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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1, 3, and 7-14 in the reply filed on 04/21/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 17, 19, 21, 23, 37-39, 41, 43 and 44 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/21/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Fernando fails to disclose “a thermally conductive interior surface having a first end nearer to the heating chamber than a second end,” asserting that all heated portions of the channel are “equally close” to the heating chamber and that no other portion of the channel is thermally conductive.
This argument is not persuasive.
Fernando expressly discloses that the fresh air inlet channel 170 is formed by the heating element 160 and extends away from the heating chamber toward exterior air inlet apertures (Fig. 1; ¶¶0047, 0049). As shown in Figure 1, the air inlet channel 170 is a longitudinal conduit extending between the exterior air inlet and the heating chamber. By definition, such a conduit includes a first end adjacent the heating chamber and a second end positioned farther away toward the exterior.
Applicant’s assertion that all portions of the conductive interior surface are “equally close” to the heating chamber improperly ignores the axial length of the conduit disclosed in Fernando. The fact that the conductive interior surface is formed by the wall of the heating element does not negate that the wall extends along the conduit, resulting in portions of the interior surface that are closer to the heating chamber and portions that are farther away.
Further, Fernando teaches that the air inlet channel wall may be formed of thermally conductive materials such as aluminum, copper, zinc, nickel, silver, or combinations thereof (¶¶0013–0014). These materials form the interior surface of the conduit and necessarily extend along the conduit length depicted in Figure 1. Accordingly, the thermally conductive interior surface disclosed by Fernando includes a first end nearer the heating chamber and a second end farther from the heating chamber, as now claimed.
Applicant additionally argues that Fernando does not disclose that any portion of the channel other than the portion formed by the heating element is thermally conductive. However, claim 1 does not require that the entire conduit be thermally conductive, nor does it require that the thermally conductive portion be distinct from the heating element. Claim 1 merely requires that at least a portion of the interior surface be formed of thermally conductive material and that this portion has a first end nearer to the heating chamber than a second end. Fernando clearly discloses this arrangement.
Accordingly, Fernando continues to disclose each and every limitation of amended claim 1. The amendment does not distinguish over the applied prior art.
Claim Interpretation
The phrase “substantially prevent accumulation of condensation” in claim 1 is found definite in light of Applicant’s as-filed specification, which describes heating the conduit surface to at least about 85°C (and up to 100°C) as sufficient to cause significant re-evaporation of condensate. Thus, the specification provides objective guidance such that one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably understand the scope of the claim.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fernando et al. (US 2020/0196662).
Regarding claim 1, Fernando teaches an aerosol provision device for generating aerosol from aerosol-generating material, the aerosol provision device (Fig. 1; ¶¶ [0079]–[0081], [0014]–[0016]) comprising:
a heating chamber for receiving the aerosol-generating material (aerosol-generating element 130 includes cartridge receptacle 140 configured to receive cartridge 150 containing an aerosol-generating substrate; the receptacle 140 is the heating chamber; ¶ [0079]);
an inductive heating unit for heating the aerosol-generating material during a session of use (heating element 160 comprises an inductive heating element including susceptor material that forms part of the surface of cartridge receptacle 140; susceptor is inductively heated to heat the aerosol-generating substrate during use – ¶¶ [0014]–[0016]);
a conduit having an interior surface, the conduit fluidically connecting the heating chamber with the exterior of the aerosol provision device (fresh air inlet channel 170 fluidically connects the exterior (ambient air) to the heating chamber (receptacle 140); Fig. 1; ¶ [0079]);
wherein the aerosol provision device is configured so that at least a portion of the interior surface of the conduit is heated during a session of use (fresh air inlet channel 170 is formed by the heating element 160, which heats air before it enters the cartridge 150; because the heating element forms the channel, the interior surface of the conduit is heated during operation – ¶ [0079]); and
Regarding the limitation of “to thereby substantially prevent accumulation of condensation within the conduit”, Fernando does not expressly state “prevents condensation.” However, heating the conduit’s interior surface during aerosol delivery maintains the surface above the aerosol’s dew point. As a result, aerosolized vapor passing through the conduit does not cool sufficiently to condense on the conduit walls. This is a direct, natural, and inevitable result of the disclosed structure and operation, and thus the limitation is necessarily met even if not explicitly described. See MPEP § 2112 (“Inherency… may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The limitation at issue necessarily must be present, or the natural result of the combination of elements explicitly disclosed by the prior art.”).
Here, the heated conduit wall during use necessarily prevents condensation, as a physical consequence of the arrangement disclosed in Fernando.
Fernando teaches that the receptacle wall may be formed of thermally conductive material such as aluminum, copper, zinc, nickel, silver, or combinations thereof (¶[0013]–[0014]). Such materials inherently have a thermal conductivity greater than 1 W/m·K as disclosed by Applicant’s as-filed specification (pg. 12 lines 22-28). The wall forms at least a portion of the interior surface of the conduit, as shown in Fig. 1 (fresh air channel 170) and described in ¶[0049].
Regarding the limitation of “wherein the conduit has a first end and a second end, the first end being nearer to the heating chamber than the second end”, wherein the first end of the air inlet channel 170 is located adjacent the heating chamber containing heating element 160 (Fig. 1; ¶0049), and the second end is positioned toward exterior air inlet apertures for drawing in fresh air (¶0047);
Regarding the limitation of “wherein the at least a portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material has a first end and a second end, the first end being nearer to the heating chamber than the second end”, wherein the thermally conductive wall defining the interior surface of the air inlet channel 170 extends from the end adjacent the heating chamber toward the exterior air inlet end (¶¶0013–0014; ¶0049), such that the conductive interior surface includes a first end nearer the heating chamber and a second end positioned farther from the heating chamber.
Accordingly, Fernando teaches, either expressly or inherently, every element of amended claim 1.
Regarding Claim 7, Fernando teaches:
a conduit – air inlet channel 170 (Fig. 1; ¶[0047]).
Having a first end adjacent the heating chamber – first end located near heating chamber 140 containing heating element 160 (Fig. 1; ¶[0049]).
a second end positioned away from the heating chamber toward apertures for fresh air intake – second end located toward exterior air inlet apertures for drawing in fresh air (¶[0047]).
At least a portion of the interior surface of the conduit is formed of thermally conductive material – Fernando discloses the conduit is formed, at least in part, of thermally conductive materials to conduct heat (¶[0013]).
Located at the first end near the heating chamber – thermally conductive portion positioned at the end near the heating chamber (Fig. 1; ¶[0049]).
Therefore, Fernando teaches each and every limitation of claim 7.
Regarding Claim 8, Fernando teaches:
The device of claim 3 further comprising a conduit support – manifold or structural portion supporting air inlet channel 170 (Fig. 1; ¶[0047]).
Having an interior surface defining a passageway – conduit support defines the passageway for airflow through the conduit (¶[0047]).
At least a portion of the interior surface is formed of thermally conductive material – thermally conductive material disclosed for portions of the conduit/support (¶[0013]–[0014]).
The thermally conductive material forms a layer on the interior surface – conductive material applied as a layer on the inner wall (¶[0013]–[0014]).
To conduct heat from the heating element to the air – conductive layer is used to transfer heat from heating element 160 to incoming air (¶[0049]).
Therefore, Fernando teaches each and every limitation of claim 8.
Regarding claim 10, Fernando teaches wherein the thermally conductive material is a metallic material, such as aluminum (¶[0013]).
Regarding claim 11, Fernando teaches thermally conductive materials such as aluminum, copper, zinc, nickel and silver (¶[0013]) which are all inherently electrically conductive.
Regarding claim 12, Fernando teaches wherein the thermally conductive material such as nickel (¶[0013]), inherently ferromagnetic as disclosed by Applicant’s specification (pg. 39 lines 05-10).
Regarding claim 13, Fernando teaches a conduit (air inlet channel, 170) and a heating element (160) (¶¶[0038]–[0039], Fig. 1). The heating element raises the temperature of air in the conduit to at least 200 °C within seconds of initiating heating. Since this is occurring during use, this necessarily heats the interior of the conduit at least in part, from conduction of heat generated by the heating element to the interior surface of the conduit.
Regarding claim 14, Fernando teaches a conduit (air inlet channel, 170) heated during use by the heating element (160) (¶¶[0038]–[0039], Fig. 1). The air temperature in the conduit reaches at least 200 °C within seconds of heating, which in turn heats at least a portion of the interior surface to attain temperatures greater than or equal to 85 °C, 90 °C, 95 °C, and 100 °C as recited.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JENNIFER KESSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-7739. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00am - 5:00pm.
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 at (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.
/JENNIFER A KESSIE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747