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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/27/2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17, 19, 21, 23, 37-39, 41, 43 and 44 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 07/27/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because claim 1 has been amended to include new limitations that change the scope of the claim. Accordingly, the previous rejection over Fernando has been withdrawn, and a new rejection over Fernando in view of Conley is set forth below.
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 § 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 10 is 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as indefinite because the phrases “a ceramic material, such as alumina or zirconia” and “a metallic material, such as aluminum, brass or stainless steel” use exemplary language, making it unclear whether the listed materials are required or merely nonlimiting examples.
For purposes of continued examination, the claim is interpreted as requiring the thermally conductive material to be either a ceramic material or a metallic material, with alumina, zirconia, aluminum, brass, and stainless steel treated as nonlimiting examples.
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.
Claim 1, 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando et al. (US 2020/0196662 A1) in view of Conley et al. (US 2015/0020833 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fernando teaches:
an aerosol provision device (shisha device 100, ¶ [0078]) for generating aerosol from aerosol-generating material (aerosol-generating substrate contained in cartridge 150, ¶ [0079]);
a heating chamber (cartridge receptacle 140, ¶ [0079]) for receiving the aerosol-generating material (cartridge 150 containing the aerosol-generating substrate, ¶ [0079]);
an inductive heating unit (induction coil configured to heat a susceptor material, ¶ [0020]) for heating the aerosol-generating material during a session of use (susceptor material heating the aerosol-generating substrate to form an aerosol, ¶ [0014]);
a conduit (fresh-air inlet channel 170, ¶ [0079]) having an interior surface (surface of fresh-air inlet channel 170 formed by heating element 160, ¶ [0079]), the conduit fluidly connecting the heating chamber with the exterior of the aerosol provision device (fresh-air inlet channel in fluid connection with cartridge receptacle 140 and receiving fresh air from outside the device, ¶ [0029]);
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 (heating element 160 forming a portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170 and heating air before it enters receptacle 140, ¶ [0079]) to thereby substantially prevent accumulation of condensation within the conduit. The recited condensation-prevention language states a function of the heated conduit surface rather than requiring additional structure. Fernando’s heated interior surface, which may be heated to a working temperature of about 150°C to about 250°C, is capable of substantially preventing condensation within the channel and therefore satisfies the functional limitation. See MPEP § 2114 (Fernando, ¶ [0033]);
wherein at least a portion of the interior surface (the portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170 formed by heating element 160, ¶ [0079]) is formed of thermally conductive material having a thermal conductivity greater than 1 W/m/K (heating element comprising a metallic susceptor, such as stainless steel or aluminum, ¶ [0016]); and
wherein the conduit has a first end (the end of fresh-air inlet channel 170 adjacent receptacle 140, Fig. 1) comprising an opening fluidly connecting the heating chamber to the conduit (opening between fresh-air inlet channel 170 and receptacle 140, Fig. 1) and a second end (the opposite end of fresh-air inlet channel 170, Fig. 1) comprising an opening fluidly connecting the exterior of the device to the conduit (air inlet 171, Fig. 1).
Fernando does not expressly teach that 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 of the portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material being nearer to the first end of the conduit and nearer to the heating chamber than the second end of the portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material.
Conley discloses that heating element 222 may be positioned outside airflow passageway 214 to heat its wall, and that airflow passageway 214 itself may be formed from electrically and thermally conductive material, such as conductive ceramic, so that the passageway functions as a heating element and transfers heat to air passing therethrough (¶ [0034]).
Fernando already teaches that heating element 160 forms part of the interior surface of channel 170 and that the channel extends from the exterior of the device to receptacle 140. Conley discloses a known construction in which a thermally conductive passageway wall extends along and distributes heat through an airflow passageway. Thus, Conley’s construction is compatible with Fernando’s existing heated channel and would permit heat to be distributed longitudinally toward the chamber-side opening.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend Fernando’s heated, thermally conductive interior surface longitudinally along channel 170 from adjacent receptacle 140 toward air inlet 171, as taught by Conley, to distribute heat along the channel. The resulting conductive portion would have a chamber-side end nearer both the first end of the conduit and the heating chamber than its opposite end.
Regarding claim 7, Fernando teaches the conduit has a first end and a second end (fresh-air inlet channel 170 extending between receptacle 140 and exterior air inlet 171, Fernando Fig. 1), the first end being nearer to the heating chamber than the second end (the end of fresh-air inlet channel 170 adjacent receptacle 140 being nearer receptacle 140 than the opposite end at exterior air inlet 171, Fernando Fig. 1).
Modified Fernando further includes the at least a portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material having a first end and a second end (the thermally conductive wall portion extending longitudinally along fresh-air inlet channel 170, Conley ¶ [0034] as applied to Fernando Fig. 1), the first end being nearer to the heating chamber than the second end (the chamber-side end of the thermally conductive wall portion being nearer receptacle 140 than its opposite end, Conley ¶ [0034] as applied to Fernando Fig. 1), and the first end of the at least a portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material being located at the first end of the conduit (the chamber-side end of the thermally conductive wall portion being located at the chamber-side end of fresh-air inlet channel 170, Conley ¶ [0034] as applied to Fernando Fig. 1).
Because claim 7 recites the final alternatives using “and/or,” modified Fernando satisfies claim 7 by locating the first end of the thermally conductive interior-surface portion at the first end of the conduit.
Regarding claim 8, Fernando teaches a conduit support (a manifold of fresh-air inlet channel 170, ¶ [0047]) having an interior surface defining a passageway (the manifold directing air through fresh-air inlet channel 170 to each aperture, ¶ [0047]).
Fernando does not expressly teach the at least a portion of the interior surface of the conduit formed of thermally conductive material is provided by a layer of thermally conductive material on the interior surface of the conduit support.
Conley discloses that the wall of airflow passageway 214 may be constructed from thermally conductive material, such as ceramic, and heated to transfer heat to air passing through the passageway (¶ [0034]). Fernando also teaches a layered construction comprising an aluminum-metallized film supported by a ceramic backing (¶ [0046]).
Fernando already teaches that any suitable portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170 may be formed by heating element 160 (¶ [0030]) and that the channel may include a supporting manifold. Conley discloses forming a passageway wall from thermally conductive material, while Fernando discloses placing a metallized film on a supporting backing. Together, these teachings provide a known arrangement in which a supporting passageway structure carries a thermally conductive surface layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a layer of thermally conductive material (an aluminum-metallized layer, Fernando ¶ [0046]) on the interior surface of the conduit support (the passageway-facing interior surface of the manifold, Fernando ¶ [0047], as modified in view of Conley ¶ [0034]) so that the at least a portion of the interior surface of the conduit formed of thermally conductive material is provided by the layer, to distribute heat along the passageway while the manifold provides structural support.
Regarding claim 9, Fernando teaches a tubular component (heating element 160 forming at least a portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170, ¶ [0030]) constructed of thermally conductive material (heating element 160 comprising a metallic susceptor material, ¶ [0016]), the at least a portion of the interior surface formed of thermally conductive material being provided by the tubular component (the portion of the surface of fresh-air inlet channel 170 formed by heating element 160, ¶ [0029]).
Fernando does not expressly teach that the tubular component provides the entirety of the interior surface of the conduit.
Conley discloses that airflow passageway 214 itself may be constructed from electrically and thermally conductive material, such as conductive ceramic, such that the passageway itself functions as the heating element (¶ [0034]).
Fernando already teaches that any suitable portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170 may be formed by heating element 160, including 50% or more of the channel length (¶ [0030]). Conley discloses extending the thermally conductive construction to the passageway itself.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Fernando’s fresh-air inlet channel 170 as a thermally conductive tubular component, as taught by Conley, so that the tubular component provides the interior surface of the conduit and distributes heat along the airflow passageway.
Regarding claim 10, modified Fernando teaches the thermally conductive material is a metallic material (metallic susceptor material of heating element 160, Fernando ¶ [0016]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Fernando teaches the thermally conductive material is an electrically conductive material (metallic susceptor material of heating element 160, Fernando ¶ [0016]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Fernando teaches the thermally conductive material is a ferromagnetic and/or ferrimagnetic material (ferromagnetic susceptor material inductively heated by an alternating magnetic field, Fernando ¶ [0014]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Fernando teaches the heating of the interior surface of the conduit during a session of use results, at least in part, from conduction of heat generated by the heating unit (heat from heating element 222 conducted through the thermally conductive wall of airflow passageway 214, Conley ¶ [0034]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Fernando teaches the aerosol provision device is configured so the conduit is heated during the session of use (heating element 160 forming and heating a portion of fresh-air inlet channel 170 during use, Fernando ¶ [0029]) and at least a portion of the interior surface attains a temperature greater than or equal to 85°C (heating element 160 attaining a working temperature of about 180°C to about 250°C, Fernando ¶ [0033]).
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights