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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2002-75771. The Office notes that JP ‘771 and a translation thereof were submitted as part of an IDS on 13 August 2024.
With respect to claim 1, JP ‘771 discloses a multilayer ceramic capacitor (see abstract) comprising: a multilayer body including a plurality of dielectric layers that are laminated (see paragraph [0022]), a plurality of internal electrode layers that are each laminated on a corresponding one of the plurality of dielectric layers (see paragraph [0022]), a first main surface and a second main surface opposed to each other in a height direction, a first lateral surface and a second lateral surface opposed to each other in a width direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the height direction, and a first end surface and a second end surface opposed to each other in a length direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the height direction and the width direction (see FIG. 1); and a first external electrode and a second external electrode (see paragraph [0021]); wherein the plurality of internal electrodes include a plurality of first internal electrodes each electrically connected to the first external electrode and a plurality of second internal electrode layers each electrically connected to the second external electrode (see FIG. 1); the plurality of first internal electrode layers and the plurality of second internal electrode layers each include a plurality of holes with different area equivalent diameters (see paragraph [0022]); when an area equivalent diameter at which a cumulative value in a cumulative distribution of the area equivalent diameters of the plurality of holes is about 99% is defined as an area equivalent diameter D99, and a thickness of each of the plurality of dielectric layers sandwiched between a corresponding one of the plurality of first internal electrode layers and a corresponding one of the plurality of second internal electrode layers is defined as a thickness t, the thickness t of each of the plurality of dielectric layers is about 0.5 μm or more and (area equivalent diameter D99) < about 0.0879 × exp (2.86 × t) is satisfied (see paragraph [0026], citing a maximum diameter of 10 μm, and paragraph [0029], citing a dielectric thickness of 0.5-2 μm; 0.0879 x exp (2.86 x 2) = 26.8, thus, D99 anything less than 26.8).
With respect to claim 2, JP ‘771 discloses that the thickness t of each of the plurality of dielectric layers is about 1.4 μm or less. See paragraph [0029], citing a dielectric thickness of 0.5-2 μm.
With respect to claim 3, JP ‘771 discloses that the thickness t of each of the plurality of dielectric layers is about 1.0 μm or less. See paragraph [0029], citing a dielectric thickness of 0.5-2 μm.
With respect to claim 4, JP ‘771 discloses that the thickness t of each of the plurality of dielectric layers is about 0.75 μm or more. See paragraph [0029], citing a dielectric thickness of 0.5-2 μm.
With respect to claim 5, JP ‘771 discloses that the multilayer body has a dimension in the length direction of about 0.2 mm or more and about 6 mm or less, a dimension in the height direction of about 0.05 or more and about 5 mm or less, and a dimension in the width direction of about 0.1 mm or more and about 5 mm or less. See paragraph [0057].
With respect to claim 6, JP ‘771 discloses that each of the plurality of dielectric layers includes BaTiO3, CaTiO3, SrTiO3, or CaZrO3 as a main component. See paragraph [0037].
With respect to claim 7, JP ‘771 discloses that each of the plurality of dielectric layers include a Mn compound, an Fe compound, a Cr compound, a Co compound, or a Ni compound as a secondary component. See paragraph [0037].
With respect to claim 8, JP ‘771 discloses that a thickness of each of the plurality of dielectric layers is about 0.5 μm or more and about 1.6 μm or less. See paragraph [0029], citing a dielectric thickness of 0.5-2 μm.
With respect to claim 9, JP ‘771 discloses that a number of the plurality of dielectric layers is 15 or more and 1200 or less. See paragraph [0051].
With respect to claim 10, JP ‘771 discloses that each of the plurality of internal electrode layers includes Ni, Cu, Ag, Pd, or Au, or an alloy including at least one of Ni, Cu, Ag, Pd, or Au. See paragraph [0033].
With respect to claim 11, JP ‘771 discloses that a thickness of each of the plurality of internal electrode layers is about 0.2 μm or more and 2.0 μm or less. See paragraph [0027].
With respect to claim 12, JP ‘771 discloses that a number of the plurality of internal electrode layers is 15 or more and 1000 or less. See paragraph [0051].
With respect to claim 13, JP ‘771 discloses that the first external electrode includes a first base electrode layer and a first plated layer; and the second external electrode includes a second base electrode layer and a second plated layer. See paragraph [0056].
With respect to claim 14, JP ‘771 discloses that the first and second base electrode layers are fired layers. See paragraph [0056].
With respect to claim 15, JP ‘771 discloses that each of the fired layers includes a metal component and at least one of a glass component and a ceramic component. See paragraph [0056].
With respect to claim 16, JP ‘771 discloses that the metal component includes at least one of Cu, Ni, Ag, Pd, Ag-Pd alloys, or Au. See paragraph [0056].
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 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2002-75771 in view of Itogawa (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2022/0148814).
With respect to claim 17, JP ‘771 fails to teach that the glass component includes at least one of B, Si, Ba, Mg, Al, or Li.
Itogawa, on the other hand, teaches that an external electrode base layer may include both a glass and ceramic component, the glass component including at least one of B, Si, Ba, Mg, Al, or Li. See paragraph [0057]. Such an arrangement is well-known as part of a structure for connecting the capacitor to outside components.
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 teachings of JP ‘771 and Itogawa in order to connect the capacitor to outside components.
With respect to claim 18, JP ‘771 fails to teach that the ceramic component includes at least one of BaTiO3, CaTiO3, (Ba, Ca)TiO3, SrTiO3, or CaZrO3.
Itogawa, on the other hand, teaches that an external electrode base layer may include both a glass and ceramic component, the ceramic component includes at least one of BaTiO3, CaTiO3, (Ba, Ca)TiO3, SrTiO3, or CaZrO3. See paragraph [0057]. Such an arrangement is well-known as part of a structure for connecting the capacitor to outside components.
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 teachings of JP ‘771 and Itogawa in order to connect the capacitor to outside components.
Conclusion
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 2848
Prosecution Insights