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 1-5 and 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2019/0027312) in view of Kim et al. (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2020/0411243).
With respect to claim 1, Muramatsu teaches a multilayer ceramic capacitor (see abstract) comprising: a multilayer body including a first surface and a second surface facing each other in a lamination direction, a third surface and a fourth surface facing each other in a first direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the lamination direction, and a fifth surface and a sixth surface facing each other in a second direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the lamination direction and the first direction (see FIG. 14, laminate 12, surfaces 12a-12f, and paragraph [0060]); and four outer electrodes on the multilayer body (see FIG. 14, external electrodes 114a/114b/115a/115b and paragraphs [0082]-[0083]); wherein about 0.85 L/W about 1.00 is satisfied, where L is a dimension of the multilayer ceramic capacitor in the first direction and W is a dimension of the multilayer ceramic capacitor in the second direction (see paragraph [0103]); the multilayer body includes: a first inner electrode including one end exposed on the third surface and the fifth surface and another end exposed on the fourth surface and the sixth surface (see FIG. 18, elements 118a and 118b with extensions 22a/22b/24a/24b); a second inner electrode including one end exposed on the third surface and the sixth surface and another end exposed on the fourth surface and the fifth surface (see FIG. 18, elements 118a and 118b with extensions 22a/22b/24a/24b).
Muramatsu fails to teach a peripheral electrode; and the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the first inner electrode and the third to sixth surfaces.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches the inclusion of peripheral electrodes in a region between the inner electrode and the capacitor surfaces. See FIG. 3, element 141 and paragraph [0043]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement in flexural strength. See paragraph [0043].
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 Muramatsu, as taught by Kim, in order to improve the flexural strength of the capacitor.
With respect to claim 2, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the second inner electrode and the third to sixth surfaces. See Kim, FIG. 3 elements 142, which are peripheral electrodes in the same layer as the second internal electrode.
With respect to claim 3, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a shortest distance between the peripheral electrode and the third to sixth surfaces is about 5.0 µm or more and about 20 µm or less. See Muramatsu, FIG. 17 and paragraph [0078], noting that the size of the gap 26b between the internal electrode and the third surface of the body is between 10 and 20 µm, meaning that any peripheral electrode introduced into that gap would have a distance of less than 20 µm
With respect to claim 4, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a width in the first direction of the peripheral electrode located between the third surface and the first inner electrode is about 1.0% or more and about 30% or less of a distance between the third surface and the first inner electrode. See Muramatsu, paragraph [0079].
With respect to claim 5, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a width in the second direction of the peripheral electrode located between the fifth surface and the first inner electrode is about 1.0% or more and about 30% or less of a distance between the fifth surface and the first inner electrode. See Muramatsu, paragraph [0079].
With respect to claim 10, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the peripheral electrode is not located on a line connecting an intersection of the third surface and the sixth surface and an intersection of the fourth surface and the fifth surface. See FIG. 8 of Kim, noting that the peripheral electrode 141 is spaced apart from the surfaces of the capacitor body.
With respect to claim 11, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the peripheral electrode is not located about 1.0 µm or more and about 10 µm or less from a corner of the first inner electrode located at a longest portion of a length of the first inner electrode in a direction connecting an intersection of the third surface and the sixth surface and an intersection of the fourth surface and the fifth surface. See Kim, FIG. 8, noting that the peripheral electrode 141 is spaced away from the corner of internal electrode 121 near external electrode 132.
With respect to claim 12, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the first inner electrode includes an extended electrode portion exposed on the third surface and the fifth surface, and the extended electrode portion is not connected to the peripheral electrode. See Muramatsu, FIG. 18, elements 118a and 118b with extensions 22a/22b/24a/24b and Kim, FIG. 3, noting that the peripheral electrodes are spaced away from the internal electrodes.
With respect to claim 13, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a distance between the extended electrode portion of the first inner electrode and the peripheral electrode is about 1.0 µm or more and about 10 µm or less. See Muramatsu, paragraph [0078], noting that the side gap is about 10µm, meaning that the gap between the inner electrode and an added peripheral electrode taught by Kim would be 10 µm or less.
With respect to claim 14, Muramatsu teaches multilayer ceramic capacitor (see abstract) comprising: a multilayer body including a first surface and a second surface facing each other in a lamination direction, a third surface and a fourth surface facing each other in a first direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the lamination direction, and a fifth surface and a sixth surface facing each other in a second direction orthogonal or substantially orthogonal to the lamination direction and the first direction (see FIG. 14, laminate 12, surfaces 12a-12f, and paragraph [0060]); and four outer electrodes on the multilayer body (see FIG. 14, external electrodes 114a/114b/115a/115b and paragraphs [0082]-[0083]); wherein about 0.85 L/W about 1.00 is satisfied, where L is a dimension of the multilayer ceramic capacitor in the first direction and W is a dimension of the multilayer ceramic capacitor in the second direction (see paragraph [0103]); the multilayer body includes: a first inner electrode including one end exposed on the third surface and another end exposed on the fourth surface (see FIG. 18, elements 118a and 118b with extensions 22a/22b/24a/24b); a second inner electrode including one end exposed on the third surface and another end exposed on the fourth surface (see FIG. 18, elements 118a and 118b with extensions 22a/22b/24a/24b).
Muramatsu fails to teach a peripheral electrode; and the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the first inner electrode and the third to sixth surfaces.
Kim, on the other hand, teaches the inclusion of peripheral electrodes in a region between the inner electrode and the capacitor surfaces. See FIG. 3, element 141 and paragraph [0043]. Such an arrangement results in an improvement in flexural strength. See paragraph [0043].
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 Muramatsu, as taught by Kim, in order to improve the flexural strength of the capacitor.
With respect to claim 15, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the second inner electrode and the third to sixth surfaces. See Kim, FIG. 3 elements 142, which are peripheral electrodes in the same layer as the second internal electrode.
With respect to claim 16, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that the peripheral electrode is exposed on the third surface and the fourth surface. See Kim, FIG. 3, elements 141.
With respect to claim 17, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a same type of metal component as the first inner electrode and the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the peripheral electrode and the first inner electrode. See Kim, paragraphs [0116] and [0117].
With respect to claim 18, the combined teachings of Muramatu and Kim teach that the one end of the first inner electrode is exposed on the fifth surface and the another end is exposed on the sixth surface; the one end of the second inner electrode is exposed on the sixth surface and the another end is exposed on the fifth surface; and a same type of metal component as the first inner electrode and the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the peripheral electrode and the first inner electrode. See Muramatsu, FIG. 17, wherein elements 22a and 22b are exposed to each of the 3rd-6th surfaces of the body, and Kim, paragraphs [0116]-[0117].
With respect to claim 19, the combined teachings of Muramatsu and Kim teach that a same type of metal component as the second inner electrode and the peripheral electrode is provided in a region between the peripheral electrode and the second inner electrode. See Kim, paragraphs [0116] and [0117].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with respect to 6, the prior art fails to teach, or fairly suggest, that the peripheral electrode located between the third surface and the first inner electrode is discontinuously provided in the second direction, when taken in conjunction with the limitations of base claim 1. Claims 7-9 would be allowed by virtue of their dependency from claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fujita et al. (US 2021/0202173) discloses a ceramic electronic device having substantially equal length and width dimensions, but fails to teach the addition of peripheral electrodes. Nagai et al. (US 2023/0095767), Kim et al. (US 2020/0043646), and Ota et al. (US 2017/0169954) each disclose dummy electrodes, but fails to teach or suggest the features of the multilayer body 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