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 .
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 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.
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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the concave shaped central portion (recited in claim 1) with each of the main portions includes only one of the longest portion (recited in claim 17), the concave shaped central portion (recited in claim 1) with a length of a longest portion of a first one of the main portions is not equal to a length of a longest portion of a second one of the main surface portions (recited in claim 18), the concave shaped central portion (recited in claim 1) with shapes of the main portions are not identical (recited in claim 19) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (it is noted the feature of claims 17-19 are only discussed and shown in the specification relating to the trapezoidal embodiment). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 14-19 is/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.
In regards to claim 14-15,
Claims 14-15 recite “the first and second external electrodes include main portions” which causes the claim to be indefinite as claim 12 from which claim 14-15 depend has already recited “the first external electrode includes a main portion” thus causing confusion as to if the recitation in claims 14-15 is an additional main portion or meant to be the same as that of claim 12.
In regards to claim 16-19,
Claims 16-19 recite “the first and second external electrodes include main portions” which causes the claim to be indefinite as claim 1 from which claim 16-19 depend has already recited “the first external electrode includes a main portion” thus causing confusion as to if the recitation in claims 16-19 is an additional main portion or meant to be the same as that of claim 1.
In regards to claim 17,
It is unclear how each of the main portions includes only one of the longest portion while having a concave central portion (i.e. longest portions one either side of the central portion (i.e. each main portion would have two longest portions) as recited in claim 1 from which claim 17 depends. Claim 17 will not be treated on the merits.
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(s) 1-9, 11, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onodera et al. (US 2019/0131073) in view of Mizuno (US 2022/0285100).
In regards to claim 1,
Onodera ’073 discloses a multilayer ceramic capacitor comprising:
a multilayer body including a first main surface and a second main surface (3c – fig. 1 & 4; [0039]) on both sides in a lamination direction, a first side surface and a second side surface (3a & 3b – fig. 1; [0039]) on both sides in a width direction that intersects with the lamination direction, and a first end surface and a second end surface (3e – fig. 1; [0039]) on both sides in a length direction that intersects with the lamination direction and the width direction;
a first external electrode (5 – fig. 1; 0038]) provided on the first end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface; and
a second external electrode (5 – fig. 1; 0038]) provided on the second end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface;
wherein the multilayer body includes:
an inner layer portion in which a plurality of dielectric layers ([0044]) and a plurality of internal electrode layers (7 & 9 – fig. 4; [0046]) are laminated;
outer layer portions provided on both sides of the inner layer portion in the lamination direction (seen in fig. 4);
the first external electrode includes a main portion extending on the first main surface in the length direction from the first end surface toward the second end surface (seen in fig. 1-2);
when the multilayer ceramic capacitor is viewed from the first main surface, the main portion has a concave shaped central portion in the width direction and a longest portion of the main portion is located on a region that does not overlap with a region in which the internal electrode layers are located (seen in fig. 9);
and at least one of the side surface portions does not include a shortest portion in a central portion of the side surface in the lamination direction (fig. 1 & 7-8). Onodera ’073 fails to disclose wherein the multilayer body includes: side margin portions provided on both sides of the inner layer portion and the outer layer portions in the width direction; a thickness of the side margin portions in width direction is about 10 µm or more and about 30 µm or less.
Mizuno ‘100 discloses wherein the multilayer body includes: side margin portions (17a & 17b – fig. 3; [0048]) provided on both sides of the inner layer portion and the outer layer portions in the width direction; a thickness of the side margin portions in width direction is about 10 µm or more and about 30 µm or less (table 1)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the capacitor of Onodera ’073 to have side margin portions as taught by Mizuno ‘100 to obtain a capacitor with improved volume efficiency.
In regards to claim 2,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Mizuno ‘100 further discloses wherein the longest portion is located on a ridge where the first main surface meets the first side surface (fig. 2 & 9 of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 3,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Mizuno ‘100 further discloses wherein the main portion includes a shortest portion that is shorter in the length direction than a remainder of the main portion and is located in a central portion of the first main surface in the width direction (fig. 2 & 9 of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 4,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Mizuno ‘100 further discloses wherein two of the internal electrode layers that are adjacent to each other in the lamination direction have widthwise ends with a positional deviation of about 5 µm or less in the width direction (fig. 6 & 9 of Onodera ’073 – internal electrodes shown to be aligned (i.e. deviation is 0)).
In regards to claim 5,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Mizuno ‘100 further discloses wherein the side margin portions include Si in a larger amount than the dielectric layers ([0071-0076] of Mizuno ‘100).
In regards to claim 6,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein dimensions of the multilayer capacitor are about 0.2 mm or greater and about 2.0 mm or less in the length direction, about 0.1 mm or greater and about 1.0 mm or less in the width direction, and about 0.1 mm or greater and about 0.5 mm or less in the lamination direction ([0045] & [0102] of Mizuno ‘100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the capacitor of Onodera ’073 to have overall dimensions as taught by Mizuno ‘100 to obtain a capacitor a desired sized based on the intended use. Furthermore, 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 regards to claim 7,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the multilayer body has a substantially rectangular parallelepiped shape (fig. 1 of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 8,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein each of the external electrodes includes a base electrode layer (E1, E21, & E22 – fig. 3; [0064-0065] of Onodera ’073) and a plated layer (E3-E4 – fig. 3; [0067] of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 9,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the base electrode layer includes at least one of a fired layer, a conductive layer resin, and a thin film layer ([0064-0065] of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 11,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the main surface portion includes a shortest portion that is shorter in the length direction than a remainder of the main portion and is located in the concave shaped central portion (fig. 2 & 9 of Onodera ’073).
In regards to claim 16,
Onodera ’073 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the first and second external electrodes include main portions respectively extending on the first main surface and the second main surface in the length direction from one of the first and second end surfaces toward the other of the first and second end surfaces; and the multilayer body includes four of the longest portions (fig. 1-2 & 9 of Onodera ’073).
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Onishi et al. (US 2010/0128411) in view of Fukunaga et al. (US 2015/0340155).
In regards to claim 12,
Onishi ‘411 discloses a multilayer ceramic capacitor comprising:
a multilayer body including a first main surface and a second main surface (2a & 2b – fig. 1; [0038]) on both sides in a lamination direction, a first side surface and a second side surface (2e & 2f – fig. 1; [0038]) on both sides in a width direction that intersects with the lamination direction, and a first end surface and a second end surface (2c & 2d – fig. 1; [0038]) on both sides in a length direction that intersects with the lamination direction and the width direction;
a first external electrode (5/5A/5B or 6/6A/6B – fig. 1; [0041-0047]) provided on the first end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface and the second side surface; and
a second external electrode (5/5A/5B or 6/6A/6B – fig. 1; [0041-0047]) provided on the second end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface and the second side surface;
wherein the multilayer body includes:
an inner layer portion in which a plurality of dielectric layers and a plurality of internal electrode layers (3-4 – fig. 1; [0039]) are laminated;
outer layer portions provided on both sides of the inner layer portion in the lamination direction (seen in fig. 1C); and
the first external electrode includes a main portion extending on the first main surface in the length direction from the first end surface toward the second end surface (fig. 1A);
when the multilayer ceramic capacitor is viewed from the first main surface, the main portion has a trapezoidal shape and a longest portion of the main portion is located on a region that does not overlap with a region in which the internal electrode layers are located (fig. 1). Onishi ‘411 fails to disclose wherein the multilayer body includes: side margin portions provided on both sides of the inner layer portion and the outer layer portions in the width direction; a thickness of the side margin portions in width direction is about 10 µm or more and about 30 µm or less; and a side margin outer layer includes larger ceramic grains than a side margin inner layer.
Fukunaga ‘155 discloses multilayer ceramic capacitor comprising:
a multilayer body (12 – fig. 1; [0030]) including a first main surface and a second main surface (17 & 18 – fig. 1; [0032]) on both sides in a lamination direction, a first side surface and a second side surface (15 & 16 – fig. 1; [0032]) on both sides in a width direction that intersects with the lamination direction, and a first end surface and a second end surface (13 & 14 – fig. 1; [0032]) on both sides in a length direction that intersects with the lamination direction and the width direction;
a first external electrode (40 – fig. 1; [0030]) provided on the first end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface and the second side surface; and
a second external electrode (40 – fig. 1; [0030]) provided on the second end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface and the second side surface;
wherein the multilayer body includes:
an inner layer portion (26 – fig. 3; [0033]) in which a plurality of dielectric layers (20 – fig. 2-3; [0033]) and a plurality of internal electrode layers (22 & 24 – fig. 2-3; [0033]) are laminated;
outer layer portions (28 & 30 – fig. 3; [0033]) provided on both sides of the inner layer portion in the lamination direction; and
side margin portions (32 & 34 – fig. 3; [0033]) provided on both sides of the inner layer portion and the outer layer portions in the width direction;
the first external electrode includes a main portion extending on the first main surface in the length direction from the first end surface toward the second end surface (fig. 1);
a thickness of the side margin portions in width direction is about 10 µm or more and about 30 µm or less ([0039]); and
a side margin outer layer (32a/34a – fig. 3; [0043]) includes larger ceramic grains than a side margin inner layer (32b/34b – fig. 3; [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the capacitor of Onishi ‘411 to have an inner layer portion and side margin portions as taught by Fukunaga ‘155 to obtain a capacitor with improved volume efficiency and increased reliability.
In regards to claim 13,
Onishi ‘411 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the main portion includes a shortest portion that is shorter in the length direction than a remainder of the main portion and is adjacent to one of the first and second side surfaces (fig. 1; [0042-0043] & [0045] of Onishi ‘411).
In regards to claim 14,
Onishi ‘411 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 further discloses wherein the first and second external electrodes include main portions that respectively extend on the first main surface and the second main surface in the length direction from one of the first and second end surfaces toward the other of the first and second end surfaces; and the main portions have a same trapezoidal shape (fig. 1; [0042-0043] & [0045] of Onishi ‘411).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onishi ‘411 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sato (US 2018/0108479).
In regards to claim 15,
Onishi ‘411 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 fails to disclose wherein a trapezoidal shape of the trapezoidal shaped central portions of some of the main surface portions differ from each other.
Sato ‘479 discloses forming one external electrode to be longer on the first main surface than the other external electrode (fig. 1; [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the external electrodes of Onishi ‘411 as modified by Fukunaga ‘155 such that one is longer on the main surface than the other as taught by Sato ‘479 thus obtaining wherein a trapezoidal shape of the trapezoidal shaped central portions of some of the main surface portions differ from each other (noting the combination will have one trapezoid that will be larger than the other) to obtain a capacitor with improved strength. Furthermore, change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim(s) 1 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (US 2022/0139622) in view of JP2001126950A hereafter referred to as Kawamata.
In regards to claim 1,
Kang ‘622 discloses a multilayer ceramic capacitor comprising:
a multilayer body including a first main surface and a second main surface (1 & 2 – fig. 3; [0036]) on both sides in a lamination direction, a first side surface and a second side surface on both sides in a width direction that intersects with the lamination direction, and a first end surface and a second end surface (3 & 4 – fig. 3; [0036]) on both sides in a length direction that intersects with the lamination direction and the width direction (fig. 1);
a first external electrode (131 – fig. 1; 0033]) provided on the first end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface; and
a second external electrode (132 – fig. 1; 0033]) provided on the second end surface, the first main surface, the second main surface, the first side surface, and the second side surface;
wherein the multilayer body includes:
an inner layer portion in which a plurality of dielectric layers (111 – fig. 3; [0033]) and a plurality of internal electrode layers (121 & 122 – fig. 3-4; [0033]) are laminated;
outer layer portions (113 & 114 – fig. 4; [0033]) provided on both sides of the inner layer portion in the lamination direction;
side margin portions (141 & 142 – fig. 5; [0033]) provided on both sides of the inner layer portion and the outer layer portions in the width direction;
the first external electrode includes a main portion extending on the first main surface in the length direction from the first end surface toward the second end surface (seen in fig. 1 & 4);
a thickness of the side margin portions in width direction is about 10 µm or more and about 30 µm or less (table 1). Kang ‘622 fails to disclose when the multilayer ceramic capacitor is viewed from the first main surface, the main portion has a concave shaped central portion in the width direction and a longest portion of the main portion is located on a region that does not overlap with a region in which the internal electrode layers are located; and at least one of the side surface portions does not include a shortest portion in a central portion of the side surface in the lamination direction.
Kawamata discloses when the multilayer ceramic capacitor is viewed from the first main surface, the main portion has a concave shaped central portion in the width direction and a longest portion of the main portion is located on a region that does not overlap with a region in which the internal electrode layers are located; and at least one of the side surface portions does not include a shortest portion in a central portion of the side surface in the lamination direction (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the capacitor of Kang ‘622 to have side external electrodes as taught by Kawamata to obtain a capacitor with improved protection from crack.
In regards to claim 20,
Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata further discloses a method of mounting the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), the method comprising: placing the multilayer ceramic capacitor such that one of the main surfaces defines and functions as a mounting surface ([0036] of Kang ‘622 & fig. 1 & 4 of Kawamata).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sato ‘479.
In regards to claim 18,
Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata further discloses wherein the first and second external electrodes include main portions that respectively extend on the first main surface and the second main surface in the length direction from one of the first and second end surfaces toward the other of the first and second end surfaces (fig. 1 & 4 of Kang ‘622 & fig. 1; [0020-0021] of Kawamata. Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata fails to disclose wherein a length of the longest portion of a first one of the main surface portions is not equal to a length of the longest portion of a second one of the main surface portions.
Sato ‘479 discloses forming one external electrode to be longer on the first main surface than the other external electrode (fig. 1; [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the external electrodes of Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata such that one is longer on the main surface than the other as taught by Sato ‘479 thus obtaining wherein a length of the longest portion of a first one of the main surface portions is not equal to a length of the longest portion of a second one of the main surface portions (noting the combination will have one trapezoid that will be larger than the other) to obtain a capacitor with improved strength. Furthermore, change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). 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 regards to claim 19,
Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata further discloses wherein the first and second external electrodes include main portions that respectively extend on the first main surface and the second main surface in the length direction from one of the first and second end surfaces toward the other of the first and second end surfaces (fig. 1 & 4 of Kang ‘622 & fig. 1; [0020-0021] of Kawamata. Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata fails to disclose wherein shapes of the main surface portions are not identical.
Sato ‘479 discloses forming one external electrode to be longer on the first main surface than the other external electrode (fig. 1; [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the external electrodes of Kang ‘622 as modified by Kawamata such that one is longer on the main surface than the other as taught by Sato ‘479 thus obtaining wherein shapes of the main surface portions are not identical (noting the combination will have concaved central portion that will be larger than the other) to obtain a capacitor with improved strength. Furthermore, change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
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.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID M SINCLAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-5068. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH from 8AM-4PM.
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 J 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.
/David M Sinclair/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights