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 § 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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015-103700 in view of JP 4-291711 (the Office notes that both references were submitted as part of an IDS filed 17 January 2025).
With respect to claim 1, JP ‘700 teaches a film capacitor (see abstract) comprising: a wound body (see paragraph [0012], noting that the teachings apply to a wound capacitor) comprising a pair of dielectric films each having a vapor-deposited metal on surface thereof (see paragraph [0012]), the pair of dielectric films being overlapped in a thickness direction of the wound body such that there is a gap between the pair of dielectric films (see paragraph [0014]), and the wound body having a pair of opposed ends (see FIG. 2); and a pair of end face electrodes at the opposed ends of the wound body, respectively (see FIG. 2, elements 7, which would be disposed on opposing ends of wound body), wherein a ratio of a thickness of the gap to a thickness of the pair of dielectric films in the first direction is 0.003 to 0.029 (see Table 1).
JP ‘700 fails to teach that the wound body has a shape in which a first dimension in a first direction is shorter than a second dimension in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in a cross section in a third direction along an extending surface of each of the end face electrodes.
JP ‘711, on the other hand, teaches that the wound body has a shape in which a first dimension in a first direction is shorter than a second dimension in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in a cross section in a third direction along an extending surface of each of the end face electrodes. See FIGS. 1 and 2. Such an arrangement is known in the art to produce a small sized-capacitor having a large capacity. See paragraph [0004].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify JP ‘700, as taught by JP ‘711, in order to produce a small-sized capacitor having a large capacity.
With respect to claim 2, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that the ratio of the thickness of the gap to the thickness of the pair of dielectric films in the first direction is 0.015 to 0.029. See JP ‘700, Table 1.
With respect to claim 3, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that, when a design capacitance value of the film capacitor is denoted by CO, and an actual measurement capacitance value is denoted by Cl, (CO - C1)/CO x 100 is 0.5% or less. While the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and JP ‘711 do not explicitly teach the exact ratio of design capacitance value to actual measured capacitance value, the combined references explicitly teach each of the physical structures recited in claims 1 and 5, and as such, are considered to implicitly teach any physical properties associated therewith, including design and measured capacitance values. See MPEP 2112.01(a).
With respect to claim 4, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that, when a design capacitance value of the film capacitor is denoted by CO, and an actual measurement capacitance value is denoted by Cl, (CO - C1)/COx 100 is 10% or less. While the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and JP ‘711 do not explicitly teach the exact ratio of design capacitance value to actual measured capacitance value, the combined references explicitly teach each of the physical structures recited in claims 1 and 5, and as such, are considered to implicitly teach any physical properties associated therewith, including design and measured capacitance values. See MPEP 2112.01(a).
With respect to claim 5, JP ‘700 teaches a method for producing a film capacitor (see abstract), the method comprising: forming a wound body by winding a pair of dielectric films (see paragraph [0012], noting that the teachings apply to a wound capacitor) each having a vapor- deposited metal on a surface such that the dielectric films overlap each other in a thickness direction (see paragraph [0012]); such that a ratio of a thickness of a gap between the pair of dielectric films to a thickness of the pair of dielectric films is 0.003 to 0.029 (see JP ‘700, Table 1); and forming end face electrodes on opposed ends of the wound body (see FIG. 2, elements 7, which would be disposed on opposing ends of wound body).
JP ‘700 fails to teach that the wound body pressing the wound body by controlling a press pressure within a predetermined range.
JP ‘711, on the other hand, teaches that the wound body has a shape in which a first dimension in a first direction is shorter than a second dimension in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in a cross section in a third direction along an extending surface of each of the end face electrodes. See FIGS. 1 and 2. Such an arrangement is known in the art to produce a small sized-capacitor having a large capacity. See paragraph [0004].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify JP ‘700, as taught by JP ‘711, in order to produce a small-sized capacitor having a large capacity.
With respect to claim 6, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that the wound body is pressed into a shape in which a first dimension in a first direction is shorter than a second dimension in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in a cross section in a third direction along an extending surface of each of the end face electrodes. See JP ‘711, FIGS. 1 and 2.
With respect to claim 7, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that the pressing pressure during the pressing of the wound body is controlled such that the ratio of the thickness of the gap to the thickness of the pair of dielectric films is 0.015 to 0.029. See JP ‘700, Table 1.
With respect to claim 8, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and ‘711 teach that the wound body is pressed into a shape such that, when a design capacitance value of the film capacitor is denoted by CO, and an actual measurement capacitance value is denoted by C1,(CO - C 1)/C0x 100 is 0.5% or less. While the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and JP ‘711 do not explicitly teach the exact ratio of design capacitance value to actual measured capacitance value, the combined references explicitly teach each of the physical structures recited in claims 1 and 5, and as such, are considered to implicitly teach any physical properties associated therewith, including design and measured capacitance values. See MPEP 2112.01(a).
With respect to claim 9, the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and JP ‘711 are considered to teach that the wound body is pressed into a shape such that, when a design capacitance value of the film capacitor is denoted by CO, and an actual measurement capacitance value is denoted by C1,(CO - Cl)/COx 100 is 10% or less. While the combined teachings of JP ‘700 and JP ‘711 do not explicitly teach the exact ratio of design capacitance value to actual measured capacitance value, the combined references explicitly teach each of the physical structures recited in claims 1 and 5, and as such, are considered to implicitly teach any physical properties associated therewith, including design and measured capacitance values. See MPEP 2112.01(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Inakura et al. (US 2022/0270823), Inakura (US 2022/0102072), WO 2021/024564), and WO 2018/021417 each disclose wound capacitor having smaller second dimension than first dimensions, but fail to teach the gap ratio recited in the independent claims.
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