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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US Publication 2019/0237255) in view of Suzuki (US Publication 2008/0304204) and in further view of Chigira (US Publication 2019/0355517).
PNG
media_image1.png
474
466
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 of Sakura with Examiner’s Comments (Figure 1EC)
In re claim 1, Sakurai discloses a multilayer ceramic capacitor, comprising:
a multilayer body (10 – Figure 1, ¶26) including dielectric layers (2 – Figure 1, ¶26) and internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1, ¶26) that are laminated (Figure 1); and
an outer electrode (4 – Figure 1, ¶26) to be electrically connected to the internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1);
wherein the dielectric layers include Ba, Ti, and Zr, and Mg or Mn (¶9-11, ¶39);
the multilayer body includes a first main surface and a second main surface (top and bottom surfaces of 10 – Figure 1) opposite to each other in a lamination direction of the dielectric layers (2 – Figure 1) and the internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1), a first side surface and a second side surface (surfaces of 10 facing toward and away from viewer – Figure 1) opposite to each other in a width direction intersecting both the lamination direction (Figure 1) and a length direction in which the internal electrode layers extend to the outer electrode (4 – Figure 1), and a first end surface and a second end surface (left and right surfaces of 10 – Figure 1) opposite to each other in the length direction (Figure 1);
the outer electrode (4 – Figure 1) is provided on each of the first end surface and the second end surface (Figure 1);
in the multilayer body, a region in which the internal electrode layers overlap each other as viewed in the lamination direction is defined as an effective portion (EP – Figure 1EC), regions opposite to each other in the lamination direction with the effective portion therebetween are defined as a first main surface side outer layer portion (MO1 – Figure 1EC) and a second main surface side outer layer portion (MO2 – Figure 1EC), regions opposite to each other in the width direction with the effective portion therebetween are defined as a first side surface side outer layer portion and a second side surface side outer layer portion (dielectric portions around the internal electrode in the width direction – Figure 1), and regions opposite to each other in the length direction with the effective portion therebetween are defined as a first end surface side outer layer portion (EO1 – Figure 1EC) and a second end surface side outer layer portion (EO2 – Figure 1EC);
at a center portion of the first side surface side outer layer portion or the second side surface side outer layer portion in the length direction, in a dielectric in a region between the first side surface or the second side surface and one of the internal electrode layers Ba/(Ti + Zr), which is a content ratio of Ba, Ti, and Zr, is about 0.995 or more and about 1.003 or less (¶31-34, Table 1: Sample 6, Sample 15), and in the first end surface side outer layer portion (EO1 – Figure 1EC) or the second end surface side outer layer portion (EO2 – Figure 1EC), in a dielectric in a region between the first end surface or the second end surface and one of the internal electrode layers, Ba/(Ti + Zr), which is a content ratio of Ba, Ti, and Zr, is about 0.995 or more and about 1.003 or less (¶31-34, Table 1: Sample 6, Sample 15).
Sakurai does not disclose at a center portion of the first side surface side outer layer portion or the second side surface side outer layer portion in the length direction, in a dielectric in a region between the first side surface or the second side surface and one of the internal electrode layers a content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.5 parts by mol to about 5.0 parts by mol larger than a content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in a dielectric which is in a region at a center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion, or a content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.4 parts by mol to about 2.0 parts by mol larger than a content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion; and
Suzuki at a center portion of the first side surface side outer layer portion (left Gs – Figure 3, Figure 1, ¶49) for the second side surface side outer layer portion (right Gs – Figure 3, Figure 1) in the length direction (Figure 3< Figure 1), in a dielectric in a region between the first side surface or the second side surface and one of the internal electrode layers content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.5 parts by mol to about 5.0 parts by mol larger than a content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in a dielectric (3 – Figure 2, ¶46) (¶29) which is in a region at a center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion (3a – Figure 3, Figure 1, ¶49), or a content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.4 parts by mol to about 2.0 parts by mol larger than a content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the magnesium rich regions of Suzuki to improve the moisture resistant characteristics of the electronic component.
Sakurai does not disclose in the first end surface side outer layer portion or the second end surface side outer layer portion, in a dielectric in a region between the first side surface or the second side surface and one of the internal electrode layers a content of a content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.25 parts by mol to about 2.5 parts by mol larger than the content of Mg relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion, or a content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.2 parts by mol to about 1.0 parts by mol larger than the content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion.
Chigira discloses in the first end surface side outer layer portion or the second end surface side outer layer portion (15 – Figure 1, Figure 2, ¶40), in a dielectric in a region between the first side surface or the second side surface and one of the internal electrode layers (12 – Figure 2, ¶39) a content of a content of Mn is greater than that of the dielectric region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion (14 – Figure 2, ¶40) (¶40). Chigira further discloses that the amount of Mn in the margin and capacitance regions is a balance between overall capacitance and dielectric degradation (¶57). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the amount of Mn in the margin and effective portion to create a balance between humidity resistance, dielectric degradation, and capacitance (¶55, ¶57), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
In re claim 2, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakura further discloses wherein a region adjacent to the first side surface side outer layer portion or the second side surface side outer layer portion (dielectric portions around the internal electrode in the width direction – Figure 1) in the length direction and adjacent to the first end surface side outer layer portion or the second end surface side outer layer portion (EO1, EO2 – Figure 1EC) in the width direction is defined as a corner side outer layer portion (corner portions of element 10 when viewing in a thickness direction – Figure 1);
in the corner side outer layer portion, in a dielectric in a region surrounded by an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the width direction a tip end surface of one of the internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1) opposite to a side to be connected to an outer electrode, an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the length direction a side surface of the one of internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1), which extends in the length direction, the first side surface or the second side surface (surfaces of 10 facing toward and away from viewer – Figure 1), and the first end surface or the second end surface, Ba/(Ti + Zr), which is a content ratio of Ba, Ti, and Zr, is about 0.995 or more and about 1.003 or less (¶31-34, Table 1: Sample 6, Sample 15). Note that the entire ceramic layer contains the elemental ratio requirement (¶76-92).
Sakurai does not disclose in the corner side outer layer portion , in a dielectric in a region surrounded by an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the width direction a tip end surface of one of the internal electrode layers opposite to a side to be connected to an outer electrode, an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the length direction a side surface of the one of internal electrode layers, which extends in the length direction, the first side surface or the second side surface , and the first end surface or the second a content of Mg or Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.4 parts by mol to about 2.0 parts by mol larger than the content of Mg or the content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion.
Suzuki discloses in the corner side outer layer portion (where GS1 and GE1 intersect – Figure 4, ¶51), in a dielectric in a region (10 – Figure 4, ¶50) surrounded by an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the width direction a tip end surface of one of the internal electrode layers (1, 2 – Figure 4, ¶50) opposite to a side to be connected to an outer electrode (31, 32 – Figure 2, ¶48), an imaginary surface obtained by extending in the length direction a side surface of the one of internal electrode layers, which extends in the length direction, the first side surface or the second side surface (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4), and the first end surface or the second end surface (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4) a content of Mg or Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti is about 0.4 parts by mol to about 2.0 parts by mol larger than the content of Mg (¶29)or the content of Mn relative to 100 parts by mol of Ti in the dielectric which is in the region at the center portion in the width direction and the length direction of the effective portion.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the magnesium rich regions of Suzuki to improve the moisture resistant characteristics of the electronic component.
In re claim 5, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses a dimension of the multilayer body in the length direction is about 0.2 mm or more and about 10 mm or less; a dimension of the multilayer body in the lamination direction is about 0.1 mm or more and about 10 mm or less; and a dimension of the multilayer body in the width direction is about 0.1 mm or more and about 10 mm or less (¶120).
In re claim 6, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses wherein a thickness of each of the dielectric layers is about 0.5 µm or more and about 72 µm or less (¶28).
In re claim 7, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai does not explicitly disclose a number of the dielectric layers is 10 or more and 700 or less. However, it is well-known in the art that adjusting the number of dielectric layers, and thus number of overlapping internal electrodes, is directly correlated to the capacitance of the device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the number of dielectric layers to achieve a component of desired capacitance, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working part of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In re claim 8, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses wherein each of the internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1) includes Ni, Cu, Ag, Pd, or Au, or an alloy including at least one of Ni, Cu, Ag, Pd, or Au (¶72).
In re claim 9, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses wherein a thickness of each of the internal electrode layers (3 – Figure 1) is about 0.2 µm or more and about 3.0 µm or less (¶72).
In re claim 10, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai does not explicitly disclose a number of the internal electrode layers is 5 or more and 350 or less. However, it is well-known in the art that adjusting the number of overlapping internal electrodes is directly correlated to the capacitance of the device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the number of internal electrode layers layers to achieve a component of desired capacitance, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working part of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In re claim 11, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses wherein the outer electrode includes a base electrode layer and a plating layer on the base electrode layer (¶103).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US Publication 2019/0237255) in view of Suzuki (US Publication 2008/0304204) and in further view of Chigira (US Publication 2019/0355517) and in further view of Sakate (US Publication 2018/0261390).
In re claim 3, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai does not disclose wherein, in the first side surface side outer layer portion or the second side surface side outer layer portion, in a dielectric in a region between one of the internal electrode layers and the first side surface or between another one of the internal electrode layers and the second side surface, a content of Mg or Mn increases in a direction from the one of the internal electrode layers to the first side surface or in a direction from the another one of the internal electrode layers to the second side surface.
Sakate discloses in the first side surface side outer layer portion or the second side surface side outer layer portion (left 17 and 18, right 17 and 18 – Figure 3, ¶46), in a dielectric in a region between one of the internal electrode layers (12, 13 – Figure 3, ¶48) and the first side surface (left surface of 16 – Figure 3, ¶46) or between another one of the internal electrode layers (12, 13 – Figure 3, ¶48) and the second side surface (right surface of 16 – Figure 3), a content of Mg or Mn increases in a direction from the one of the internal electrode layers to the first side surface or in a direction from the another one of the internal electrode layers to the second side surface (Figure 4; Note that the magnesium diffuses from bonding unit 18 outwards into margin 17 and capacitance portion 19 [¶46, ¶91]. Therefore, the content of magnesium increases from the internal electrodes to a point within 18.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the bonding units, and thus, magnesium concentration gradient, of Sakate to prevent movement of magnesium from the margin portions into the effective layer (¶94: Sakate).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US Publication 2019/0237255) in view of Suzuki (US Publication 2008/0304204) and in further view of Chigira (US Publication 2019/0355517) and in further view of Otani et al. (US Publication 2021/0098195) and in further view of Sakate (US Publication 2018/0261390).
In re claim 4, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 1, as explained above. Sakurai does not disclose wherein at least one of the internal electrode layers includes an inclined surface in a range of about 5 µm from a terminal in the width direction to a center in the width direction;
a thickness of the at least one of the internal electrode layers in the lamination direction gradually decreases toward the terminal in the inclined surface.
Otani discloses at least one of the internal electrode layers (13a, 13b – Figure 4, ¶30) includes an inclined surface (Figure 4) in a range of about 5 µm from a terminal in the width direction to a center in the width direction (‘W’ direction – Figure 1, Figure 3, Figure 4; Note that since the inclined region starts from the end of the internal electrode, the internal electrode therefore includes an inclined surface that exists within the length region.)
a thickness of the at least one of the internal electrode layers (13a,13b – Figure 4) in the lamination direction gradually decreases toward the terminal in the inclined surface (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the inclined surface of the internal electrodes to reduce the occurrence of misalignments during a manufacturing process (¶8: Otani).
Sakurai does not disclose a particle size of all grains is about 500 nm or less in a dielectric laminated on the inclined surface.
Sakate discloses that adjusting the grain size and difference in grain size in the vicinity of the internal electrodes and on the internal electrodes is proportional to the difference in shrinking behavior between the multilayer chip and the side margins (¶100-101). Sakate further discloses the grain size in the vicinity of the internal electrodes is several tens of nm and on the edge of the capacitor portion is several hundred nm (¶100-101). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adjust the ceramic grain size of the dielectric layers and margin portions to achieve a device having improved flexibility of the capacitor (¶99: Sakate) since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US Publication 2019/0237255) in view of Suzuki (US Publication 2008/0304204) and in further view of Chigira (US Publication 2019/0355517) and in further view of Saito et al. (US Publication 2016/0086733).
In re claim 12, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 11, as explained above. Sakurai does not disclose wherein the base electrode layer includes a metal component and a glass component.
Saito discloses the base electrode layer (13a – Figure 1, ¶49) includes a metal component and a glass component (¶48).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the glass component of Saito to improve the mechanical strength of the electronic component.
In re claim 13, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira and in further view of Saito discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 12, as explained above. Sakurai further discloses wherein the metal component includes at least one of Cu, Ni, Ag, Pd, Au, or an alloy of Ag and (¶73).
In re claim 14, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira and in further view of Saito discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 12, as explained above. Sakurai does not disclose wherein the plating layer includes at least one of Cu, Ni, Ag, Pd, Au, or an alloy of Ag and Pd.
Saito discloses wherein the plating layer (13b, 13c – Figure 1, ¶45) includes at least one of Cu, Ni, Ag, Pd, Au, or an alloy of Ag and Pd (¶45).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the plating layers of Saito to improve the mounting characteristics of the electronic component.
In re claim 15, Sakurai in view of Suzuki and in further view of Chigira and in further view of Saito discloses the multilayer ceramic capacitor according to Claim 12, as explained above. Sakurai does not disclose wherein the plating layer includes a Ni plating layer and a Sn plating layer.
Saito discloses wherein the plating layer includes a Ni plating layer (13b – Figure 1, ¶45) and a Sn plating layer (13c – Figure 1, ¶45).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the plating layers of Saito to improve the mounting characteristics of the electronic component.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kato (US Patent 10,269,498) Figure 3
Fukunaga et al. (US Publication 2020/0066446) [¶40]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARUN RAMASWAMY whose telephone number is (571)270-1962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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.
/ARUN RAMASWAMY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
