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 1-4, 6-7, 9, 11-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yokota (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2021/0134530).
With respect to claim 1, Yokota discloses a multilayer electronic component (see abstract), comprising: a body including a plurality of dielectric layers, the body having first and second surfaces opposing each other in a first direction, third and fourth surfaces connected to the first and second surfaces and opposing each other in a second direction, and fifth and sixth surfaces connected to the first to fourth surfaces and opposing each other in a third direction (see FIG. 1, elements 110-116 and paragraph [0041]; see also, paragraph [0167], noting that the similar structures in claim 22 are the same or similar to FIGS. 1-19); first and second side margin portions disposed on the fifth and sixth surfaces, respectively (see FIG. 22, elements 110b/110f and 110c/110g; see paragraph [0052]); and first and second external electrodes disposed on the third and fourth surfaces, respectively (see FIG. 1, elements 121/122), wherein the body includes an active portion including an internal electrode alternately disposed with the dielectric layer in the first direction (see FIG. 22, the central portion of the body, where dielectric ceramic layers are laminated between internal electrode layers; see also, paragraph [0043]), an upper cover portion disposed above the active portion in the first direction (see FIG. 22, element 110d and paragraph [0057]), and a lower cover portion disposed below the active portion in the first direction (see FIG. 22, element 110e and paragraph [0058]), and one of the first and second side margin portions includes an inner margin portion covering at least a portion of the active portion on the fifth or sixth surface (see FIG. 22, element 110b), and an outer margin portion disposed on the inner margin portion and disposed to be in contact with the upper cover portion and the lower cover portion (see FIG. 22, element 110f, which contacts both layer 110d and 110e).
With respect to claim 2, Yokota discloses that the outer margin portion is disposed to cover an upper end and a lower end of the inner margin portion in the first direction. See FIG. 22, noting that the ends of the outer margin portion are in contact with, and cover, the upper end and lower end of the inner margin portion; the inner margin portion does not extend beyond the outer margin portion.
With respect to claim 3, Yokota discloses that the inner margin portion is disposed to completely cover the active portion on the fifth or sixth surface. See FIG. 22.
With respect to claim 4, Yokota discloses that the upper end of the inner margin portion in the first direction is in contact with the upper cover portion on the fifth or sixth surfaces, and the lower end of the inner margin portion in the first direction is in contact with the lower cover portion on the fifth or sixth surface. See FIG. 22.
With respect to claim 6, Yokota discloses that in a first direction-third direction cross-section, the outer margin portion extends continuously to cover the inner margin portion. See FIG. 22, noting that the ends of the outer margin portion are in contact with, and cover, the upper end and lower end of the inner margin portion; the inner margin portion does not extend beyond the outer margin portion.
With respect to claim 7, Yokota discloses that an upper end of the outer margin portion in the first direction is disposed on the same plane as the second surface, and a lower end of the outer margin portion in the first direction is disposed on the same plane as the first surface. See FIG. 22.
With respect to claim 9, Yokota discloses that an upper end of the outer margin portion in the first direction is in contact with the upper cover portion on the fifth or sixth surface, and a lower end of the outer margin portion in the first direction is in contact with the lower cover portion on the fifth or sixth surface. See FIG. 2.
With respect to claim 11, Yokota discloses that at least a portion of the outer margin portion is disposed on the first and second surfaces. See FIG. 22.
With respect to claim 12, Yokota discloses that an average width of the inner margin portion in the third direction is 0.5 μm or more and 5 μm or less. See paragraph [0105].
With respect to claim 13, Yokota discloses that an average width of the outer margin portion in the third direction is 15 μm or more and 40 μm or less. See paragraph [0106].
With respect to claim 14, Yokota discloses that, an average width of the inner margin portion in the third direction is Tma, an average width of the outer margin portion in the third direction is Tmb, and Tmb/Tma is 3 or more and 80 or less. See paragraphs [0105]-[0106].
With respect to claim 15, Yokota discloses that, an average width of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the third direction in a center of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the first direction is Tm1, an average width of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the third direction at an upper end of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the first direction is Tm2, and Tm1-Tm2 is 0.5 μm or more and 5 μm or less. See FIG. 22 and paragraphs [0105]-[0106], noting that the center of the side margin portion is the width of 110b plus the width of 110f, and the end of side margin portion is only the width of 110f, meaning that the end width is 0.5 to 5 μm less than the center width.
With respect to claim 18, Yokota discloses that the internal electrode comprises first and second internal electrodes alternately disposed with the dielectric layer interposed therebetween in the first direction, and the first internal electrode is connected to the third, fifth, and sixth surfaces, and the second internal electrode is connected to the fourth, fifth, and sixth surfaces. See FIG. 6; see also, paragraph [0167], noting that the similar structures in claim 22 are the same or similar to FIGS. 1-19.
With respect to claim 19, Yokota discloses that the first external electrode covers one end of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the second direction, and the second external electrode covers the other end of the one of the first and second side margin portions in the second direction. See FIG. 22, element 121.
With respect to claim 20, Yokota discloses that in a first direction-third direction cross-section, the inner margin portion continuously extends to cover the active portion on the fifth or sixth surface. See FIG. 22.
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 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Kim (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2014/0301015).
With respect to claim 16, Yokota fails to teach that the inner margin portion has a different composition from the outer margin portion.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches that the inner margin portion has a different composition from the outer margin portion. See paragraph [0080], noting that glass is added to inner margin portion S1 to increase the porosity thereof. Such an arrangement improves reliability and increases capacitance. See paragraph [0079].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Yokota, in view of Kim, in order to improve reliability and increase capacitance.
With respect to claim 17, Yokota fails to teach that porosity of the inner margin portion is higher than porosity of the outer margin portion.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches that porosity of the inner margin portion is higher than porosity of the outer margin portion. See FIG. 3, paragraph [0087], noting that P1 is twice as large as P2. Such an arrangement improves reliability and increases capacitance. See paragraph [0087].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Yokota, in view of Kim, in order to improve reliability and increase capacitance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8, and 10 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: with respect to claims 5, 8, and 10, the prior art fails to teach, or fairly suggest, the details of the upper end and lower end of the outer margin portion recited in each respective claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fukunaga et al. (US 2020/0126721) and Fukunaga et al. (US 2015/0340155) each teach a plurality of side margin layers, but fail to teach the details recited in claim 1.
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 2847
Prosecution Insights