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 § 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.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 9, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0142209).
With respect to claim 1, Ito discloses a dielectric composition (see abstract) comprising: dielectric grains including a barium titanate-based compound (see paragraph [0029]); and a secondary phase located between the dielectric grains (see abstract, noting grain boundary phases), wherein the secondary phase includes a first secondary phase including Ga and Si (see paragraphs [0029], the second sub ingredient Si, and [0049], noting the addition of an element “A”, which includes Ga).
With respect to claim 3, Ito discloses that the first secondary phase further includes Al and Mg. See paragraphs [0049] and [0029].
With respect to claim 8, Ito discloses that Ga in an amount of 0.1 wt% to 0.5 wt%. See Table 2, sample 22, where 1.5 mol of Ga is .45 wt%, when taken in conjunction with 100 mol of BaTiO3.
With respect to claim 9, Ito discloses a multilayered capacitor (see FIG. 1) comprising: a capacitor body including a dielectric layer and an internal electrode (see FIG. 1, elements 10 and 12, and paragraph [0024]); and an external electrode disposed outside the capacitor body (see FIG. 1, elements 6 and 8, and paragraph [0024]), wherein the dielectric layer includes dielectric grains including a barium titanate-based compound (see paragraph [0029]), and a secondary phase located between the dielectric grains (see abstract, noting grain boundary phases), and the secondary phase includes a first secondary phase including Ga and Si (see paragraphs [0029], the second sub ingredient Si, and [0049], noting the addition of an element “A”, which includes Ga).
With respect to claim 11, Ito discloses that the first secondary phase further includes Al and Mg. See paragraphs [0049] and [0029].
With respect to claim 16, Ito discloses that Ga in an amount of 0.1 wt% to 0.5 wt%. See Table 2, sample 22, where 1.5 mol of Ga is .45 wt%, when taken in conjunction with 100 mol of BaTiO3.
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.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0142209) in view of Sasabayashi (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2009/0310279).
With respect to claim 2, Ito fails to teach that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, and the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric composition, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric composition.
Sasabayashi, on the other hand, teaches that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, and the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric composition, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric composition. See paragraph [0018]. Such an arrangement results in good AC voltage characteristics. See paragraph [0018].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Ito, as taught by Sasabayashi, in order to provide a capacitor with good AC voltage characteristics.
With respect to claim 10, Ito fails to teach that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, and the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric composition, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric composition.
Sasabayashi, on the other hand, teaches that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, and the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric composition, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric composition. See paragraph [0018]. Such an arrangement results in good AC voltage characteristics. See paragraph [0018].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Ito, as taught by Sasabayashi, in order to provide a capacitor with good AC voltage characteristics.
Claims 5-7 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0142209) in view of Kim et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2023/0080684).
With respect to claim 5, Ito fails to teach that an average area (%) occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to a total area of the secondary phase is 50% to 95%.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches that that an average area (%) occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to a total area of the secondary phase is 50% to 95%. See paragraph [0065]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement in the reliability of the dielectric. See paragraph [0067].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Ito, as taught by Kim, in order to improve the reliability of the dielectric.
With respect to claim 6, the combined teachings of Ito and Kim teach that the secondary phase further includes a second secondary phase which includes Si and is free of Ga, and an average area (%) occupied by the second secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase is 5% to 50%. See Kim, paragraph [0065], noting that Kim teaches that the second secondary phase differs in composition from the first secondary phase and the difference in composition includes being free of one of the elements found in the first secondary phase; when taken in conjunction with Ito, would be Ga.
With respect to claim 7, the combined teachings of Ito and Kim teach that: a ratio of the average area occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase to the average area occupied by the second secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase is 1.5 to 2.5. See Kim, paragraph [0065].
With respect to claim 13, Ito fails to teach that an average area (%) occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to a total area of the secondary phase is 50% to 95%.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches that that an average area (%) occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to a total area of the secondary phase is 50% to 95%. See paragraph [0065]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement in the reliability of the dielectric. See paragraph [0067].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Ito, as taught by Kim, in order to improve the reliability of the dielectric.
With respect to claim 14, the combined teachings of Ito and Kim teach that the secondary phase further includes a second secondary phase which includes Si and is free of Ga, and an average area (%) occupied by the second secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase is 5% to 50%. See Kim, paragraph [0065], noting that Kim teaches that the second secondary phase differs in composition from the first secondary phase and the difference in composition includes being free of one of the elements found in the first secondary phase; when taken in conjunction with Ito, would be Ga.
With respect to claim 15, the combined teachings of Ito and Kim teach that: a ratio of the average area occupied by the first secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase to the average area occupied by the second secondary phase with respect to the total area of the secondary phase is 1.5 to 2.5. See Kim, paragraph [0065].
Claims 19-21 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2023/0080684) in view of Ito et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0142209).
With respect to claim 19, Kim teaches a dielectric composition (see the abstract) comprising: dielectric grains including a barium titanate-based compound (see paragraph [0070]); and a secondary phase located between the dielectric grains (see FIG. 5), the secondary phase including a first secondary phase including Si (see paragraph [0039], citing Si), and a second secondary phase which includes Si and is free of Ga (see paragraph [0065]).
Kim fails to teach that the first secondary phase includes Ga.
Ito, on the other hand, teaches that a first secondary phase Ga. See paragraph [0049]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement of the IR temperature dependency. See paragraph [0050].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kim, as taught by Ito, in order to improve the IR temperature dependency.
With respect to claim 20, the combined teachings of Kim and Ito teach that the dielectric composition is free of rare-earth elements. See Kim, which makes no indication of the inclusion of a rare-earth element.
With respect to claim 21, the combined teachings of Kim and Ito teach that: the first secondary phase further includes Al and Mg. See paragraph [0039].
With respect to claim 24, Kim teaches a multilayered capacitor (see the abstract) comprising: a capacitor body including a dielectric layer and an internal electrode (see FIG. 2, elements 111 and 121/122, and paragraph [0039]); and an external electrode disposed outside the capacitor body (see FIG. 2, elements 131/132 and paragraph [0039]), wherein the dielectric layer includes dielectric grains including a barium titanate-based compound (see paragraph [0070]), and a secondary phase located between the dielectric grains (see FIG. 5), and the secondary phase including a first secondary phase including Si (see paragraph [0039], citing Si), and a second secondary phase which includes Si and is free of Ga (see paragraph [0065]).
Kim fails to teach that the first secondary phase includes Ga.
Ito, on the other hand, teaches that a first secondary phase Ga. See paragraph [0049]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement of the IR temperature dependency. See paragraph [0050].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kim, as taught by Ito, in order to improve the IR temperature dependency.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2023/0080684) in view of Ito et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2007/0142209), and further, in view of Sasabayashi (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2009/0310279).
With respect to claim 25, the combined teachings of Kim and Ito teach that the dielectric layer is free of rare-earth elements (See Kim, which makes no indication of the inclusion of a rare-earth element), but fail to teach that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric layer, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric layer.
Sasabayashi, on the other hand, teaches that the dielectric grains including the barium titanate-based compound are a primary phase, and the primary phase has an average area of 85% or more of a total area of the dielectric composition, and the secondary phase has an average area of 15% or less of the total area of the dielectric composition. See paragraph [0018]. Such an arrangement results in good AC voltage characteristics. See paragraph [0018].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combined teachings of Kim and Ito, as taught by Sasabayashi, in order to provide a capacitor with good AC voltage characteristics.
With respect to claim 26, the combined teachings of Kim, Ito, and Sasabayashi teach that the first secondary phase further includes Al and Mg. See Kim, paragraph [0039].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: with respect to claim 17, the prior art fails to teach, or fairly suggest, the addition of gallium powder having the recited particle diameter, when taken in conjunction with the remaining limitations of claim 17. Claim 18 is allowed by virtue of its dependency from claim 17.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 4, 12, 22, 23, 27, and 28 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: with respect to claims 4, 12, 22, and 27 the prior art fails to teach, or fairly suggest, the combination of elements having the recited molar parts, when taken in conjunction with the limitations of the respective base claims. Claims 23 and 28 are allowed by virtue of their respective dependencies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nomura et al. (US 2019/0241476) and Ishii et al. (US 2012/0250216 each disclose gallium as part of a dielectric ceramic composition.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DION R FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 5:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m..
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.
/DION R. FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights