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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “thick-film” in claims 1, 4 , and 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “thick-film” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. "Thick-film" is indefinite as there is no part of the specification that defines what "thick" is and no range or
The term “substantially” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. "Substantially" is not defined in the specification and there is no
Claims 2, 3, 5, and 6 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yugawa (WO 2020004271 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yugawa teaches an electronic component comprising:
A base material having an insulating film constituting a main surface [¶0008]; and
A thick film electrode provided on the main surface of the base material, the thick-film electrode [10] including a body portion located above the main surface, a conduction portion extending from the body portion toward the base material [9] and penetrating the insulating film [3, Fig. 4], and a diffusion prevention layer [11] covering the body portion, [Fig. 4, ¶0017]
Wherein the diffusion prevention layer has a first portion directly covering a surface of the body portion and a second portion directly covering the main surface in a peripheral region of the body portion and extends parallel to the main surface [¶0023].
Regarding claim 2, the electronic component according to claim 1, wherein a dimension of the diffusion prevention layer [11a] in a portion covering the main surface of the base material is greater than a dimension of a thinnest portion of the diffusion prevention layer [11] in a portion covering the body portion [Fig. 4, ¶0023, the vertical portion being between 3-5 μm and the horizontal being between 1-8 μm can have the horizontal 8 μm while the vertical is 3 μm for example].
Regarding claim 3, the electronic component according to claim 1wherein a plurality of the thick-film electrodes are provided on the main surface of the base material [¶0016], and
wherein t1<L<D/2 holds, where D is a distance [¶¶0017 and 0019, diameter was from 10-150 μm and the body was placed 1.5 to 15 μm inside the outer peripheral edge, would be possible to have t1 be less than L and L less than D/2 if there were the maximum distance of the ranges disclosed] between the thick-film electrodes adjacent to each other, t1 is a dimension of the diffusion prevention layer covering the body portion, and L is a dimension of the diffusion prevention layer covering the main surface of the base material [¶0019].
Regarding claim 4, the semiconductor element according to claim 3, wherein the insulating film [3] has a substantially uniform thickness in the thick-film electrodes-forming regions [¶0019].
Regarding claim 5, the semiconductor element according to claim 1, wherein the insulating film [3] is made of an oxide or a nitride containing at least one element selected from the group consisting of Si, Al, Zr, Mg, Ta, Ti, and Y, or a resin [¶0013, contains insulating particles of silica and alumina].
Regarding claim 6, the semiconductor element according to claim 1, wherein the body portion of the thick-film electrode has a raised portion raised from the surface of the body portion opposite to the surface on the base material side and formed in an annular region corresponding to an edge of a through-hole of the insulating film penetrated by the conduction portion [¶¶0024 and 0031, Fig. 4].
Regarding claim 7, the semiconductor element according to claim 1, wherein the diffusion prevention layer is a single layer or a multi-layer [¶0011, Fig. 4].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOOR MOHAMMAD ISMAIL TAHIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Sue Purvis can be reached at (571) 272-1236. 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.
/NOOR MOHAMMAD ISMAIL TAHIR/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893