DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-4, 7-8, and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naito et al (US 2016/0189872) in view of Hong et al (US 2021/0166886).
Regarding claim 1, Naito teaches a tantalum capacitor (Fig. 1-4) comprising: a tantalum body (Fig. 3, 21 [0034]) including a tantalum element body including tantalum particles ([0034]) and a conductive polymer layer (Fig. 3, 23) disposed on the tantalum element body (Fig. 3), the tantalum body having a first surface (Fig. 3, top), a second surface (Fig. 3, bottom) opposing the first surface in a first direction (Fig. 3, up and down), and a plurality of side surfaces (Fig. 3, sides) connecting the first surface and the second surface to each other (Fig. 3); a molded portion (Fig. 3, 40) surrounding the tantalum body (Fig. 3); and a coating layer (Fig. 3, 30) disposed on at least a portion of an edge on which the first surface of the tantalum body and the plurality of side surfaces meet each other (Fig. 3), and a thickness of the coating layer is denoted by t2 (1-100 μm [0048]).
However, Naito is silent about the limitation when a thickness of an edge portion of the conductive polymer layer is denoted by t1 and a sum of t1 and t2 satisfies 5.5 μm or more and 100 μm or less.
Hong teaches that a thickness of an edge portion of the conductive polymer layer is denoted by t1 (3-20 μm [0057]) and a sum of t1 and t2 satisfies 5.5 μm or more and 100 μm or less (4-120 μm when combined).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong to the invention of Naito, in order to make a solid electrolyte capacitor having excellent reliability (Hong [0012]).
Regarding claim 2, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the thickness (t1) of the edge portion of the conductive polymer layer satisfies 5 μm or more and 20 μm or less.
Regarding claim 3, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the thickness (t2) of the coating layer t2 is 0.5 μm or more and 80 μm or less (1-100 μm [0048]).
Regarding claim 4, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the coating layer includes at least one of an epoxy resin, polyimide, silicone ([0071]), and silicone rubber.
Regarding claim 7, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the coating layer is also disposed on at least a portion of an edge on which the plurality of side surfaces of the tantalum body meets each other (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the coating layer is also disposed on at least a portion of an edge on which the second surface and the plurality of side surfaces of the tantalum body meet each other (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the tantalum body has a tantalum wire (Fig. 3, 22) extending in a second direction (Fig. 3, left to right) crossing the first direction.
Regarding claim 11, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the tantalum wire extends from one of the plurality of side surfaces (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches: an anode lead frame (Fig. 3, 11) connected to the tantalum wire (Fig. 3); and a cathode lead frame (Fig. 3, 12) spaced apart from the anode lead frame (Fig. 3), the cathode lead frame connected to the tantalum body (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the cathode lead frame is disposed on the second surface (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Naito, as modified by Hong, further teaches that the tantalum body further includes: a carbon layer (Fig. 3, 24) disposed on the conductive polymer layer; and a silver (Ag) layer disposed on the carbon layer ([0040]), and the coating layer is in contact with the silver (Ag) layer ([0040]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 15, the prior art fails to teach or suggest, alone or in combination:
A tantalum capacitor comprising: a tantalum body including a tantalum element body including tantalum particles and a conductive polymer layer disposed on the tantalum element body, the tantalum body having a first surface, a second surface opposing the first surface in a first direction, and a plurality of side surfaces connecting the first surface and the second surface to each other; a molded portion surrounding the tantalum body; and a coating layer disposed on at least a portion of an edge on which the first surface of the tantalum body and the plurality of side surfaces meet each other, wherein at least a portion of the first surface of the tantalum body is in contact with the molded portion.
Specifically, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious, alone or in combination, the limitation of “wherein at least a portion of the first surface of the tantalum body is in contact with the molded portion” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Claims 5-6 and 9 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.
Regarding claim 5-6, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious, alone or in combination, the limitation of “wherein at least a portion of the first surface of the tantalum body is in contact with the molded portion” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 9, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious, alone or in combination, the limitation of “wherein at least a portion of the second surface of the tantalum body is in contact with the molded portion” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Cited Prior Art
Furuzawa et al (US 2006/0181836) teaches relevant art in Fig. 1-14.
NEMOTO et al (US 2009/0135551) teaches relevant art in Fig. 1-13.
NEMOTO et al (JP 2009182157) teaches relevant art in Fig. 1-6.
TANAKA et al (US 2024/0296997) teaches relevant art in Fig. 1-20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P MCFADDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5649. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur 8am-9pm PST.
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.
/MICHAEL P MCFADDEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights