DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in response to applicant’s request for continued examination filed November 18, 2025. Claims 7 and 17-18 have been amended. Claims 19-20 are canceled. Claim 21 is new. Claims 7-18 and 21 are pending and stand rejected.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 18, 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 7-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160295916 A1 (hereinafter MALGAT) in view of US 20170055576 A1 (hereinafter BEESON).
Regarding claim 7, MALGAT discloses a heated aerosol-generating article for use with an aerosol-generating device (abstract). MALGAT discloses that the article is designed to produce an aerosol when heated rather than burned (¶5). MALGAT discloses a non-combustible aerosol generating article (Fig. 3, aerosol-generating article 3000, ¶79). Regarding the recitation of “non-combustible,” as with the instant application the article of MALGAT is designed to be used for aerosol generation as a result of heat not burn and is treated such that there is a lower propensity for flame ignition (¶5, ¶7). MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article comprising a rod of aerosolizable material (Fig. 2, aerosol-forming substrate ¶3020, ¶79) and a wrapper (Fig. 3, cigarette paper 3060, ¶79) wrapped around the rod of aerosolizable material. MALGAT further discloses wherein the rod of aerosolizable material forms a distal end (as shown in Fig. 3) of the aerosol generating article, and wherein the wrapper extends from the distal end of the aerosol generating article (as shown in Fig. 3). The aerosol-forming substrate 3020 extends to the distal end of the article and the paper 3060 extends the entire length of the article.
MALGAT does not disclose wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper.
MALGAT teaches an embodiment where the distal end of the aerosol-forming substrate comprises a distal end spanned by an aluminum foil 1222 which extends around the distal end (Fig. 2, ¶76). MALGAT teaches that the aluminum foil spanning the distal end will prevent a user inadvertently attempting to ignite the aerosol forming substrate (¶76). MALGAT also teaches that the thermally-conductive material to prevent ignition (¶7) may be a co-laminated sheet comprising aluminum foil and a second material such as paper (¶12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously enclose the distal end of the of the article. MALGAT teaches that providing a wrapper at the distal end of foil would prevent inadvertent combustion of the article (MALGAT ¶76). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously make the wrapper of the substrate unitary with the wrapper at the distal end to prevent inadvertent combustion. Since MALGAT teaches that the covering for the distal end 1222 can be a co-laminated sheet with paper it would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to make integral a laminated sheet of cigarette paper and aluminum foil. The courts have held that making components integral to be a mere obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.", see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (Claims were directed to a vibratory testing machine (a hard-bearing wheel balancer) comprising a holding structure, a base structure, and a supporting means which form "a single integral and gaplessly continuous piece." Nortron argued that the invention is just making integral what had been made in four bolted pieces. The court found this argument unpersuasive and held that the claims were patentable because the prior art perceived a need for mechanisms to dampen resonance, whereas the inventor eliminated the need for dampening via the one-piece gapless support structure, showing insight that was contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art.).
MALGAT does not disclose the wrapper comprising at least three layers, an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material, wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure.
BEESON teaches a smoking article with an aerosol-generating portion and a wrapping material (Abstract). BEESON teaches that the wrapper comprises at least three layers (¶34), BEESON discloses an embodiment where the wrapping paper 90 may comprise a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). BEESON teaches an innermost peripheral layer that is in contact with the aerosolizable material. BEESON teaches that the wrapping paper 90 maybe a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). Since the wrapping paper 90 is shown in contact with the substrate 85 and the layers are cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper, the paper layer is in contact with the aerosolizable material (¶34). There is the foil layer (intermediate layer) which is comprised of foil, a non-combustible material. BEESON teaches that the outer most layer comprises paper (¶31, preventing scorching of outer wrapping paper 75). BEESON teaches that the tri-laminate sheet may further facilitate improvement in the taste or sensory experience by the user by reducing, minimizing or eliminating scorching or charring of particular components of the smoking article, and by directing more of the heat toward the aerosol-generating segment (¶34).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MALGAT to provide that the wrapper comprising at least three layers, an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material, wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure as taught in BEESON. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously include an improved wrapper to enclose an aerosolizable material. Doing so would facilitate improvement in the taste or sensory experience by the user by reducing, minimizing or eliminating scorching or charring of particular components of the smoking article, and by directing more of the heat toward the aerosol-generating segment (BEESON ¶34). Further, courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C. In this case, BEESON clearly teaches a multi-layer wrapping with paper and non-combustible layers (¶31-¶34). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously rearrange these layers with predictable results.
Regarding claim 8, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 7 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses wherein the aerosolizable material comprises tobacco (¶2).
Regarding claim 9, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 7 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses wherein the wrapper circumscribes at least an end of the rod that is distant from a mouth of a user in use. As illustrated in Fig. 2, the wrapper circumscribes the end of the rod away from the mouth end 1012.
Regarding claim 10, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 9 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses wherein the wrapper circumscribes at least the rod over at least 25% of a length of the rod. As illustrated in Fig. 2, the wrapper circumscribes the rod over greater than 25% of the length of the rod and in fact the entire rod.
Regarding claim 11, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 7 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses at least one of a filter (Fig. 3, filter 3050, ¶78). In another embodiment MALGAT also discloses both a filter (Fig. 3, filter 3050, ¶79) a a cooling element (Fig. 3, aerosol cooling element 3040, ¶79). By their nature and placement the smoke that flows from the lit end to the mouth end cools over time. Further, due to the recitation of or, only one of the limitations the filter or the cooling element is required to read upon the claim of the instant application.
Regarding claim 12, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 11 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses wherein the non-combustible aerosol generating article comprises the filter and the cooling element, and wherein the cooling element is arranged between the aerosolizable material and the filter (as shown in Fig. 3). The cooling element is arranged between the aerosolizable material (Fig. 3, aerosol-forming substrate 3020, ¶79) and the filter (Fig. 3, filter 3050, ¶79).
Regarding claim 13, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 7 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses a heater (Fig. 4, heater blade 2100, ¶80).
Regarding claim 14, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 13 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses a tobacco heating product (Fig. 4, aerosol generating device 2010, ¶80).
Regarding claim 15, modified MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article of claim 13 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses wherein the heater is a device into which the aerosol generating article is at least partially inserted in use. MALGAT discloses s an electrically-operated aerosol generating system (Fig. 4, aerosol generating device 2010, ¶80). MALGAT discloses that the heater blade, part of the device, is able to pierce the foil. In Fig. 4 it can be seen that the heater blade is inserted into the aerosol generating article.
Regarding claim 16, modified MALGAT discloses the aerosol generating article according to claim 7 as discussed above. MALGAT further discloses a system comprising an aerosol generating device and the aerosol generating article. MALGAT discloses an electrically-operated aerosol generating system (Fig. 4, aerosol generating device 2010, ¶80). MALGAT discloses that the heater blade, part of the device, is able to pierce the foil and when actuated through a user drawing on the mouth end, air is able to flow into the article (Fig. 4, aerosol forming substrate 1020, ¶82) and deliver aerosol to the user (¶80). MALGAT discloses that the device comprises a housing and an electrical energy supply to power the heater and a controller (¶82-¶83).
Regarding claim 17, MALGAT discloses a heated aerosol-generating article for use with an aerosol-generating device (abstract). MALGAT discloses that the article is designed to produce an aerosol when heated rather than burned (¶5). MALGAT discloses a non-combustible aerosol generating article (Fig. 3, aerosol-generating article 3000, ¶79). MALGAT further discloses wherein the rod of aerosolizable material forms a distal end (as shown in Fig. 3) of the aerosol generating article, and wherein the wrapper extends from the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article(as shown in Fig. 3). The aerosol-forming substrate 3020 extends to the distal end of the article and the paper 3060 extends the entire length of the article.
MALGAT teaches that the wrapper prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. MALGAT teaches that the end of the aerosol-generating article may have an aluminum foil wrapper that is thermally-conductive and non-flammable (¶12). MALGAT teaches that this is to prevent the user from igniting the article (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide that the wrapper extending from the distal end prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously use a wrapper to prevent ignition of the article for a heat not burn system because doing so would prevent an inadvertent attempt to light and swiftly spread applied heat to the aerosol material (MALGAT ¶76).
MALGAT does not disclose wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper.
MALGAT teaches an embodiment where the distal end of the aerosol-forming substrate comprises a distal end spanned by an aluminum foil 1222 which extends around the distal end (Fig. 2, ¶76). MALGAT teaches that the aluminum foil spanning the distal end will prevent a user inadvertently attempting to ignite the aerosol forming substrate (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously enclose the distal end of the of the article. MALGAT teaches that providing a wrapper at the distal end of foil would prevent inadvertent combustion of the article (MALGAT ¶76). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously make the wrapper of the substrate unitary with the wrapper at the distal end to prevent inadvertent combustion. Since MALGAT teaches that the covering for the distal end 1222 can be a co-laminated sheet with paper it would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to make integral a laminated sheet of cigarette paper and aluminum foil. The courts have held that making components integral to be a mere obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.", see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (Claims were directed to a vibratory testing machine (a hard-bearing wheel balancer) comprising a holding structure, a base structure, and a supporting means which form "a single integral and gaplessly continuous piece." Nortron argued that the invention is just making integral what had been made in four bolted pieces. The court found this argument unpersuasive and held that the claims were patentable because the prior art perceived a need for mechanisms to dampen resonance, whereas the inventor eliminated the need for dampening via the one-piece gapless support structure, showing insight that was contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art.).
MALGAT does not disclose a process for making an aerosol generating article comprising wrapping a rod of aerosolizable material in a wrapper, the wrapper comprising at least three layers, an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material, wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure.
BEESON teaches a smoking article with an aerosol-generating portion and a wrapping material (Abstract). BEESON teaches that the wrapper comprises at least three layers (¶34), BEESON discloses an embodiment where the wrapping paper 90 may comprise a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). BEESON teaches an innermost peripheral layer that is in contact with the aerosolizable material. BEESON teaches that the wrapping paper 90 maybe a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). Since the wrapping paper 90 is shown in contact with the substrate 85 and the layers are cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper, the paper layer is in contact with the aerosolizable material (¶34). There is the foil layer (intermediate layer) which is comprised of foil, a non-combustible material. BEESON teaches that the outer most layer comprises paper (¶31, preventing scorching of outer wrapping paper 75). BEESON teaches that the tri-laminate sheet may further facilitate improvement in the taste or sensory experience by the user by reducing, minimizing or eliminating scorching or charring of particular components of the smoking article, and by directing more of the heat toward the aerosol-generating segment (¶34).
BEESON teaches a smoking article with an aerosol-generating portion and a wrapping material (Abstract). BEESON discloses the process of making the substrate (¶42, ¶46), forming the sheet (¶50), a process for making laminated paper (¶61), and the assembly of the system (¶64).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MALGAT to provide that the wrapper comprising at least three layers, an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material, wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure as taught in BEESON. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously include an improved wrapper to enclose an aerosolizable material. Doing so would facilitate improvement in the taste or sensory experience by the user by reducing, minimizing or eliminating scorching or charring of particular components of the smoking article, and by directing more of the heat toward the aerosol-generating segment (BEESON ¶34). Further, courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C. In this case, BEESON clearly teaches a multi-layer wrapping with paper and non-combustible layers (¶31-¶34). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously rearrange these layers with predictable results.
Further, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MALGAT to apply the process disclosed in BEESON to make the smoking article of MALGAT. A person of ordinary skill in the art of tobacco making would obviously apply the teachings of BEESON because doing so would be using the manner well established in the art (BEESON ¶59-¶64). BEESON makes reference to multiple prior art sources demonstrating that the process of forming a rod with a wrapper is notoriously well known.
Regarding claim 18, MALGAT discloses a heated aerosol-generating article for use with an aerosol-generating device (abstract). MALGAT discloses that the article is designed to produce an aerosol when heated rather than burned (¶5). MALGAT discloses a non-combustible aerosol generating article (Fig. 3, aerosol-generating article 3000, ¶79). MALGAT further discloses wherein the rod of aerosolizable material forms a distal end (as shown in Fig. 3) of the aerosol generating article, and wherein the wrapper extends from the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article (as shown in Fig. 3). The aerosol-forming substrate 3020 extends to the distal end of the article and the paper 3060 extends the entire length of the article.
MALGAT may not explicitly disclose, but nonetheless teaches that the wrapper prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. MALGAT teaches that the end of the aerosol-generating article may have an aluminum foil wrapper that is thermally-conductive and non-flammable (¶12). MALGAT teaches that this is to prevent the user from igniting the article (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide that the wrapper extending from the distal end prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously use a wrapper to prevent ignition of the article for a heat not burn system because doing so would prevent an inadvertent attempt to light and swiftly spread applied heat to the aerosol material (MALGAT ¶76).
MALGAT does not disclose wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper.
MALGAT teaches an embodiment where the distal end of the aerosol-forming substrate comprises a distal end spanned by an aluminum foil 1222 which extends around the distal end (Fig. 2, ¶76). MALGAT teaches that the aluminum foil spanning the distal end will prevent a user inadvertently attempting to ignite the aerosol forming substrate (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously enclose the distal end of the of the article. MALGAT teaches that providing a wrapper at the distal end of foil would prevent inadvertent combustion of the article (MALGAT ¶76). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously make the wrapper of the substrate unitary with the wrapper at the distal end to prevent inadvertent combustion. Since MALGAT teaches that the covering for the distal end 1222 can be a co-laminated sheet with paper it would have been prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to make integral a laminated sheet of cigarette paper and aluminum foil. The courts have held that making components integral to be a mere obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.", see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (Claims were directed to a vibratory testing machine (a hard-bearing wheel balancer) comprising a holding structure, a base structure, and a supporting means which form "a single integral and gaplessly continuous piece." Nortron argued that the invention is just making integral what had been made in four bolted pieces. The court found this argument unpersuasive and held that the claims were patentable because the prior art perceived a need for mechanisms to dampen resonance, whereas the inventor eliminated the need for dampening via the one-piece gapless support structure, showing insight that was contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art.).
MALGAT does not disclose a method of preventing a user lighting or igniting a rod of aerosolizable material in an aerosol generating article the wrapper comprising: an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material, and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material,wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure.
BEESON teaches a smoking article with an aerosol-generating portion and a wrapping material (Abstract). BEESON teaches that the wrapper comprises at least three layers (¶34), BEESON discloses an embodiment where the wrapping paper 90 may comprise a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). BEESON teaches an innermost peripheral layer that is in contact with the aerosolizable material. BEESON teaches that the wrapping paper 90 maybe a cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper in a tri-laminate sheet (¶34). Since the wrapping paper 90 is shown in contact with the substrate 85 and the layers are cigarette paper/foil/tobacco paper, the paper layer is in contact with the aerosolizable material (¶34). There is the foil layer (intermediate layer) which is comprised of foil, a non-combustible material. BEESON teaches that the outer most layer comprises paper (¶31, preventing scorching of outer wrapping paper 75). BEESON teaches that the tri-laminate sheet may further facilitate improvement in the taste or sensory experience by the user by reducing, minimizing or eliminating scorching or charring of particular components of the smoking article, and by directing more of the heat toward the aerosol-generating segment (¶34). Further, BEESON teaches a buffer region 110 to reduce the potential scorching or other thermal degradation of portions of the aerosol-generating segment (¶63). BEESON discloses that the wrapping paper may dissipate or redirect heat to reduce scorching (¶33) to improve taste.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified MALGAT to provide a method of preventing a user lighting or igniting a rod of aerosolizable material in an aerosol generating article the wrapper comprising: an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material, and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material,wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure as taught in in BEESON. A person of ordinary skill in the art of tobacco making would obviously apply the method of BEESON to include a buffer region to reduce scorching. This would reduce thermal degradation (¶63) and improve taste (¶33).
Regarding claim 21, MALGAT discloses a heated aerosol-generating article for use with an aerosol-generating device (abstract). MALGAT discloses that the article is designed to produce an aerosol when heated rather than burned (¶5). MALGAT discloses a non-combustible aerosol generating article (Fig. 3, aerosol-generating article 3000, ¶79). MALGAT discloses the non-combustible aerosol generating article comprising a rod of aerosolizable material (Fig. 2, aerosol-forming substrate ¶3020, ¶79) and a wrapper wrapped around the rod of aerosolizable material (Fig. 3, cigarette paper 3060, ¶79). MALGAT further discloses wherein the rod of aerosolizable material forms a distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article (as shown in Fig. 3), and wherein the wrapper extends from the distal end of the aerosol generating article (as shown in Fig. 3). The aerosol-forming substrate 3020 extends to the distal end of the article and the paper 3060 extends the entire length of the article.
MALGAT further teaches that the wrapper and prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. MALGAT teaches that the end of the aerosol-generating article may have an aluminum foil wrapper that is thermally-conductive and non-flammable (¶12). MALGAT teaches that this is to prevent the user from igniting the article (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide that the wrapper extending from the distal end prevents ignition of the rod of aerosolizable material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously use a wrapper to prevent ignition of the article for a heat not burn system because doing so would prevent an inadvertent attempt to light and swiftly spread applied heat to the aerosol material (MALGAT ¶76).
MALGAT further teaches wherein the wrapper is irremovably arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper.
MALGAT teaches that the article is for use in an electrically-operated aerosol-generating system (¶45). MALGAT shows in Fig. 4 that in use the distal end of the article remains covered by the wrapper (¶80). MALGAT teaches that the aluminium foil end not only prevents inadvertent lighting, but also prevents air from being drawn into the article thereby restricting oxygen and lowering the propensity for ignition and combustion (¶76).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of MALGAT to provide wherein the wrapper is irremovably arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously make the portion of the wrapper covering the distal end irremovably arranged. Doing so would both prevent ignition of the article and lower the propensity for combustion when in use in the electrical aerosol generating device (MALGAT ¶76).
MALGAT does not disclose the wrapper comprising at least three layers, an innermost peripheral layer disposed in contact with the aerosolizable material and an outermost peripheral layer, wherein the innermost and outermost peripheral layers comprise paper, and an intermediate layer comprises a non-combustible material, wherein at least the intermediate layer and one of the innermost or outermost peripheral layers are provided as a laminate structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed November 18, with respect to the rejections of claims 7-18 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of MALGAT and BEESON.
The amendment to recite, “wherein a single portion of the wrapper is arranged over the distal end of the non-combustible aerosol generating article so that the distal end is completely enclosed in the wrapper” is rendered obvious by the teachings of MALGAT alone. However, the obviousness is bolstered by the combination with BEESON because a person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously apply the co-laminated sheet in BEESON to prevent scorching to the teaching of the use of a laminated wrapper for the distal end of MALGAT.
Applicant’s remaining arguments rely upon the allowability of the amended claim recitation. This limitation has been rejected as detailed above and that rejection is in repeated here.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE L MOORE whose telephone number is (313)446-6537. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 9 am to 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, Michael H Wilson can be reached on 571-270-3882. 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.
/STEPHANIE LYNN MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747