Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/614,040

INNER ELECTRODE MATERIAL FOR MULTILAYERED CAPACITOR AND MULTILAYERED CAPACITOR COMPRISING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Examiner
RAMASWAMY, ARUN
Art Unit
2848
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
660 granted / 784 resolved
+16.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
821
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.8%
+14.8% vs TC avg
§102
30.6%
-9.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 784 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (CN108172337A) in view of Zhao et al. (“Ti2AlC Bulk Ceramics Produced by Gelcasting and Al-rich Pressureless Sintering”). . In re claim 1, Su discloses an inner electrode material for a multilayered capacitor, comprising a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1, [Chemical Formula 1] M1a+1M2M3a(in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti, V, Sc, Zr or Mo, M2 is Al, Si, Sn, Cd, In, Ga, Ge, Pb, As, S or P, M3 is C or N, a is 1 to 3) (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4). Su does not disclose wherein the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g. Zhao discloses wherein the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g. (3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the specific surface area of the compound to improve the sintering activity of the powder (Zhao: 3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12). In re claim 2, Su in view of Zhao discloses the inner electrode material for the multilayered capacitor of claim 1, as explained above. Su further discloses wherein: in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti or V, M2 is Al, Si or Sn, and M3 is C (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4). In re claim 3, Su in view of Zhao discloses the inner electrode material for the multilayered capacitor of claim 1, as explained above. Su further discloses wherein: the compound is Ti3AlC2, Ti2AlC, V2AlC, Ti3SiC2 or Ti3SnC2 (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4). In re claim 5, Su in view of Zhao discloses the inner electrode material for the multilayered capacitor of claim 1, as explained above. Su does not disclose the compound has a volume reduction rate of 5% or less at a temperature of 1100°C compared to a volume reduction rate at a temperature of 800°C when analyzed by thermomechanical analyzer (TMA). Zhao discloses the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g for the purposes of improving sintering activity of the powder (3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12) The combination of Su and Zhao discloses the compound has a volume reduction rate of 5% or less at a temperature of 1100°C compared to a volume reduction rate at a temperature of 800°C when analyzed by thermomechanical analyzer (TMA) (Note that the [¶153] and Table 1 of the Specification notes that the volume reduction rate is dependent on the material of the compound and specific surface area. Therefore, the combination of Su and Zhao disclose this limitation.). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the specific surface area of the compound to improve the sintering activity of the powder (Zhao: 3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12). In re claim 6, Su in view of Zhao discloses the inner electrode material for the multilayered capacitor of claim 1, as explained above. Su does not disclose the compound has an electrical conductivity of 1.05 × 106 S/m or more. Zhao discloses the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g for the purposes of improving sintering activity of the powder (3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12) The combination of Su and Zhao discloses the compound has an electrical conductivity of 1.05 × 106 S/m or more (Note that the [¶153] and Table 1 of the Specification notes that the electrical conductivity is dependent on the material of the compound and specific surface area. Therefore, the combination of Su and Zhao disclose this limitation.) It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the specific surface area of the compound to improve the sintering activity of the powder (Zhao: 3.1 Powder Characterization ll.7-12). Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (CN108172337A) in view of Zhao et al. (“Ti2AlC Bulk Ceramics Produced by Gelcasting and Al-rich Pressureless Sintering”) and in further view of Kazuyuki (CN111952074A). In re claim 4, Su in view of Zhao discloses the inner electrode material for the multilayered capacitor of claim 1, as explained above. Su further discloses the compound for use in an electrode for an electronic device (Summary of the Invention ¶13) Su does not disclose wherein: the compound has an average particle diameter D50 of 400 to 700 nm. Kazuyuki discloses adjusting the D50 particle size of a conductive powder for use in an electrode paste is a balance between aggregation and surface roughness of the final product (Detailed Ways: Conductive Powder ¶3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the particle size of the conductive powder to achieve a final electrode product having desired dispersibility, and thus continuity, and evenness, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Claim(s) 7-10 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hosokura et al. (US Publication 2003/0044610) in view of Su et al. (CN108172337A) and in further view of Kazuyuki (CN111952074A). In re claim 7, Hosokura discloses a multilayered capacitor, comprising: a capacitor body (2 – Figure 1, ¶31) including a dielectric layer (2a – Figure 1, ¶32) and an inner electrode (3 – Figure 2, ¶30); and an external electrode (4, 5 – Figure 1, ¶30) disposed outside the capacitor body (2 – Figure 1). Hosokura does not disclose wherein the inner electrode includes a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: [Chemical Formula 1] M1a+1M2M3a(in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti, V, Sc, Zr or Mo, M2 is Al, Si, Sn, Cd, In, Ga, Ge, Pb, As, S or P, M3 is C or N, a is 1 to 3). Su discloses an electrode paste for a ceramic capacitor including a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: [Chemical Formula 1] M1a+1M2M3a(in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti, V, Sc, Zr or Mo, M2 is Al, Si, Sn, Cd, In, Ga, Ge, Pb, As, S or P, M3 is C or N, a is 1 to 3) (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4, Detailed Description ¶8). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the conductive compound of Su to provide for an electrode that has good oxidation resistance (Su – Detailed Description ¶2). Hosokura does not disclose the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g. Kazuyuki discloses adjusting the particle size of a conductive powder, and thus, surface area, for use in an electrode paste is a balance between aggregation and surface roughness of the final product (Detailed Ways: Conductive Powder ¶3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the particle size of the conductive powder to achieve a final electrode product having desired dispersibility, and thus continuity, and evenness, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In re claim 8, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 7, as explained above. Hosokura does not disclose wherein: in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti or V, M2 is Al, Si or Sn, and M3 is C. Su further discloses wherein: in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti or V, M2 is Al, Si or Sn, and M3 is C (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the conductive compound of Su to provide for an electrode that has good oxidation resistance (Su – Detailed Description ¶2). In re claim 9, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 7, as explained above. Hosokura does not disclose the compound is Ti3AlC2, Ti2AlC, V2AlC, Ti3SiC2 or Ti3SnC2. Su further discloses wherein: the compound is Ti3AlC2, Ti2AlC, V2AlC, Ti3SiC2 or Ti3SnC2 (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the conductive compound of Su to provide for an electrode that has good oxidation resistance (Su – Detailed Description ¶2). In re claim 10, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 7, as explained above. Hosokura does not disclose the compound has an average particle diameter D50 of 400 to 700 nm. Kazuyuki discloses adjusting the particle size of a conductive powder for use in an electrode paste is a balance between aggregation and surface roughness of the final product (Detailed Ways: Conductive Powder ¶3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the particle size of the conductive powder to achieve a final electrode product having desired dispersibility, and thus continuity, and evenness, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In re claim 13, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 7, as explained above. Hosokura further discloses the inner electrode does not include nickel (Ni), barium titanate (BaTiO3), silicon dioxide (SiO2), or tungsten (W) (¶19; Note that Hosokura states that Nickel may not be used.). In re claim 14, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 7, as explained above. Hosokura further discloses the dielectric layer includes a plurality of dielectric crystal grains, and the dielectric crystal grains include BamTiO3 (0.995≤m≤1.010) as a main component, and hafnium (Hf), manganese (Mn), chromium (Cr), silicon (Si), aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), tin (Sn), antimony (Sb), germanium (Ge), gallium (Ga), indium (In), or a combination thereof as an accessory component (¶43-44). In re claim 15, Hosokura discloses a method of manufacturing a multilayered capacitor, comprising: forming a dielectric green sheet using dielectric powder (¶44-45); forming a conductive paste layer (¶45) on a surface of the dielectric green sheet forming a dielectric green sheet laminate by stacking the dielectric green sheets on which the conductive paste layer is formed (¶46); forming a capacitor body including a dielectric layer (2a – Figure 1) and an inner electrode (3 – Figure 1) by firing the dielectric green sheet laminate in an oxidizing atmosphere (¶48); and forming an external electrode (4, 5 – Figure 1) on one surface of the capacitor body (2 – Figure 1) (¶55). Hosokura does not disclose wherein the inner electrode includes a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: [Chemical Formula 1] M1a+1M2M3a(in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti, V, Sc, Zr or Mo, M2 is Al, Si, Sn, Cd, In, Ga, Ge, Pb, As, S or P, M3 is C or N, a is 1 to 3). Su discloses an electrode paste for a ceramic capacitor including a compound represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: [Chemical Formula 1] M1a+1M2M3a(in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is Ti, V, Sc, Zr or Mo, M2 is Al, Si, Sn, Cd, In, Ga, Ge, Pb, As, S or P, M3 is C or N, a is 1 to 3) (Summary of the Invention ¶6, Example 1: ¶1-4, Detailed Description ¶8). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the conductive compound of Su to provide for an electrode that has good oxidation resistance (Su – Detailed Description ¶2). Hosokura does not disclose the compound has a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 1.0 to 2.2 m2/g. Kazuyuki discloses adjusting the particle size of a conductive powder, and thus, surface area, for use in an electrode paste is a balance between aggregation and surface roughness of the final product (Detailed Ways: Conductive Powder ¶3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the particle size of the conductive powder to achieve a final electrode product having desired dispersibility, and thus continuity, and evenness, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In re claim 16, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 15, as explained above. Hosokura further discloses the oxidizing atmosphere is an air or oxygen (O2) atmosphere (¶48; Note that the atmosphere has a partial pressure of oxygen.). In re claim 17, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 15, as explained above. Hosokura further discloses the firing of the dielectric green sheet laminate is performed using a hot press method (¶47). In re claim 18, Hosokura in view of Su and in further view of Kazuyuki discloses the multilayered capacitor of claim 15, as explained above. Hosokura further discloses the conductive paste layer does not include nickel (Ni), barium titanate (BaTiO3), silicon dioxide (SiO2), or tungsten (W) (¶19; Note that Hosokura states that Nickel may not be used.). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 11 is 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 prior art does not teach nor suggest (in combination with other claim limitations) the compound has a volume reduction rate of 5% or less at a temperature of 1100°C compared to a volume reduction rate at a temperature of 800°C when analyzed by thermomechanical analyzer (TMA). Claim 12 is 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 prior art does not teach nor suggest (in combination with other claim limitations) the compound has an electrical conductivity of 1.05 × 106 S/m or more. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Rosvall et al. (US Publication 2010/0236937) Abstract, [¶17] Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARUN RAMASWAMY whose telephone number is (571)270-1962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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. /ARUN RAMASWAMY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2848
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603227
MULTILAYERED CAPACITOR AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597566
MULTILAYER ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597564
MULTILAYER CERAMIC CAPACITOR AND PASTE FOR PRODUCING BUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586721
MULTILAYER CERAMIC CAPACITOR AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586722
MULTILAYER ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+14.2%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 784 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month