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 Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 2, “that’ should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Kubo et al. (WO2020158783) also published as US20220162404 which will be used for citations.
With regard to claim 1, Kubo et al. discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising a stacked body including an anode foil having a dielectric layer formed on a surface thereof, a cathode foil, and a separator, and a liquid component with which the stacked body is impregnated (paragraph [0147]), wherein the stacked body includes a conductive polymer layer formed on the separator (paragraph [0063]) and at least one surface selected from a surface of the dielectric layer and a surface of the cathode foil (paragraph [0069]), the conductive layer includes a mixed region in which a first conductive polymer layer formed on the at least one surface and a second conductive polymer layer formed on the separator are mixed (paragraphs [0136] and [0140]-[0142], Applicant should note that it is inherent that there will be a mixed region as claimed because the conductive polymer layer of the separator will face both the conductive polymer layer of the anode and the conductive polymer layer of the cathode), and at least one selected from the group consisting of glycols, glycerin, polyglycerins and sugar alcohols is present in the mixed region (paragraph [0083]).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, see paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 4, Kubota et al. discloses a method for manufacturing an electrolytic capacitor that includes an anode foil having a dielectric layer formed on a surface thereof, a cathode foil, and a separator (abstract), the method comprising in the following order, a polymer layer formation step of forming a conductive polymer layer containing a conductive polymer component on the separator (paragraph [0063]) and at least one surface selected from a surface of the dielectric layer and a surface of the cathode foil (paragraph [0069]), a stacked body formation step of forming a stacked body by stacking the anode foil, the cathode foil, and the separator such that the separator is disposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil (paragraph [0073]), a liquid application step of impregnating the conductive polymer included in the stacked body with a liquid that includes water and an organic compound that does not boil at 100oC under 1 atm (paragraphs [0083] and [0136}), a removal step of removing a portion of the liquid with which the conductive polymer layer has been impregnated (paragraph [0136]), such that the organic compound remains in the conductive polymer layer (conventional in the art, it is inherent that the organic compound will remain in the conductive polymeric layer since it does not boil at 100oC), and an impregnation step of impregnating the stacked body subjected to the removal step with a liquid component (paragraph [0147]).
Regarding claim 5, see paragraph [0128]. Applicant should note that it is inherent that a mass of the organic compound contained in the conductive polymeric layer will become larger than a mass of water contained in the conductive polymer layer in the removal step since water will be dried out as is conventional in the art.
Regarding claim 7, see paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 8, see paragraph [0083].
Regarding claim 9, see paragraph [0082].
Regarding claim 10, see paragraphs [0051]-[0060] and [0076]-[0078].
Regarding claim 11, Applicant should note that it is inherent that the heating temperature will be higher or equal to 100oC since water is the liquid being removed.
Regarding claim 12, see paragraphs [0063] and [0069].
Regarding claim 13, see paragraph [0073].
Regarding claim 14, see paragraphs [0052]-[0054] and [0093].
Regarding claim 15, see paragraphs [0136] and [0140]-[0142]. Applicant should note that it is inherent that there will be a mixed region as claimed because the conductive polymer layer of the separator will face both the conductive polymer layer of the anode and the conductive polymer layer of the cathode.
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota et al.
Kubota et al. discloses a method for manufacturing an electrolytic capacitor as shown above including the relative mass of the conductive polymer with respect to a mass of the organic compound, see paragraph [0061] and [0080]. Although Kubota et al. does not specifically disclose the range of the ratio claimed however, it has been held that where the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges through routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESSAMA OMGBA whose telephone number is (469)295-9278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday: 10:00 AM – 6:00 PM.
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, Alford Kindred can be reached at 571-272-4037. 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.
/ESSAMA OMGBA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights