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.
Claims 1-8 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 7-8, the limitation, “other internal electrodes” is confusing. Are these in addition to the internal electrodes already claimed? It is suggested to add --of the-- before “internal”
Claim 6, line 4, replace “of 3.0 um or more and 15 um or less” with –from 3.0 µm to 15 µm--.
Claim 7, line 2, replace “50 or more and 300 or less” with –50 to 300--.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sakate et al. (US 2017/0345567).
PNG
media_image1.png
182
228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
168
200
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Sakate et al. disclose in Fig. 1B-1C, a multilayer ceramic electronic device (title) comprising:
dielectric layers (11a2) and internal electrode layers (11a1), the dielectric layers (11a2) and the internal electrode layers (11a1) being laminated,
wherein the internal electrode layers (11a1) comprise a first internal electrode layer located farthest out along a lamination direction (top-bottom); and
the first internal electrode layer (11a1) has a Mn concentration higher (Fig. 3A, [0040] – process of forming) than that of other internal electrode layers (11a1).
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) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakate et al. (US 2017/0345567) in view of Hamaji et al. (US 6,295,196 B1).
Regarding claim 6, Sakate et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the dielectric layers comprise an internal dielectric layer located inwards from the first internal electrode layer along the lamination direction; and the internal dielectric layer has a thickness from 3.0 µm to 15 µm.
Hamaji et al. disclose a ceramic dielectric (2) located inwards from a first internal electrode layer (8) along the lamination direction; and the internal dielectric layer (2) has a thickness from 3.0 µm to 15 µm (C:8, L: 35-42).
Lacking unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the capacitor of Sakate et al. so that the dielectric layers comprise an internal dielectric layer located inwards from the first internal electrode layer along the lamination direction; and the internal dielectric layer has a thickness from 3.0 µm to 15 µm, since such a modification would form a multilayer ceramic capacitor having desired capacitance.
Regarding claim 8, Sakate et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the dielectric layers comprise Ca, Sr, Zr, Ti, and O.
Hamaji et al. disclose a multilayer ceramic capacitor having dielectric layers (2), wherein the dielectric layers comprise Ca, Sr, Zr, Ti, and O (table 5 and 8).
Lacking unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the capacitor of Sakate et al. so that the dielectric layers comprise Ca, Sr, Zr, Ti, and O, since such a modification would form a multilayer ceramic capacitor having high dielectric constant ceramic layers.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakate et al. (US 2017/0345567).
Regarding claim 7, Sakate et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the number of the internal electrode layers is 50 or more and 300 or less.
It is well known in the ceramic capacitor art to form a multilayer ceramic capacitor having 50 to 300 internal electrode layers.
Lacking unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the capacitor of Sakate et al. so that it comprises 50 to 300 internal electrode layers, since such a modification would form a multilayer ceramic capacitor having desired capacitance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 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 a multilayer ceramic electronic device where
C3 < C2A < C1 is satisfied, where
C1 denotes the Mn concentration of the first internal electrode layer,
C2A denotes a Mn concentration of the gap-corresponding portion of the second
internal electrode layer, and
C3 denotes a Mn concentration of the third internal electrode layer (claim 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2016/0163453 A1 – [0053] – Mn diffusion occurs in the outermost dielectric layers into the outermost layer internal electrodes containing Ni.
US 8,971,017 B1 – multilayer ceramic capacitor having boundary layer that includes Mg and Mn
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