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 filed 15 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that neither Matsuura ‘151 nor Tsuda ‘521 disclose a water concentration of 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass is critical, desired, or balanced improvement of the capacitor performance and accuses the examiner of making a conclusory statement without explain why one of ordinary skill would be drawn to the sub range claimed.
The examiner disagrees with applicant. The cited sections of Tsuda ‘521 explicitly discloses “electrolyte solution having a water of less than 0.1% by mass is inferior in the property of restoring the dielectric layer, so that the leakage current cannot be suppressed. Whereas the electrolyte solution having a water of more than 6.0% by mass increases the ESR. As described above, it is important to set a proportion of the water in the electrolyte solution to a range from 0.1% by mass to 6.0% by mass, inclusive, in the present exemplary embodiment” and further provides examples of 0.1wt% (1000 ppm), 0.5wt% (5000ppm), and 1.0wt%(10000ppm) thus providing a clear teaching of values within the sub-range claimed and further recognizing the critical, desired, or balanced improvement of the capacitor performance specifically as it relates to leakage current (short circuit) and ESR. Furthermore, it is known within the capacitor art that water in an electrolyte is known to evaporate inside a sealed case and cause expansion/swelling of the capacitor case which is detrimental as discussed in JPH08203781A. Thus one of ordinary skill in the art would expect that controlling the amount of water in an electrolyte will have an effect of leakage current (short circuit) and expansion.
Applicant further argues that neither Matsuura ‘151 nor Tsuda ‘521 disclose the conductive polymer component does not contain an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, or contains an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, and when the conductive polymer component contains the additive, a content of the additive in the conductive polymer component is 0.1 mass% or less. Specifically applicant argues Matsuura ‘151 discloses 15 mass% or more of a hydroxyl-containing compound as an essential component of the electrolyte system.
The examiner notes that while Matsuura ‘151 discloses the electrolytic solution filling the container may include 15 mass% or more of a hydroxyl-containing compound, the conductive polymer is silent to any hydroxyl-containing compound and the claim is directed to the amount of compound contained in the conductive polymer not the entire electrolyte system as argued by applicant. Thus the argument is moot.
New grounds of rejection have been made based on the amendments made. All claims stand rejected.
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)(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) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsuda (US 2018/0082798).
In regards to claim 10, Tsuda ‘798 discloses
A manufacturing method of an electrolytic capacitor, comprising:
a step of preparing a capacitor element (10 – fig. 1-2; [0014]) that includes an anode foil (21 – fig. 2; [0015]) having a dielectric layer on a surface thereof ([0016]), a cathode foil (22 – fig. 2; [0015]), and a separator (23 – fig. 2; [0015]) and a conductive polymer ([0017]) component that are interposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil; and
a step of obtaining an electrolytic capacitor by housing in a case (11 – fig. 1; [0014]) the capacitor element and a liquid component ([0014] & [0056]) containing a non-aqueous solvent and having a water concentration of 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass (abstract & table 1),
wherein the separator contains a synthetic resin fiber ([0037]),
the liquid component does not contain a protic organic solvent or contains a protic organic solvent, and
when the liquid component contains the protic organic solvent, a concentration of the protic organic solvent in the liquid component is 20 mass% or less ([0062] & [0069-0070] – when first solvent is 80% by mass or more of electrolyte solution the second protic solvent will be 20% or less).
In regards to claim 11, Tsuda ‘798 discloses
The manufacturing method of an electrolytic capacitor according to claim 10, wherein in the step of preparing the capacitor element, the capacitor element is prepared by impregnating a precursor including the anode foil, the cathode foil, and the separator into a treatment liquid containing the conductive polymer component, and drying the precursor ([0066] & [0082-0084]).
In regards to claim 12, Tsuda ‘798 discloses
The manufacturing method of an electrolytic capacitor according to claim 11, wherein the treatment liquid does not contain an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, or contains an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, and when the treatment liquid contains the additive, a content of the additive in the treatment liquid is 15 mass% or less ([0098]).
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) 1-3, 5-6, 9, 13-18, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuura et al. (US 2016/0064151) in view of Tsuda (US 2018/0047521).
In regards to claim 1,
Matsuura ‘151 discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising a capacitor element (12 – fig. 1-2; [0027]) and a liquid component ([0028] & table 1) that contains a non-aqueous solvent, wherein
the capacitor element includes an anode foil (12A – fig. 2; [0030]) having a dielectric layer on a surface thereof, a cathode foil (12B – fig. 2; [0030]), and a separator (12C – fig. 2; [0030]) and a conductive polymer (122 – fig. 3; [0030]) component that are interposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil,
the separator contains a synthetic resin fiber ([0032]),
the liquid component does not contain a protic organic solvent or contains a protic organic solvent, and
when the liquid component contains the protic organic solvent, a concentration of the protic organic solvent in the liquid component is 20 mass% or less (table 1). Matsuura ‘151 fails to disclose a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass.
Tsuda ‘521 discloses a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass ([0056] & 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 electrolyte of Matsuura ‘151 to have a water concentration as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to obtain a capacitor with good ESR and leakage current properties.
In regards to claim 2,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein a synthetic resin constituting the synthetic resin fiber contains at least one selected from the group consisting of aromatic polyamides and polyesters ([0032] of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 3,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the liquid component contains an aprotic polar solvent at a concentration of 50 mass% or more (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 5,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the aprotic polar solvent has a boiling point of 180 °C or higher (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 6,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the aprotic polar solvent contains at least one selected from the group consisting of lactone compounds, cyclic sulfone compounds, and sulfoxide compounds (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 9,
Matsuura ‘151 discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising a capacitor element (12 – fig. 1-2; [0027]) and a liquid component ([0028] & table 1) that contains a non-aqueous solvent, wherein
the capacitor element includes an anode foil (12A – fig. 2; [0030]) having a dielectric layer on a surface thereof, a cathode foil (12B – fig. 2; [0030]), and a separator (12C – fig. 2; [0030]) and a conductive polymer (122 – fig. 3; [0030]) component that are interposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil,
the separator contains a synthetic resin fiber ([0032]),
the conductive polymer component does not contain an additive that serves as an oxygen supply ([0064]), or contains an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, and
when the conductive polymer component contains the additive, a content of the additive in the conductive polymer component is 0.1 mass% or less. Matsuura ‘151 fails to disclose a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass.
Tsuda ‘521 discloses a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass ([0056] & 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 electrolyte of Matsuura ‘151 to have a water concentration as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to obtain a capacitor with good ESR and leakage current properties.
In regards to claim 13,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein, when the liquid component contains the protic organic solvent, the concentration of the protic organic solvent in the liquid component is 10 mass% or less (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 14,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein, when the liquid component contains a protic organic solvent, a concentration of the protic organic solvent in the liquid component is 10 mass% or less (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 15,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein a synthetic resin constituting the synthetic resin fiber contains at least one selected from the group consisting of aromatic polyamides and polyesters ([0032] of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 16,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the liquid component contains an aprotic polar solvent at a concentration of 50 mass% or more (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 17,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the aprotic polar solvent has a boiling point of 180 °C or higher (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 18,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the aprotic polar solvent contains at least one selected from the group consisting of lactone compounds, cyclic sulfone compounds, and sulfoxide compounds (table 1 of Matsuura ‘151).
In regards to claim 20,
Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the additive that serves as an oxygen supply includes at least one of a polyhydric alcohol, an ethylene oxide adduct, a polyethylene oxide adduct, and a polyalkylene glycol ([0064] of Matsuura ‘151 – the conductive polymer of Matsuura ‘151 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 does not contain at least one of a polyhydric alcohol, an ethylene oxide adduct, a polyethylene oxide adduct, and a polyalkylene glycol).
Claim(s) 1, 8-9, & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakuma et al. (US 2009/0109602) in view of Tsuda ‘521.
In regards to claim 1,
Kakuma ‘602 discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising a capacitor element (7 – fig. 1; [0028]) and a liquid component ([0040-0041]) that contains a non-aqueous solvent, wherein
the capacitor element includes an anode foil (1 – fig. 1; [0028]) having a dielectric layer on a surface thereof, a cathode foil (2 – fig. 1; [0028]), and a separator (3 – fig. 1; [0028]) and a conductive polymer ([0029-0030]]) component that are interposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil,
the liquid component does not contain a protic organic solvent or contains a protic organic solvent ([0046]), and
when the liquid component contains the protic organic solvent, a concentration of the protic organic solvent in the liquid component is 20 mass% or less. Kakuma ‘602 fails to disclose the separator contains a synthetic resin fiber and a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass.
Tsuda ‘521 discloses e separator contains a synthetic resin fiber ([0036]) and a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass ([0056] & 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 solvent of Kakuma ‘602 to have a water concentration as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to obtain a capacitor with good ESR and leakage current properties and to form the separator of Kakuma ‘602 using a material as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to ensure good insulation properties. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
In regards to claim 8,
Kakuma ‘602 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the liquid component does not contain a solute or contains a solute ([0029] of Kakuma ‘602).
In regards to claim 9,
Kakuma ‘602 discloses an electrolytic capacitor comprising a capacitor element (7 – fig. 1; [0028]) and a liquid component ([0040-0041]) that contains a non-aqueous solvent, wherein
the capacitor element includes an anode foil (1 – fig. 1; [0028]) having a dielectric layer on a surface thereof, a cathode foil (2 – fig. 1; [0028]), and a separator (3 – fig. 1; [0028]) and a conductive polymer ([0029-0030]]) component that are interposed between the anode foil and the cathode foil,
the conductive polymer component does not contain an additive that serves as an oxygen supply ([0046]), or contains an additive that serves as an oxygen supply, and
when the conductive polymer component contains the additive, a content of the additive in the conductive polymer component is 0.1 mass% or less. Kakuma ‘602 fails to disclose the separator contains a synthetic resin fiber and a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass.
Tsuda ‘521 discloses e separator contains a synthetic resin fiber ([0036]) and a water concentration in the liquid component is 1000 ppm or more and 10000 ppm or less by mass ([0056] & 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 solvent of Kakuma ‘602 to have a water concentration as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to obtain a capacitor with good ESR and leakage current properties and to form the separator of Kakuma ‘602 using a material as taught by Tsuda ‘521 to ensure good insulation properties. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
In regards to claim 19,
Kakuma ‘602 as modified by Tsuda ‘521 further discloses wherein the liquid component does not contain a solute or contains a solute ([0029] of Kakuma ‘602).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 4,734,821 – table 1
JPH08203781A – teaches lower water content in the electrolyte to reduce the potential of damage due to swelling caused by water evaporation
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