CTNF 17/626,722 CTNF 94388 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-42-04 AIA 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/21/2025 has been entered. The status of the 10/13/2025 claims, is as follows: Claim 1 has been amended; Claims 4-12, 30, and 32 have been withdrawn ; Claims 14, 29, and 31 have been canceled ; and Claims 1-13, 15-28, 30, and 32 are pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 AIA Claim s 17-18, 23, and 26 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In claim 17: The limitation "the thermocouple junction is of a type selected from the group comprising:" in line 2 renders the claim indefinite because of an improper Markush grouping by utilizing “comprising” instead of “consisting of”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim. In claim 18: The limitation "a range selected from the group comprising:" in line 2 renders the claim indefinite because of an improper Markush grouping by utilizing “comprising” instead of “consisting of”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim. In claim 23: The limitation "a level selected from the group comprising:" in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because of an improper Markush grouping by utilizing “comprising” instead of “consisting of”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 13, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatton (US 20180077967) in view of Tucker (US 20130213419) Regarding Claim 1, Hatton discloses an aerosol provision system (vaporizer apparatus; abstract) comprising: an electric heater (resistive heater) for generating an aerosol (aerosol) from an aerosol generating material (vaporizable material) for user inhalation (for inhalation by the user) (“generate an aerosol from the vaporizable material for inhalation by the user”, para. 0099) (“heater may generally include a heating coil (resistive heater) in thermal contact with the wick”, para. 0077), wherein the electric heater (resistive heater) comprises a first portion (conductor A; fig. 20A) comprising a first electrically resistive material and a second portion (conductor B; fig. 20B) comprising a second electrically resistive material which is different from the first electrically resistive material (“a resistive heater may comprised of two dissimilar conductors (e.g., stainless steel and titanium) welded together”, para. 0167), and wherein the first portion (conductor A) and the second portion (conductor B) are connected together (para. 0167) so that the electric heater comprises a thermocouple junction (thermocouple junction); and control circuitry (control circuit) configured to make measurements of temperature for the electric heater using the thermocouple junction (“may be used to measure temperature at a point along the heater coil”, para. 0167 and 0077), wherein the thermocouple junction is located around the middle of the electric heater (para. 0168 and 0170; annotated fig. 20A). PNG media_image1.png 348 517 media_image1.png Greyscale Hatton does not disclose: a first connecting lead connected to the first portion of the electric heater, wherein the first connecting lead has an electrical resistance per unit length which is less than an electrical resistance per unit length of the first portion of the electric heater, and a second connecting lead connected to the second portion of the electric heater, wherein the second connecting lead has an electrical resistance per unit length which is less than an electrical resistance per unit length of the second portion of the electric heater. However, Tucker discloses the two ends of a heater 14 are connected to a battery by two spaced apart electrical leads 26 (para. 0041; figs. 1 and 9), wherein the first connecting lead (lead 26) has an electrical resistance per unit length which is less than an electrical resistance per unit length of the first end of the electric heater (heater 14) (it is noted the lead 26 is highly conductive, therefore its resistance per unit length is less than the resistance per unit length of the heater 14 which is highly resistive), and a second connecting lead (lead 26’) connected to the second end of the electric heater (heater 14), wherein the second connecting lead (lead 26’) has an electrical resistance per unit length which is less than an electrical resistance per unit length of the second end of the electric heater (it is noted the lead 26’ is highly conductive, therefore its resistance per unit length is less than the resistance per unit length of the heater 14 which is highly resistive) (para. 0042) (provided as evidence, according to attached non-patent literature to Boston University, https://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/Resistance.html, “Current and Resistance”, published on 07/12/1999, resistivity and conductivity are inversely related. Good conductors have low resistivity while highly resistive conductors/insulators have high resistivity). PNG media_image2.png 330 552 media_image2.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first portion of the heater of (conductor A of Hatton) to be connected to the first connecting lead (i.e. lead 26 of Tucker) and modify the second portion (conductor B of Hatton) of the heater to be connected to the second connecting lead (i.e. lead 26’ of Tucker) as taught by Tucker. Such connections are known in the art to supply power from the battery to the first portion and the second portion of the heater by means of first and second connecting leads (i.e. leads 26) of Tucker. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the first and second connecting leads (i.e. leads 26 of Tucker) such that the leads 26 have electrical resistance per unit length less than the electrical resistance per unit length of the first portion and the second portion of the heater. Doing so would ensure the leads 26’s are highly conductive to carry power from the power source to the first portion and the second portion of the heater and to ensure that the first portion and the second portion are highly resistive so that heat generation is concentrated primarily along the first portion and the second portion of the heater (i.e. conductor A and conductor B of Hatton) and not at the leads 26 (para. 0042 of Tucker). Regarding Claim 2, Hatton discloses the aerosol provision system (vaporizer apparatus), wherein the electric heater (resistive heater) is in the form of a wire coil (heating coil) (“a heating coil (resistive heater)”, para. 0077). Regarding Claim 3, Hatton discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, wherein the electric heater (resistive heater) is wound around a capillary structure (wicking material) arranged to deliver the aerosol generating material to the electric heater (para. 0098) (it is noted that the wicking material draws the vaporizable material into the heater without pump or other mechanical moving part. It is noted the Hatton is silent with regards to the wicking material draws the material through capillary action. However, provided as an evidence Bessant (US 20180242644) discloses capillary wick draws liquid to the aerosol-generating means through capillary action, para. 0153-0154.) Regarding Claim 13, Hatton discloses the aerosol provision system (vaporizer apparatus), wherein the thermocouple junction (thermocouple junction) is located around the middle of the electric heater (resistive heater) (“the junction is located in the middle of the heating element”, para. 0168 and para. 0167). Regarding Claim 27, Hatton discloses the aerosol provision system (vaporizer apparatus), further comprising the aerosol generating material (vaporizable material) (para. 0099) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Newcomb (US 20190274362) Regarding Claim 15, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the first portion of the electric heater comprises an alloy of nickel and chromium. However, Newcomb discloses an electric heater (heater 2215) comprises an alloy of nickel and chromium (nickel-chromium alloys) (para. 0169). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first portion of the electric heater (conductor A of Hatton) to comprise the alloy of nickel and chromium as taught by Newcomb, because it involves simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable result, which is to heat material to generate aerosol in vaping device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Gammerler (US 20190159514) Regarding Claim 16, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the second portion of the electric heater comprises an alloy of nickel, aluminum, manganese and silicon. However, Gammerler discloses an electric heater (heating element) comprises an alloy of nickel, aluminum, manganese and silicon (alloy of nickel, aluminum, manganese, and silicon) (para. 0008). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second portion of the electric heater (conductor B of Hatton) to comprise the alloy of nickel, aluminum, manganese and silicon as taught by Gammerler, because it involves simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable result, which is to heat material to generate aerosol in vaping device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Palmer (US 20180289925) Regarding Claim 17, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except wherein the thermocouple junction is of a type selected from the group comprising: a Type E thermocouple junction; a Type J thermocouple junction; a Type K thermocouple junction; a Type M thermocouple junction; a Type N thermocouple junction; a Type T thermocouple junction; a Type B thermocouple junction; a Type R thermocouple junction; a Type S thermocouple junction; a Type E thermocouple junction; a Type C thermocouple junction; a Type D thermocouple junction; and a Type G thermocouple junction. However, Palmer discloses a thermocouple junction between two different conductors 150, 152, wherein the thermocouple junction is a Type K thermocouple junction (K-type thermocouple) (“heater conductors 150, 152 have materials selected to provide these characteristics, for example, one is formed from alumel and one is formed from chromel, which form a well-characterized K-type thermocouple when joined.”, para. 0198). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first portion of Hatton to be made of alumel and modify the second portion of Hatton to be made of chromel such that the K-type thermocouple is formed between the two portions or conductors of the heater, because it is conventionally known to use the K-type thermocouple as temperature measurement means by providing different materials for different conductors of the heater (para. 0198 of Palmer) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 18 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Davis (US 20210401061) Regarding Claim 18, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the electric heater has an electrical resistance within a range selected from the group comprising: 0.5 to 2 ohms; 0.8 to 1.8 ohms; 0.9 to 1.7 ohms; 1.0 to 1.6 ohms; 1.1 to 1.5 ohms and 1.2 to 1.4 ohms. However, Davis discloses an electric heater (heating element) has an electrical resistance within a range: 0.5 to 2 ohms (less than 2 ohm) (para. 0357) (In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 Section I.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heater of Hatton such that it has the electrical resistance with the range from 0.5 to 2 ohms, because it is conventionally known to use the resistance of the heater from 0.5 to 2 ohms in the art of vaping apparatus. Regarding Claim 28, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except wherein the aerosol provision system comprises a control unit part and a consumable part detachably couplable to the control unit part, and wherein the control unit part comprises the control circuitry and the consumable part comprises the electric heater. However, Davis discloses an aerosol provision system (vaping device 10) comprises a control unit part (control assembly 14) and a consumable part (atomizer assembly 19. It is noted the heating element in atomizer heats material to generate aerosol. In other words, it consumes the material to generate aerosol, para. 0156) detachably couplable to the control unit part (control assembly 14) (para. 0155. It is noted the assembly 14 is detachably connected to the assembly 19 via connecting means 15 (i.e. threaded connector)), and wherein the control unit part (control assembly 14) comprises the control circuitry (control board 30) and the consumable part (atomizer assembly 19) comprises the electric heater (heating element 22). PNG media_image3.png 370 748 media_image3.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol provision system of Hatton to comprise the control unit part and the consumable part that is detachably couplable to the control unit part as taught by Davis, for the convenience of maintenance because if the control unit part failed, only the control unit part would need to be replaced . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Davis (US 20210401061) and Palmer (US 20180289925) Regarding Claim 19, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above. Hatton discloses the control circuitry (control circuit) is configured to control the electric heater to achieve desired temperature (para. 0126). The modification does not disclose the control circuitry is configured to supply power to the electric heater during a period of aerosol generation in a pulsed manner that comprises a series of on periods during which power is connected to the electric heater and off periods during power is not connected to the electric heater, and wherein the control circuitry is configured to time the measurements of temperature for the electric heater so they are made during off periods when power is not connected to the electric heater. However, Davis discloses control circuitry (temperature control circuit 4228) is configured to supply power to the electric heater (atomizer 4224) during a period of aerosol generation in a pulsed manner (pulse width modulation i.e. regular periodic pulsing for several cycles) that comprises a series of on periods during which power is connected to the electric heater and off periods during power is not connected to the electric heater (it is noted pulse width modulation comprises a series of on and off periods) (para. 0576). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Hatton (i.e. control circuit) to supply power to the heater in the pulsed manner as taught by Davis, because it is conventionally known to control the heater in pulsed manner in the art of vaping apparatus. The modification does not disclose the control circuitry is configured to time the measurements of temperature for the electric heater so they are made during off periods when power is not connected to the electric heater. However, Palmer discloses when the heater is also used as thermocouple, temperature measurement is made by momentarily discontinuing the heating current to the heater such that the small thermocouple voltage can be sensed (para. 0168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Hatton (i.e. control circuit) in view of Davis to time the measurements of temperature for the heater during the off period as taught by Palmer, in order to configure the heater as the thermocouple junction to allow the thermocouple voltage to be sensed that is used to determine the temperature of the heater. Regarding Claim 20, Davis discloses the control circuitry (temperature control circuit 4228) is configured to select a duty cycle for the on and off periods (modify the pulse width of pulsed direct current) to control the average power supplied to the electric heater (heating element) during a period of aerosol generation (para. 0576). Regarding Claim 21, the modification discloses the control circuitry (control circuit of Hatton) is configured to select the duty cycle for the power (modify the pulse width of pulsed direct current) supplied to the electric heater during a period of aerosol generation based on at least one measurement of temperature for the electric heater (temperature measurement along the heater coil of Hatton) (para. 0576 of Davis). Regarding Claim 22, the modification discloses the control circuitry (control circuit of Hatton) is configured to select the duty cycle for the power supplied to the electric heater (modify the pulse width of pulsed direct current of Davis) during a period of aerosol generation based on a comparison of the at least one measurement of temperature for the electric heater (temperature measurement along the heater coil of Hatton) and a predefined target temperature (preset temperature of Hatton) (para. 0576 of Davis). Regarding Claim 23, the modification discloses the control circuitry (control circuit of Hatton) is configured to select the duty cycle for the power supplied to the electric heater (modify the pulse width of pulsed direct current of Davis) is during a period of aerosol generation (para. 0576 of Davis). The modification does not disclose the selected duty cycle does not exceed a level selected from the group comprising: 0.95; 0.90; 0.85; 0.80 and 0.75. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the duty cycle such that it does not exceed 0.95, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation is to effectively control the heater using the selected duty cycle based on the temperature measurement of the heater such that the desired temperature set point is achieved . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967), Tucker (US 20130213419), Davis (US 20210401061), and Palmer (US 20180289925) as applied to claim 23 above, further in view of Xiang (US 20170325507) Regarding Claim 26, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the control circuitry is configured to trigger a user notification and/or to restrict the supply of power to the electric heater in response to determining a fault condition has arisen. However, Xiang discloses control circuitry (processing unit) is configured to restrict the supply of power to the electric heater (heating wire) in response to determining a fault condition has arisen (current temperature value is greater than or equal to a preset value) (abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Hatton (i.e. control circuit) in view of Davis and Palmer to restrict the supply of power to the heater in response to determining the fault condition as taught by Xiang. Doing so would ensure the desired temperature is achieved to yield desired taste for the user of the vaping device. Claims 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable the modification of Hatton (US 20180077967) and Tucker (US 20130213419) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Xiang (US 20170325507) Regarding Claim 24, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the control circuitry is configured to determine a fault condition for the electronic aerosol provision system has arisen if a measurement of temperature for the electric heater indicates the electric heater temperature is above a predetermined upper temperature threshold. However, Xiang discloses control circuitry (processing unit 20) is configured to determine a fault condition for the electronic aerosol provision system has arisen if a measurement of temperature for the electric heater indicates the electric heater temperature is above a predetermined upper temperature threshold (current temperature of the heating wire 101 is greater than a preset value) (para. 0062) (it is noted the unit 20 determines fault condition (i.e. temperature is off target temperature) has arisen because temperature of the heating wire is greater than the preset value. In such case, the unit 20 turns off the power to the heater). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Hatton to determine the fault condition has arisen if the measurement of temperature for the heater is above the predetermined upper temperature threshold as taught by Xiang. Doing so would allow the heater to be turned off to prevent overheating that can cause damage to the vaping apparatus. Regarding Claim 25, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the control circuitry is configured to determine a fault condition for the electronic aerosol provision system has arisen if a measurement of temperature for the electric heater indicates the electric heater temperature is below a predetermined lower temperature threshold. However, Xiang discloses control circuitry (processing module 2022) is configured to determine a fault condition for the electronic aerosol provision system has arisen if a measurement of temperature for the electric heater indicates the electric heater temperature is below a predetermined lower temperature threshold (temperature value of the heating wire is less than the preset value) (para. 0077) (it is noted the module 2022 determines there is the fault condition (i.e. temperature is off target temperature) because the temperature of the heating wire is less than the preset value. In such case, the module 2022 turns on the power to the heater to increase the temperature). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the control circuitry of Hatton to determine the fault condition has arisen if the measurement of temperature for the heater is below the predetermined lower temperature threshold as taught by Xiang. Doing so would allow the heater to be turned on to ensure that desired temperature is achieved to yield desirable taste for the user of the vaping device. Response to Argument Applicant's arguments filed on 10/13/2025 have been fully considered but are respectfully considered moot in view of new ground of rejections. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BONITA KHLOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7313. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am-6pm. 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on (571) 270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /BONITA KHLOK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 2 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 3 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 4 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 5 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 6 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 7 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 8 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 9 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 10 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 11 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 12 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 13 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 14 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 15 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 16 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 17 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 18 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 19 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 17/626,722 Page 20 Art Unit: 3761
Prosecution Insights