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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Ohkubo does not teach “an insulating film filling a space surrounded by the conductor pattern, and covering outermost side surfaces and top surface of the conductor pattern” as claimed. Applicant asserts that the resin walls 40, insulator 40, and junction layer 41 of Ohkubo is structurally distinct from and do not form the claimed insulating film. Applicant states that Nakamura teaches a different coil substrate architecture and does not teach or suggest one insulating film that both filles the claimed space and covers the claimed outermost side surface and top surface.
After careful consideration without passion or prejudice, the argument is not found persuasive, respectfully. Claim 1 requires the insulating film to fill space surrounded by the conductor pattern, to cover outermost side surfaces and top surface of the conductor. The resin wall 18 of Ohkubo fills the space surrounded by the coil pattern 14A and covers the outermost side surfaces, and insulator 40 and or junction layer 41 covers the top surface of conductor pattern. Therefore, it’s proper to interpret resin wall 18, insulator 40 and junction layer 41 as the “insulating film” as claimed. The claim does not require the insulting film be a single or one piece. Even if the claim requires the insulating film be a single or one piece or integral, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893). Accordingly, the examiner maintains Ohkubo teaches “an insulating film filling a space surrounded by the conductor pattern, and covering outermost side surfaces and top surface of the conductor pattern” as claimed.
Applicant also argues that Ohkubo does not teach “H2/W2” relationship as required by claim 1. Applicant asserts that the examiner relies on the dimensions of the resin walls 18 in Ohkubo whereas H2 and W2 in the claim recites that the insulating film fills the space surrounded by the conductor pattern and covers the outermost side surfaces and the top surface of the conductor.
After careful consideration without passion or prejudice, the argument is not found persuasive, respectfully. As seen in FIG. 4 and or 6 of the present invention, height H2 is the height of the insulating film from the bottom surface to the top surface of the conductor pattern. In addition, the claim merely recites “H2 is a height of the insulating film” without further defining the height dimension from point A to point B. Therefore, under broadest reasonable claim interpretation, it’s proper to interpret the height of the resin wall in Ohkubo as the claimed “H2,…a height of the insulating film” as recited. Accordingly, the examiner maintains Ohkubo teaches all the claimed limitations as recited in claim 1. Therefore, Ohkubo anticipates claim 1.
Applicant further argues that there would be no motivation to combine Ohkubo and Nakamura in the manner proposed, and there would no reasonable expectation of success. In fact, the proposed combination would not work for the structure recited in claim 12.
The argument is not persuasive. While Ohkubo may not expressly teach epoxy resin the material for the resin wall 18, it’s well known in the art to use epoxy resin as the insulating film for a coil conductor in a coil component as in the present invention. Nakamura expressly teaches epoxy resin as the insulating film for the coil conductor (para. [0053]). Epoxy resin is known for having good bonding characteristics. Accordingly, the combination is proper with the motivation as set forth in the Office action dated 06/01/2026. The combination would also work as intended because the insulating film structure of Nakamura and Ohkubo are similar.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ohkubo et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2016/0351316 A1, hereinafter “Ohkubo”).
With respect to claim 1, Ohkubo teaches a coil component 1 (Figs. 1-6) comprising:
a body part 10 including a magnetic material;
a coil part 13 and 11 disposed in the body part; and
an electrode part 30A and or 30B disposed on the body part,
wherein the coil part includes:
a supporting member 11,
a coil conductor 14 disposed on at least one surface (upper and or lower surface) of the supporting member and having a conductor pattern 14A of a planar coil shape, and
an insulating film 18, 40 and 41 filling a space surrounded by the conductor pattern, and covering outermost side surfaces (peripheral surfaces) and top surface (upper surface) of the conductor pattern,
wherein the space surrounded by the conductor pattern has no magnetic material therein, and wherein H2/W2 is between 10 and 25, where H2 is a height of the insulating film and W2 is a width of the insulating film (paras. [0029], [0038], [0040] and [0046]).[[,]]
PNG
media_image1.png
494
469
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein
H2 is 220 µm or more and 250 µm or less (para. [0040]).
With respect to claim 3, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein
H1/W1 is between 3 and 9, where H1 is a height of the conductor pattern and W1 is a width of the conductor pattern (para. [0040]).
With respect to claim 4, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 3, wherein
H1 is 200 µm or more and 260 µm or less (para. [0040]).
With respect to claim 5, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein the conductor pattern has a side surface which is in contact with the insulating wall (para. [0038]).
With respect to claim 6, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 5, wherein the insulating film extends to be in contact with at least one surface of the supporting member, and
thickness of the insulating film in contact with the side surface of the conductor pattern is substantially same as thickness of the insulating film in contact with the supporting member (para. [0040]).
With respect to claim 7, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein the conductor pattern includes a plurality of turns,
the insulating film fills spaces between adjacent turns of the plurality of turns, respectively, and
the spaces between adjacent turns of the plurality of turns have no magnetic material therein (para. [0040]).
With respect to claim 8, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein the conductor pattern includes
a seed layer 14a disposed on a surface of the supporting member, and
a plating layer 14b formed on the seed layer (para. [0038]).
With respect to claim 9, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1, wherein the supporting member includes a glass fiber and an insulating resin (para. [0031]).
With respect to claim 10, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 3, wherein the coil part includes
the supporting member 11,
a first coil conductor (coil conductor 14 on upper side of the supporting member) disposed on a first surface of the supporting member and having a first conductor pattern 14A of a planar coil shape,
a second coil conductor (coil conductor 14 on lower side of the supporting member) disposed on a second surface of the supporting member opposing the first surface thereof and having a second conductor pattern 14A of a planar coil shape,
a first insulating film 18, 40 and 41 filling a space surrounded by the first conductor pattern, and covering outermost side surface and top surface of the first conductor pattern,
a second insulating film 18, 40 and 41 filling a space surrounded by the second conductor pattern, and covering outermost side surface and top surface of the second conductor pattern,
H11/W11 is between 3 to 9, where H11 is a height of the first conductor pattern and W11 is a width of the first conductor pattern, and
H12/W12 is between 3 to 9, where H12 is a height of the second conductor pattern and W12 is a width of the second conductor pattern (paras. [0032], [0038] and [0040]).
With respect to claim 11, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 10, wherein the coil part further includes a through via (“via” para. [0035]) penetrating through the supporting member and connecting the first and second coil conductors (para. [0035]).
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 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohkubo, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Nakamura et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2015/0035634 A1, hereinafter “Nakamura”).
With respect to claim 12, Ohkubo teaches the coil component of claim 1. Ohkubo does not expressly teach the insulating film includes at least one selected from the group consisting of an epoxy resin, a polyimide resin, and a liquid crystal crystalline polymer resin.
Nakamura teaches a coil component 1 (FIGs. 1A-2), wherein the insulating film 41 includes at least one selected from the group consisting of an epoxy resin, a polyimide resin, and a liquid crystal crystalline polymer resin (para. [0053]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have use epoxy resin wall as taught by Nakamura to the coil component of Ohkubo to provide the desired bonding characteristics to meet design requirements.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MANGTIN LIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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 S. Ismail can be reached at 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 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.
/MANG TIN BIK LIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights