Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/757,011

SUSCEPTOR FOR AEROSOL GENERATION DEVICE AND AEROSOL GENERATION DEVICE

Final Rejection §112§DP
Filed
Jun 08, 2022
Examiner
KESSIE, JENNIFER A
Art Unit
1747
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Shenzhen First Union Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
193 granted / 303 resolved
-1.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
362
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
52.0%
+12.0% vs TC avg
§102
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 303 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
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 Claims 1,7-11, 16-19 are allowable. The restriction requirement between different produtcs, as set forth in the Office action mailed on September 17, 2024 , has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. Specifically, the restriction requirement of September 17, 2024 is fully withdrawn. Claim 22-23, directed to a specific susceptor are no longer withdrawn from consideration because the claim(s) requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. 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. Claims 3-6,13-14 and 20 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 3-6,13-14 and 20 recites the limitation "accommodation space". There is no accommodation space recited in claim 1 where the claims depend on, therefore, is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1,7-11, 16-19 and 22-23 are allowed. Claims 3-6, 13-14 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Independent claim 1 has been amended to recite, inter alia, that: the susceptor comprises a main body portion of a pin, needle, or blade-like structure; the main body forms a hollow in an interior; the hollow extends along an axial direction of the main body; and the sensing portion of the temperature sensor is accommodated within the hollow of the main body. The prior art of record, including Huizhou, Yan, and Stoner, fails to teach or suggest this specific structural configuration. Huizhou discloses a magnetic conductive metallic heating component with a sensor positioned on or at a base region of the heating module. However, Huizhou does not disclose or suggest a susceptor having a pin/needle/blade-like main body with an axially extending internal hollow, nor accommodating a sensing portion of a temperature sensor within such a hollow along the axial length of the susceptor body. Yan discloses thermocouple structures with elongated wires; however, Yan does not disclose integrating a temperature sensor within an internal axial hollow of a susceptor main body, nor does Yan suggest modifying a susceptor into a hollow pin/needle/blade-like structure. Stoner discloses various susceptor geometries, including pin- or rod-like shapes. However, Stoner’s susceptors are solid heating bodies and do not disclose or suggest a longitudinal internal hollow configured to house a temperature sensor within the susceptor body itself. Furthermore, the prior art does not provide a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify the cited references to arrive at the claimed configuration. In particular, modifying Huizhou in view of Yan and/or Stoner to form a pin/needle/blade-like susceptor having an axially extending internal hollow that accommodates the sensing portion of a temperature sensor would require: a substantial redesign of the susceptor body from a base-supported heating structure to an elongated, insertion-type geometry; formation of a longitudinal internal cavity within the susceptor body while maintaining its heating functionality; and integration and routing of the temperature sensor within the interior of the susceptor body. The cited references do not suggest such modifications, nor do they recognize or address the integration of a temperature sensor within an internal axial hollow of a susceptor main body. Rather, the references consistently position sensors external to or separate from the heating body, or disclose solid susceptors without internal cavities. Accordingly, the claimed configuration represents more than a predictable variation of the prior art elements and is not a result of routine optimization or design choice. The combination of the cited references would not have rendered the claimed subject matter obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Therefore, the claimed subject matter, as amended, is considered to be novel and nonobvious over the prior art of record. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” 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 /Christopher M Rodd/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 08, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Apr 01, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Sep 11, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Final Rejection — §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599161
METHOD OF MAKING AEROSOL-FORMING SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599160
LIPID-CONTAINING ORAL COMPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593871
AEROSOL-GENERATING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575602
AEROSOL GENERATING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569004
AEROSOL DELIVERY DEVICE WITH SEPARABLE HEAT SOURCE AND SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+25.2%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 303 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month