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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4-22-2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the Applicants’ arguments/remarks filed 1-22-2025.
Claims 1-10 are presently examined
Claim 1 is amended.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1) because the view numbers are not preceded by the abbreviation “FIG.” Instead, the drawings identify the views using the word “Figure”, e.g., “Figure 1” etc.; However, 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1) requires view numbers to be preceded by the abbreviation “FIG”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.84(u)(1) and 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application.
Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 line 16 recites “…configured to control the light source emit light...”. Phrase appears to be missing the word “to” between source and emit. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Claim 1, under step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis set forth in MPEP 2106, claim 1 is directed to a statutory category because claim 1 recites an electronic vapor provision system, which in a machine or manufacture (35 USC 101).
Under step 2A, prong 1 (see MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1)), Claim 1 recites a controller/data processor configured for generating transmission data and controlling emission of an optical signal to transmit the transmission data to a reading device. These limitations recite the concept of generating, communicating, and indicating information. Such information when recited at a high level of generality falls under the judicially recognized exception of mental processes grouping of abstract ideas under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), because it encompasses observation, evaluation, judgement, or presentation of information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Under step 2A prong two (See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2)), claim 1 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements recited in claim 1 include an electronic vapor provision system, a control unit, a housing, a light source, a controller/data processor, and an input device. These additional elements merely provide a technological environment in which the information generation and information transmission concept is implemented. The claim does not recite an improvement in the functioning of the controller/data processor, an improvement in optical communication technology, an improvement to the light source, or an improvement to electronic vapor provision technology. Rather the controller and light source are used as tools to generate, transmit, and indicate information. The recited physical contact with an input device merely initiates the information transmission and does not impose a meaningful limit on the abstract idea because it fails to transform the nature of the claim into a patent eligible application of the judicial exception. (See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2))
Under Step 2B, the additional elements, considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. For example, the use of an electronic provision device having a housing, control unit, controller/data processor, light source/LED, user input device, visual indicator, was well understood, routine, and conventional in the field, as evidenced as follows by Alarcon ‘387, Bowen, and Jordan.
Alarcon ‘387 (US20150142387A1) teaches an electronic aerosol generating device with a housing [0006] including a power supply 14 and a liquid reservoir 16 [0032]-[0033], a controller (microcontroller 110) [0030], a light source (LED 150) [0030], input device (e.g., button is pressed to begin broadcast data set, [0078])
Bowen (US20180093054A1) teaches an electronic aerosol generating device with a housing (body 101, [0050]), controller/data processor (105 [0050]), a light source/LED, (outputs 115 include optical outputs such as LEDs/displays, [0053]), input device ([0052], discloses one or more inputs 117 such as buttons etc.)
Jordan (US 20160374397A1) teaches an electronic aerosol generating device with a housing 108 [0064], controller/data processor (controller 500 includes processor 502, [0088], light source/LED (light indicators, LEDs 105, [0060]), input device (activation push button or capacitive button, [0067])
Therefore, as shown by Alarcon ‘387, Bowen, and Jordan, further adding a housing, a controller, a light source, and an input device is an insignificant extra solution activity, because these features are well understood, routine, and conventional.
Mere instructions to perform a calculation using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Additionally claims 2-10 do not add additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
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.
Claim 1-10 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 recites “the light source not being configured to be detachable from the control unit by a user.” This limitation fails to reasonably appraise one of ordinary skill in the art of the scope of the claim because “detachable” and “by a user” are not defined. It is unclear whether the claim excludes only light sources intended to be removed during ordinary use, light sources removable without tools, light sources removeable with tools, or light sources removable only by destructive disassembly. The claim also does not recite objective structure that distinguishes a non-detachable light source from a detachable light source. Therefore, the scope of the claim is unclear. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the claim limitation “…not being configured to be detachable from the control unit by a user” is interpreted to require light sources to be not removable without tools. Claims 2-10 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alarcon (US20150142387A1) hereafter Alarcon ‘387.
Regarding Claim 1, Alarcon ‘387 teaches an electronic vapor provision system comprising a control unit (See [0033], control unit is the power supply/control electronics portion of the SCig 200), the control unit comprising:
a light source configured to emit light (LED driver 150 operating an LED as a visual signal [0030], and also teaches data logging circuitry including an LED or IR diode transducer [0045]);
a housing (e.g., the housing of the SCig, see FIG 2); and
a controller comprising a data processor configured to generate transmission data (the controller comprising a data processor is microcontroller 110 which is a computer that controls data logging, stores device data, which data is logged in memory 120 and transmits logging data through data interface 140, see [0030] and [0035]),
the controller being arranged within the housing of the control unit (the controller/ data logging device can be a dedicated circuit within the SCig or incorporated into circuitry that governs the SCig [0032], board support circuitry is included in the ecig housing [0041], see also [0044]), and
the device is configured to transmit logged usage/device data to an external device using LED or IR diode transduction [0045] and further teaches that such broadcast may be manually initiated by pressing a button on the SCig [0078].
the controller is configured to control the light source to emit an optical signal for transmitting the transmission data from the electronic vapor provision system to a reading device which is separate from the vapor provision system (data logging circuitry including an LED or IR diode transducer configured to broadcast data to an external device [0045],
the emission of the optical signal for transmitting the transmission data from the electronic vapor provision system to the reading device is initiated manually by the user, by the user physically contacting an input device arranged on an outside of the vapor provision system in order to initiate the emission of the optical signal for transmitting the transmission data from the electronic vapor provision system to the reading device (FIG 10C teaches that a button is pressed on an SCig, retrofitting unit, or a data logging device, and then the data logging device begins broadcasting data after the manual initiation [0077]-[0079].)
the controller is configured to control the light source emit light to indicate to a user one or more conditions or states relating to the vapor provision system (the LED can be utilized to send visual indications to the user [0045]).
Alarcon ‘387 fails to explicitly disclose the light source not being configured to be detachable from the control unit by a user,
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the construction of the light source of Alarcon ‘387 to not be configured to be detachable from the control unit by a user and to make the light source integrated into the construction of the device. The use of a one-piece, integrated construction instead of the structure disclosed or taught in the prior art would have been within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 II A.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the transmission data is based on data relating to the electronic vapor provision system retrieved from a data storage of the electronic vapor provision system (e.g., Alarcon ‘387 teaches the microcontroller 110 stores data related to the system in data storage memory 120 [0030], and the data includes characteristics of the device, conditions, and user activity data [0035], and [0037]-[0038])
Regarding Claim 3, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the transmission data comprises data relating to electronic vapor provision system usage [0037]- [0038].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the light source comprises an infrared light emitting diode. [0045]
Regarding Claim 6, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the light source flashes on and off in a binary manner at a predetermined frequency to emit the optical signal. (e.g., teaches broadcasting logical 1s and 0s using defined timing suitable for broadcasting binary, [0087]-[0090], an ordinary artisan would appreciate that broadcasting 1s and 0s using defined timing would include a predetermined frequency, see also [0045])
Regarding Claim 7, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches that data logging device transfers via a unidirectional or bidirectional communications link and broadcasts a data set [0068]- [0069].
Additionally Alarcon ‘387 teaches that in a button-initiated transfer a button is pressed and the device begins to broadcast the data set [0078]-[0079] (initiation portion), see also FIG 10C.
Alarcon teaches this data circuitry includes an LED or IR transducer configured to broadcast the data set to an external device [0045] (main portion).
Thus, Alarcon teaches an optical signal having an initiation portion and a main portion, where the initiation portion corresponds to the initial button initiated/turn on portion that begins the optical transmission sequence, and the main portion corresponds to the subsequent broadcast data set transmitted by LED or IR diode transducer.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the initiation portion starts an authentication process (e.g., a VLC signal provides authentication/identification information/access ID, a mobile devices uses the received information with a mobile identifier to generate a hashed value, and an access authorization device checks whether the received hash value matches authorized stored values [0078]-[0083], [0088]-[0090]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the emission of the optical signal is initiated when a condition is met by the electronic vapor provision system (e.g., a connection event occurs [0073] such as SCig battery inserted or other charging device, after such initiation, system begins broadcasting data set [0074].
Regarding Claim 10, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Alarcon ‘387 teaches the condition includes at least one of:
the usage data include at least one of puff counts, total puff duration [0066].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alarcon (US20150142387A1) hereafter Alarcon ‘387 as applied to claim 3 above, and in view of Alarcon (US20150327596A1), hereafter Alarcon ‘596.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Alarcon ‘387 teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Alarcon ‘387 fails to explicitly disclose the error codes include instructions for modifying the operation of the electronic vapor provision system to overcome the error that has been identified in the electronic vapor provision system.
Alarcon ‘596 teaches the error codes include instructions for modifying the operation of the electronic vapor provision system to overcome the error that has been identified in the electronic vapor provision system. (alerts/error codes are displayed when errors occur such as low battery [0075], which can be used to assist a user in addressing the error condition (e.g., if the battery is low the error indicator can include instructions to charge the device, overcoming the error, [0075]).
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic provision system of Alarcon ‘387 to include the error code instructions as taught by Alarcon ‘596 to indicate to a user to charge the aerosol generating device when the battery is low in order to have reusability of the device and extend the usage of the device of Alarcon ‘387, which can be used to assist customer service in addressing an error condition [0075].
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ Arguments/remarks and claim amendments filed 4-22-2026 have been fully considered and are found persuasive, and the rejection has been withdrawn. However a new rejection made in view of Alarcon (US20150142387A1) hereafter Alarcon ‘387 as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael T Fulton whose telephone number is (703)756-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 - 4:30 ET.
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.
/M.T.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1747 /RUSSELL E SPARKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights