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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-4, 7, 9-10, 12, 16-17, 20-26, 28-29, 33 and 38-41 are withdrawn. Claims 5-6, 8, 11, 13-15, 18-19, 30-32 are cancelled. Claims 27 and 36 are amended. Claims 27 and 34-36 are presently examined.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection to the claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of 9/24/2025 is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 9/24/2025 is overcome.
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 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 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Fursa (US 11,240,885) in view of Mironov (US 10,051,890).
Regarding claim 27, Fursa discloses an electrically operated aerosol generating device (figure 1, reference numeral 100), which is considered to meet the claim limitation of an apparatus, that accommodates an aerosol generating article within it (column 16, lines 3-27, figure 1, reference numeral 10). An inductor coil surrounds at least a portion of the article and defines a magnetic axis which corresponds to the longitudinal axis of the device (column 16, lines 3-27, figure 1, reference numeral 200). The area of the article defined by the inductor coil is considered to meet the claim limitation of a heating zone. The inductor has a plurality of flux concentrator segments (column 18, lines 21-63, figure 5, reference numerals 531, 532, 533, 534, 535) that have varying magnetic permeabilities so that a desired level of electromagnetic flux is achieved in the article during use (column 18, lines 64-67, column 19, lines 1-13). It is evident that the magnetic fields differ at each concentrator segment since the electromagnetic fluxes are different, that the magnetic flux in one region must be greater in one region than a different region since the flux would otherwise be consistent throughout the length, and it is additionally evident that the magnetic field at any point is a sum since the magnetic field generated by each concentrator will extend at least to adjacent concentrators. Electronics within the device control the supply of power to the inductor from the power source (column 8, lines 5-11), which is considered to meet the claim limitation of a controller. The heating occurs at a desired operating temperature (column 10, lines 37-41). Fursa does not explicitly disclose measuring a current using a detector.
Mironov teaches an aerosol generating article that uses a susceptor to heat aerosol forming substrate (abstract) where the apparent resistance of a susceptor is indirectly measured by measuring the DC current used to produce the fluctuating magnetic field (column 6, lines 32-49) so that the temperature can be precisely controlled to a desired level (column 14, lines 13-31).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the controller of Fursa with the DC current measurement of Mironov. One would have been motivated to do so since Fursa discloses an article that is heated at a desired operating temperature and Mironov teaches measuring current to allow precise temperature control.
Claims 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Fursa (US 11,240,885) in view of Mironov (US 10,051,890) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Basil (US 2017/0224015).
Regarding claims 34 and 36, modified Fursa teaches all the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Fursa does not explicitly teach using two coils.
Basil teaches an induction heating system for use with a smoking pipe that heats a smoking material using eddy currents (abstract). Two induction coils are interleaved with each other and energized for different lengths of time to better control the temperature of the bowl being heated [0013].
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide two interleaved coils in modified Fursa instead of a single coil. One would have been motivated to do so since Basil teaches that providing two interleaved coils provides better control of the temperature of the bowl being heated.
Regarding claim 35, Fursa discloses that the coil is helically wound (column 17, lines 11-29), and this arrangement is not changed by the modification of claim 34).
Response to Arguments
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103, applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues (a) that modified Fursa does not teach providing multiple magnetic fields and (b) that the dependent claims are allowable due to dependence on an allowable claim.
Regarding (a), Fursa discloses that the discrete flux concentrators result in a tuned magnetic field (column 4, lines 24-39). This indicates that each flux concentrator generates its own magnetic field, which are then summed up to create an overall magnetic field throughout the device of Fursa. These are the multiple magnetic fields that are considered to meet the claim limitation of a plurality of varying magnetic fields.
Regarding (b), all examined claims, including the examined independent claim, are rejected as set forth above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSSELL E SPARKS whose telephone number is (571)270-1426. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am-5 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, Philip Louie can be reached at 571-270-1241. 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.
/RUSSELL E SPARKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1755