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.
Email Communication
Applicant is encouraged to authorize the Examiner to communicate with applicant via email by filing form PTO/SB/439 either via USPS, Central Fax, or EFS-Web. See MPEP 502.01, 502.03, 502.05.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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) 1-7 & 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tani et al. (US 2021/0398751) in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 5,643,986).
In regards to claim 1,
Tani ‘751 discloses a solid electrolytic capacitor element comprising:
an anode foil (141 – fig. 2-3; [0040]) having a porous part at a surface layer, and having a first portion including a first end and a second portion including a second end opposite the first end (fig. 2);
a dielectric layer (150 – fig. 2; [0039]) formed on a surface of the porous part; and
a solid electrolyte layer (161 – fig. 2; [0039]) covering at least a portion of the dielectric layer,
wherein the solid electrolytic capacitor element has, between the first end and second end of the anode foil, an insulating region (region with 151 – fig. 2-3; [0045]) containing a cured product of a resin composition ([0051]), in
the insulating region, pores of the porous part are filled with the cured product (fig. 3),
the resin composition contains an insulating resin material ([0064] - polyimide, and
a glass transition point of the cured product is 230 °C or more ([0064] – polyimide). Tani ‘751 fails to disclose the a resin composition contains an additive that modifies the insulating resin material, a content rate of the additive in the resin composition is 3 % by mass or more.
Ishikawa ‘986 discloses a protective film for electronics wherein the protective film comprises a resin composition contains an insulating resin material and an additive that modifies the insulating resin material (abstract), a content rate of the additive in the resin composition is 3 % by mass or more (C6:L39-55), and a glass transition point of the cured product is 230 °C or more (claim 1 – glass transition temperature is a property of the material and based on the materials of the composition in the mass% the Tg will be 230 °C or more).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to us the masking material taught by Ishikawa ‘986 as the masking material of Tani ‘751 to obtain a capacitor wherein the masking material has good storage stability and adhesion properties
In regards to claim 2,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein in the resin composition, a viscosity at 25 °C of a γ-butyrolactone solution containing the resin composition at a concentration of 30 % by mass is 1,000 mPa·s or more and 10,000 mPa·s or less (claim 1 of Ishikawa ‘986 – viscosity is a property of the material and based on the materials of the composition in the mass% a viscosity at 25 °C of a γ-butyrolactone solution containing the resin composition at a concentration of 30 % by mass is 1,000 mPa·s or more and 10,000 mPa·s or less).
In regards to claim 3,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein the content rate of the additive in the resin composition is 60 % by mass or less (C6:L39-55 of Ishikawa ‘986).
In regards to claim 4,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein the additive interacts or reacts with the insulating resin material (claim 1 of Ishikawa ‘986).
In regards to claim 5,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein the additive contains a polymer of an epoxy compound (C6:L39-55 of Ishikawa ‘986).
In regards to claim 6,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein the insulating resin material includes a polyimide resin ([0064] of Tani ‘751 & abstract of Ishikawa ‘986).
In regards to claim 7,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses wherein in a cross section of the solid electrolytic capacitor element in the insulating region, a proportion of an area of the cured product filling the pores to a total area of the pores is 80% or more (fig. 3 of Tani ‘751 – entire area is filled (i.e. 100%)).
In regards to claim 9,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses a solid electrolytic capacitor comprising at least one of the solid electrolytic capacitor element according to claim 1 (fig. 1 of Tani ‘751 and claim 1 rejection above).
In regards to claim 10,
Tani ‘751 as modified by Ishikawa ‘986 further discloses further comprising an exterior body (110 – fig. 1-2; [0029] of Tani ‘751) that seals the solid electrolytic capacitor element.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 8 is/are 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:
The prior art does not teach or suggest (in combination with the other claim limitations) wherein in the insulating region, the cured product is further formed on a main surface of the anode foil via the dielectric layer, on the main surface of the anode foil, the cured product formed on the dielectric layer on one main surface side of the anode foil has a maximum thickness of tc, and the anode foil has a thickness of tf, and a ratio of the maximum thickness tc of the cured product to the thickness tf of the anode foil (= tc/tf) is 0.12 or less (claim 8).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2010/0149729 – [0059] & [0066] US 2017/0365415 – [0113] US 2017/0365419 – [0077] US 2017/0362385 – table 1-2 US 2020/0335284 – fig. 1C JP2007173439A – fig. 2
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