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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/3/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed 2/3/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1 and 3-20 are pending. Claims 2 and 21 are cancelled. Claims 1 and 20 are amended. No new matter is added. Support for the claimed amendments can be found in instant published paragraphs [0006] and [0069].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/3/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Butin et al. does not disclose a module configured to detect the oscillation frequency of the LC circuit- nor does it disclose or suggest that the controller is configured to adjust the frequency of the puled voltage to match the frequency of oscillation.
When an electronic vaporizing device is in use, a difference arises between the frequency of the DC/AC inverter and the oscillation frequency of the LC oscillator. This leads to significant power loss. Thus, claim 1 has been amended to require frequency detection in real time, and dynamic adjustment of the pulse frequency. ABI Aoun et al. operates under open-loop control and does not teach the aforementioned featured.
Examiner acknowledges the amendments made to claims 1 and 20. These amendments were not previously required and will be addressed hereinafter.
It is also noted that the independent claims require “the same or substantially the same” frequencies. The scope of substantially the same allows for differences between the two frequencies.
The courts have generally held that the reason or motivation to modify the reference may often suggest what the inventor has done, but for a different purpose or to solve a different problem. It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant. See, e.g., In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006). MPEP 2144, IV. Thus, Applicants result of minimizing power loss by measuring oscillation frequency and then adjusting pulse frequency does not need to be considered to combine teachings of art. In the instant case, ABI AOUN et al. describes the inclusion of a module to accurately and sensitively determine the temperature of the susceptor by measuring the frequency of the LC circuit.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
______________________________________________________________________
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BUTIN et al. (US 2021/0145071) in view of ABI AOUN et al. (US 2020/0022412).
With respect to claim 1, BUTIN et al. discloses an aerosol generating system (Abstract; Title) comprising a chamber, 130, (Paragraph [0235]; Figure 4) which is configured to receive at least part of a smokable material, 10; an LC load network, 1623 comprising a capacitor, C1, and inductor, L2, in series (Paragraphs [0117], [0240], [0237]) that generates a fluctuating, alternating magnetic field at a frequency (e.g., the LC network represents an oscillator by having the alternating magnetic field). The inductor is an inductance coil (Paragraph [0091]); The device further comprises a power supply, 150, which is configured to provide a pulse (Paragraphs [0245]-[0249] of voltage (Paragraphs [0236], [0238], [0240]) to the LC network so that the inductance coil generates a changing magnetic field (Paragraphs [0087], [0113], [0237], [0243], [0244]). The device further comprises a susceptor (included in the smokable material) (Paragraph [0237]), which is configured to interact with the alternating magnetic field and generate heat, which then heats the smokable material in the chamber (Figures 4 and 5; Paragraphs [0033]-[0034]) while the smokable material is in the cavity of the device (Paragraph [0237]); and a controller configured to adjust the time intervals between the pulses of power to generate heat (Paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0083], [0260]).
The time period between pulses of power is the frequency of applied pulses.
BUTIN et al. discloses that during operation, the controller measures the susceptor and conditions thereof through probing pulses sent to the LC oscillator (Paragraphs [0247]-[0255], [0260] and [0264]).
The measuring of conditions of the heating device in the aerosol device during operation represents the claimed ‘real time’ detecting.
BUTIN et al. further discloses that the pulse intervals sent to the LC oscillator are controlled and are variable (e.g., dynamically adjusted) (Paragraphs [0247]-[0251]) to either shorten the interval or lengthen the intervals between successive pulses (Paragraphs [0260], [0264]). The intervals are adjusted based the temperature of the susceptor, which is based on how rapidly a user inhales (Paragraph [0260]) and a standard interval between heating pulses is 90 milliseconds (Paragraph [0251]). The frequency of oscillation of the LC circuit is between 1 and 30 MHz (Paragraph [0113]).
BUTIN et al. does not explicitly disclose a module to detect the oscillation frequency of the LC circuit. ABI AOUN et al. discloses an aerosol generating device that determines the temperature of a susceptor material (Abstract; Title). The device includes a coil (e.g., module) (120B or 120C) that measures and records the frequency of the inductor using the voltage applied thereto (Paragraphs [0065], [0066]). This allows for an accurate and sensitive determination of the temperature of the susceptor (Paragraph [0076], [0090]) when using the measured values to compare against a look-up table in the memory of the device. Measurements are taken while the LC circuit is being driven (Paragraph [0059], [0062]-[0066]) (e.g., in real time)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a module in the device of BUTIN et al., that measures the frequency of the LC circuit, as taught by ABI AOUN et al. so that the temperature of the susceptor can be accurately and sensitively determined in real time. This determination can then be used to adjust the time intervals between the heating pulses sent to the inductor coil to heat the susceptor (See Paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0083] and [0260] of BUTIN et al.).
BUTIN et al. also doesn’t explicitly disclose that the varying magnetic field penetrates the susceptor. ABI AOUN et al. discloses that the varying magnetic field penetrates the susceptor to generate eddy currents therein. This heats the susceptor (Paragraph [0039]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to penetrate the susceptor with the varying magnetic field of BUTIN et al., as taught by ABI AOUN et al., so that eddy currents are generated within the susceptor, to thereby heat the susceptor.
The courts have generally held that "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 214405, II, A.
In the instant case, the pulse frequency is adjusted based on the cooling effect of a user’s inhalation through the device, which cools the heater. In order to counteract this cooling, the pulse timing is shortened. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to shorten the intervals between heating pulses to below 90 milliseconds, and including to 0.001 milliseconds (e.g., 1 MHz; frequency of LC oscillations), so that the heater can be rapidly heated when the user takes a deep and quick inhale from the device.
It is noted that claim 1 requires “the same or substantially the same”. Even if it can be shown that the frequency of the pulse voltage cannot reach exactly 1 MHz, a range of frequency in BUTIN et al. that approaches 1 MHz would still meet the requirements of “substantially the same”.
With respect to claim 3, ABI AOUN et al. discloses that the module measures the voltage of the LC circuit (Paragraphs [0015]-[0019]).
With respect to claim 4, ABI AOUN et al. discloses a coil that detects voltage to measure the frequency (Paragraphs [0019], [0064]). BUTIN et al. discloses the change in period (e.g., cycle) (Figure 3B) as the temperature of the susceptor changes (Paragraph [0072]). Given that the voltage detection unit measures the frequency through measuring the voltage, any change in the cyclic rate of the frequency is also implicitly detected.
With respect to claim 9 and 10 the detection module is a Hall Effect sensor and measures the frequency (e.g., change) of the filed generated by the coil (Paragraph [0100]).
With respect to claim 13, BUTIN et al. discloses that the power supply comprises a direct current battery (Paragraph [0238]) to provide DC current. The device further comprises a transistor switch to provide voltage to the LC oscillator (Paragraph [0240]). The switch turns the power on and off to supply pulses of current/voltage to the LC network (Paragraphs [0240]-[0250]), [0097], [0098]). The time period between pulses of power is the frequency of applied pulses
With respect to claim 14, BUTIN et al. does disclose a class-D amplifier having two transistors (Paragraph [0097]), which are switched alternatively. ABI AOUN et al. discloses that the resonance occurs because the collapsing magnetic field of the inductor generates an electric current in its winding that charges the capacitor, while the discharging capacitor provides an electric current that builds the magnetic field in the inductor (Paragraph [0041]). The charging of the capacitor by the inductor represents the claimed reverse process and discharging of the capacitor to pass current through the inductor represents the claimed forward process.
With respect to claim 20, BUTIN et al. discloses an aerosol generating system (Abstract; Title) comprising a chamber, 130, (Paragraph [0235]; Figure 4) which is configured to receive at least part of a smokable material, 10 having an inductor therein; an LC load network, 1623 comprising a capacitor, C1, and inductor, L2, in series (Paragraphs [0117], [0240], [0237]) that generates a fluctuating, alternating magnetic field at a frequency (e.g., the LC network represents an oscillator by having the alternating magnetic field). The inductor is an inductance coil (Paragraph [0091]); The device further comprises a power supply, 150, which is configured to provide a pulse (Paragraphs [0245]-[0249] of voltage (Paragraphs [0236], [0238], [0240]) to the LC network so that the inductance coil generates a changing magnetic field (Paragraphs [0087], [0113], [0237], [0243], [0244]). The device further comprises a susceptor (included in the smokable material) (Paragraph [0237]), which is configured to interact with the alternating magnetic field and generate heat, while the smokable material is in the cavity of the device (Paragraph [0237]), which then heats the smokable material in the chamber (Figures 4 and 5; Paragraphs [0033]-[0034]); and a controller configured to adjust the time intervals between the pulses of power to generate heat (Paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0083], [0260]).
The time period between pulses of power is the frequency of applied pulses
BUTIN et al. discloses that during operation, the controller measures the susceptor and conditions thereof through probing pulses sent to the LC oscillator (Paragraphs [0247]-[0255], [0260] and [0264]).
The measuring of conditions of the heating device in the aerosol device during operation represents the claimed ‘real time’ detecting.
BUTIN et al. further discloses that the pulse intervals sent to the LC oscillator are controlled and are variable (e.g., dynamically adjusted) (Paragraphs [0247]-[0251]) to either shorten the interval or lengthen the intervals between successive pulses (Paragraphs [0260], [0264]). The intervals are adjusted based the temperature of the susceptor, which is based on how rapidly a user inhales (Paragraph [0260]) and a standard interval between heating pulses is 90 milliseconds (Paragraph [0251]). The frequency of oscillation of the LC circuit is between 1 and 30 MHz (Paragraph [0113]).
BUTIN et al. does not explicitly disclose a module to detect the oscillation frequency of the LC circuit. ABI AOUN et al. discloses an aerosol generating device that determines the temperature of a susceptor material (Abstract; Title). The device includes a coil (e.g., module) (120B or 120C) that measures and records the frequency of the inductor using the voltage applied thereto (Paragraphs [0065], [0066]). This allows for an accurate and sensitive determination of the temperature of the susceptor (Paragraph [0076], [0090]) when using the measured values to compare against a look-up table in the memory of the device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a module in the device of BUTIN et al., that measures the frequency of the LC circuit, as taught by ABI AOUN et al. so that the temperature of the susceptor can be accurately and sensitively determined. This determination can then be used to adjust the time intervals between the heating pulses sent to the inductor coil to heat the susceptor (See Paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0083] and [0260] of BUTIN et al.).
BUTIN et al. also doesn’t explicitly disclose that the varying magnetic field penetrates the susceptor. ABI AOUN et al. discloses that the varying magnetic field penetrates the susceptor to generate eddy currents therein. This heats the susceptor (Paragraph [0039]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to penetrate the susceptor with the varying magnetic field of BUTIN et al., as taught by ABI AOUN et al., so that eddy currents are generated within the susceptor, to thereby heat the susceptor.
The courts have generally held that "where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 214405, II, A.
In the instant case, the pulse frequency is adjusted based on the cooling effect of a user’s inhalation through the device, which cools the heater. In order to counteract this cooling, the pulse timing is shortened. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to shorten the intervals between heating pulses to below 90 milliseconds, and including to 0.001 milliseconds (e.g., 1 MHz; frequency of LC oscillations), so that the heater can be rapidly heated when the user takes a deep and quick inhale from the device.
It is noted that claim 1 requires “the same or substantially the same”. Even if it can be shown that the frequency of the pulse voltage cannot reach exactly 1 MHz, a range of frequency in BUTIN et al. that approaches 1 MHz would still meet the requirements of “substantially the same”.
______________________________________________________________________
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BUTIN et al. (US 2021/0145071) in view of ABI AOUN et al. (US 2020/0022412) as applied to claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 20 above, and further in view of CHONG et al. (US 2019/0200677).
With respect to claim 19, modified BUTIN et al. does not explicitly disclose that the frequency of the oscillator is between 80 and 400 KHz. CHONG et al. discloses that he controller operates the oscillator at 400 KHz to perform a preheat cycle, whereby the temperature of the susceptor can then be raised to operating temperature within 1 second (Paragraph [0088]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to operate the LC unit at 400 kHz, as taught by CHONG et al. so that the susceptor can be pre-heated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 11, 12 and 15-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With respect to claim 5, while ABI AOUN et al. does note a shift in the position of a heating curve (and thus in the time of the pulse), there is no indication that the time difference is determined or measured in any way, per se.
With respect to claim 7, the cited art does not disclose the claimed diode at the claimed location, per se.
With respect to claim 11, BUTIN et al. discloses that the power supply electronics supplies pulses to the inductor (Paragraphs [0245], [0246]). Thus, the electronics represent a pulse generator. The generator produces a frequency (Paragraph [0113], [0237]). However, the actual frequency of the pulse is unknown, and is not necessarily related to the resonance frequency of the LC circuit.
With respect to claim 15, ABI AOUN et al. does not indicate when the switching occurs.
With respect to claim 16, the cited art does not disclose the claimed first and second transistor with the claimed respective connections, per se.
With respect to claim 17, BUTIN et al. discloses that the power supply electronics supplies pulses to the inductor (Paragraphs [0245], [0246]). Thus, the electronics represent a pulse generator. The generator produces a frequency (Paragraph [0113], [0237]). However, the actual frequency of the pulse is unknown, and is not necessarily related to the resonance frequency of the LC circuit. Moreover, BUTIN et al. does not disclose the pulse frequency (See claim 18).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX B EFTA whose telephone number is (313)446-6548. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Philip Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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.
/ALEX B EFTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745