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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 3-6 are amended. Claims 7-16 are cancelled. Claims 1-6 are presently examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/11/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bilat (US 11,185,112).
Regarding claim 1, Bilat discloses an aerosol generating device, which is considered to meet the claim limitation of a control unit, having an interface that receives a consumable, which is considered to meet the claim limitation of a cartridge. The consumable comprises one or more conductive portions which identify the consumable by being selectively coupleable with one or more conductive portions of the interface. Electrical circuitry is configured to identify the consumable based on completion of one or more circuits defined by the one or more pairs of conductors and the one or more conductive portions being connected (abstract). Each pair of conductors is considered to meet the claim limitation of a plurality. Information about which pairs of conductors have their lines connected together is used as values for the properties of the consumable (column 15, lines 52-67). The identification of the consumable is performed by checking which pairs of contacts are disconnected and which pairs have a voltage flowing between them (column 20, lines 33-58), which is considered to meet the claim limitation of determining which pairs of contacts have a current flowing. The aerosol generating device has a power source that selectively supplies power to different conductor pairs (column 10, lines 40-53) and a microcontroller that identifies the consumable by supplying power to the contacts to determine which ones form a circuit and are therefore connected to the cartridge (column 16, lines 24-32). The microcontroller switches between which contacts are being measured in an iterative manner (column 8, lines 9-22), and measuring also requires supplying power to the contact being measured (column 10, lines 54-67, column 11, lines 1-10), indicating that the controller selectively supplies power to the different contacts.
Regarding claim 2, Bilat discloses that each of the conductors is associated with a resistor (column 16, lines 32-48) having a different resistance value so that it can be determined which contacts are or are not in contact with the consumable based on the measured resistance (column 17, lines 4-29).
Regarding claim 3, Bilat discloses that the consumable removably docks with the device (column 4, lines 16-24), which is considered to meet the claim limitation of releasably coupled.
Regarding claim 4, Bilat discloses that a microcontroller determines which of the resistors are in short circuit (column 17, lines 4-29) and that the power for the conductors is derived from a power source (column 10, lines 54-67, column 11, lines 1-10). The conductors are electrically connected to a heater of the consumable when the consumable is inserted (column 10, liens 54-56, column 11, lines 1-10).
Regarding claim 5, Bilat discloses that microcontroller measures the voltage and determines the current through Ohm’s law (column 16, lines 58-67, column 17, lines 1-3), which is considered to meet the claim limitation of a current sensor since it output a current value. Each of the conductors is connected to a switch that actives only those conductors that are connected to the heater (column 22, lines 14-28).
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.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bilat (US 11,185,112) in view of Hijma (US 12,193,491).
Regarding claim 6, Bilat discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above. Bilat does not explicitly disclose the contacts of interface being retractable.
Hijma teaches a cartridge for an electronic cigarette (abstract). The cartridge is received in a cartridge seating that has contacts that are spring biased such that they retract under contain back into recesses within the base of the cartridge, which is considered to meet the claim limitation of a rest position, to ensure that there is sufficient contact between the cartridge seating and the cartridge itself (column 10, lines 53-67, column 11, lines 1-3).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the contacts of Bilat be the spring loaded contacts of Hijma. One would have been motivated to do so since Hijma teaches contacts that ensure there is sufficient contact between the cartridge seating and the cartridge itself.
Response to Amendment
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 102, applicant’s arguments presume that the amendments to the claims sufficiently differentiate the claimed invention from Bilat, however, as set forth further above, Bilat does disclose the amended claims. The grounds for the rejection under Bilat will not be restated here since applicant provides no additional arguments beyond the mere assertion that Bilat does not disclose the amended claims.
Regarding the rejections under 35 USC 103, applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive since they are solely based on the alleged allowability of claim 1. However, claim 1 is rejected for the reasons as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSSELL E SPARKS whose telephone number is (571)270-1426. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am-5 pm.
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 Louie can be reached at 571-270-1241. 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.
/RUSSELL E SPARKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights