-[0093]; and Komatsu: [0079]).
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.
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Djebara et al. (US 20160189876) in view of Komatsu et al. (US 20070029529) and further in view of Yoshimitsu (US 20100172068).
In regards to claim 15, Djebara as modified fails to explicitly disclose wherein a content of the metal element in the liquid component is more than or equal to 10 mass ppm.
Yoshimitsu discloses an electrolytic capacitor (abstract) wherein a content of the metal element in the liquid component is more than or equal to 10 mass ppm (Yoshimitsu ‘068: [0060], noting 4 grams of paratoluene sulfonic acid ferric salt; thus, Djebara as modified by Yoshimitsu ‘068 teaches the content of the metal element in the liquid component is more than or equal to 10 mass ppm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the electrolytic capacitor of Djebara as modified with a specific amount of the metal element, as taught by Yoshimitsu, for the purpose of providing a more complete description of the invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Timothy J Dole whose telephone number is (571)272-2229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-2:30pm.
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, Andrea Wellington can be reached at (571)272-4483. 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.
/Timothy J. Dole/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights