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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, lines 9-10, the limitation, “the thickest portion” is confusing. Insert –at least one—before “thickest”.
Claim 5, line 1, the limitation, “the thickest portion” is confusing. Insert –at least one—before “thickest”.
Claim 7, lines 3-4, the limitation, “the thickest portion” is confusing. Insert –at least one—before “thickest”.
Claim 8, lines 1-1, the limitation, “the thickest portion” is confusing. Insert –at least one—before “thickest”.
Claim 10, lines 1-2, the limitation, “the thinnest portion” is confusing. Insert –at least one—before “thinnest”.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Parent claim 2 requires the copper base layer. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 1-3, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Katsuta et al. (US 2015/0001998).
PNG
media_image1.png
266
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
316
488
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Katsuta et al. disclose an electronic component comprising:
an element body (12) having a contour having a pair of end faces (18a, 18b) and multiple lateral faces (14a, 14b, 16a, 16b) each of which is connected to the end faces (18a, 18b) and extends from one of the end faces (18a) to another of the end faces (18b), and at least one conductor (20a-20b) within the element body (12);
base layers (24) each of which is in contact with the lateral faces and one of the end faces (18a); and
Ni layers (26, [0030]) formed on the base layers (24), respectively, each of the Ni layers (26) disposed over the lateral faces (14a, 14b, 16a, 16b) and the corresponding end face (18a), each of the Ni layers (24) having at least one thickest portion disposed over at least one of the lateral faces, a thickness of the thickest portion being at least 30 percent greater than a thickness of a portion of the Ni layer disposed over the corresponding end face (table 1 – examples 2-5).
Regarding claim 2, Katsuta et al. disclose each of the base layers (24) is a Cu layer [0029].
Regarding claim 3, Katsuta et al. disclose comprising upper metal
layers (28) formed on the Ni layers (26), respectively.
Regarding claim 6, Katsuta et al. disclose each of the Ni layers (26, [0030]) has
the thickest portions that are located over the lateral faces and that are located farther from the corresponding end face (18b) than a middle between an edge farthest from the corresponding end face (18a) and an edge closest to the corresponding end face.
Regarding claim 8, Katsuta et al. disclose the thickness of the thickest portion of each of the Ni layers is from 3.5 to 5.5 micrometers [0030].
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (US 2022/0139618).
PNG
media_image3.png
356
522
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
368
518
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Kang et al. disclose an electronic component comprising:
an element body (110) having a contour having a pair of end faces (3, 4) and multiple lateral faces (1, 2, 5, 6) each of which is connected to the end faces (3,4) and extends from one of the end faces (3) to another of the end faces (4), and at least one conductor (121) within the element body (110);
base layers (131a, 132a) each of which is in contact with the lateral faces (1, 2, 5, 6) and one of the end faces (3, 4); and
Ni layers (131b, 132b, [0073]) formed on the base layers (131a, 132a), respectively, each of the Ni layers (131b, 132b) disposed over the lateral faces (1, 2, 5, 6) and the corresponding end face (3, 4), each of the Ni layers (131b, 132b) having at least one thickest portion disposed over at least one of the lateral faces (2), a thickness of the thickest portion being at least 30 percent greater than a thickness of a portion of the Ni layer disposed over the corresponding end face (table 1, examples 9-12).
Regarding claim 2, Kang et al. disclose each of the base layers (131a, 132a) is a Cu layer [0067].
Regarding claim 3, Kang et al. disclose comprising upper metal layers (131c, 132c) formed on the Ni layers (131b, 132b), respectively.
Regarding claim 4, Kang et al. disclose each of the base layers is a Cu layer [0067] and each of the upper metal layers is an Sn layer [0115]
Regarding claim 5, Kang et al. disclose the thickness of the thickest portion is
at least 20 percent greater than a thickness of at least one thinnest portion disposed over at least one of the lateral faces (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
485
778
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Kang et al. disclose each of the Ni layers (131b) has
the thickest portions that are located over the lateral faces and that are located farther from the corresponding end face (3, 4) than a middle between an edge farthest from the corresponding end face (3,4) and an edge closest to the corresponding end face (3, 4).
Regarding claim 9, Kang et al. disclose the thickness of the portion of each of the Ni layers disposed over the corresponding end face is from 2.5 to 4.0 micrometers (table 1, samples 10-11).
Regarding claim 11, Kang et al. disclose the thickness of the thickest portions of each of the Ni layers (131b) is at least 30 percent greater than a thickness of portions of
the Ni layer disposed over boundaries between the end face and each of the lateral faces (see fig. 2).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kisumi (US 2022/0093336).
Regarding claim 14, Kisumi discloses a method of manufacturing an electronic component, the method comprising: forming base layers (12) on an element body (3) that has a contour having a pair of end faces [0019] and multiple lateral faces [0019] each of which is connected to the end faces and extends from one of the end faces [0019] to another of the end faces, and at least one conductor (9) within the element
body, wherein each of the base layers (12) is in contact with the lateral faces and one of the end faces (7);
reducing a thickness of at least a portion of each of the base layers (12, [0024]), the portion being in contact with at least one of the lateral faces [0024]; and
forming Ni layers (14, [0029]) on the base layers (12), respectively, wherein each of the Ni layers (14) is disposed over the lateral faces and the corresponding end face.
Regarding claim 15, Kisumi discloses wherein the reducing the thickness is performed by a blasting treatment [0024].
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.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al. (US 2022/0139618) in view of Cho et al. (US 2014/0020942 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kang et al. disclose the claimed invention except for a circuit board arrangement comprising: the electronic component according to claim 1; and a substrate on which the electronic component is mounted via solders.
Cho et al. disclose a circuit board arrangement (120) comprising an electronic component (10) and a substrate (120) on which the electronic component is mounted via solders (142, 144).
It would have obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the electronic component of Kang et al. on a substrate using solder, since such a modification would form a circuit board arrangement having a capacitor of Kang et al., since such a modification would form a circuit board arrangement having a low ESR capacitor that has excellent flexural strength characteristics.
Regarding claim 13, the modified Kang discloses an electronic device comprising the circuit board arrangement according to claim 12 [0003].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: In combination with the other claim limitations, the prior art does not teach or suggest an electronic component:
wherein the element body has first lateral faces connected to the end faces and second lateral faces each of which is connected to the first lateral faces and the end faces, and wherein each of the Ni layer has the thickest portions disposed over boundaries between the first lateral faces and the second lateral faces (claim 7); and
wherein the thickness of the thinnest portion of each of the Ni layers is at least 3.0 micrometers (claim 10).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 6,381,117 – ceramic component having resin layer
US 2012/0327555 A1 – ceramic component having thick external electrodes
US 2015/0083475 A1 – ceramic component
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00 AM-2:30 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, 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.
/ERIC W THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
ERIC THOMAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights