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Claims 12-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on October 8, 2024.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Atkins’s heaters are arranged in the same wired circuit and therefore apply heat according to a single heating profile. However, Atkins expressly teaches that heating may be controlled by a controller and that a first resistive heater may vaporize a first material using a first temperature profile while a second resistive heater vaporizes a second material using a different temperature profile (Atkins, ¶ [0021]). Thus, the series or parallel arrangement of the heaters does not require the heaters to operate according to the same heating profile.
Atkins further teaches that the device may include memory storing programs for performing an action (¶ [0089]) and that the controller controls the heating profiles (¶ [0021]), thereby teaching the claimed profiles preprogrammed in the controller.
Applicant further argues that Bowen discloses only a single reservoir and a single heater. However, Bowen is not relied upon for the plurality of material portions, heaters, or different heating profiles. Those features are taught by Atkins. Bowen is relied upon for selecting a heating profile based on a coded portion of the consumable. Specifically, Bowen teaches a cartridge identifier comprising a barcode or QR code (¶ [0057]), suggesting a heating profile based on the identified material (¶ [0187]), and adjusting operation of the vaporizer based on information identifying the material contained in the cartridge (¶ [0043]). The rejection therefore relies upon the combined teachings of Atkins and Bowen, rather than requiring Bowen individually to disclose every limitation of claim 1.
Applicant’s argument that neither reference teaches identifiers associated with Atkins’s individual compartments is also unpersuasive because claim 1 does not require a separate identifier for each compartment. The claim requires the first and second predetermined heating profiles to be selected based on a coded portion of the consumable. Bowen’s coded identifier may identify the consumable and its contained material, thereby permitting the controller to select the corresponding first and second heating profiles for Atkins’s respective material portions.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkins et al. (US 2019/0124982) in view of Bowen et al. (US 2018/0043114).
Regarding claim 1, Atkins discloses an aerosol provision (AP) system (Figure 4, device 100 (device for generating an inhalable aerosol), [0136]) comprising:
a consumable comprising a plurality of aerosol generating material portions (Figure 1, detachable cartridge 14 containing first and second stacked compartments 114 and 214, [0139]);
an aerosol generator operable to generate an aerosolized payload by providing a first predetermined heating profile to a first aerosol generating material portion of the plurality of aerosol generating material portions and providing a second predetermined heating profile to a second aerosol generating material portion of the plurality of aerosol generating material portions, wherein the first predetermined heating profile is different from the second predetermined heating profile (Figure 1, each compartment (114 & 214) has a resistive heater element (3 & 4) (see [0139]) and [0021] discusses the use of heating profiles and that the first and second resistive heaters can vaporize the first and second materials with different temperature profiles);
wherein the first predetermined heating profile and the second predetermined heating profile are pre-programmed in a controller of the AP system (device may contain memory to store programs to perform an action (e.g. the heating profiles discussed above), [0089], also heating may be controlled by a controller from processor or memory, [0021]).
Atkins fails to disclose wherein the predetermined heating profile is selected based on a coded portion of the consumable.
Bowen teaches a similar electronic vaporizer system containing a cartridge which may include one or more reservoirs of vaporizable material ([0049]) wherein the predetermined heating profile is selected based on a coded portion of the consumable (Figure 1, identifier 138 is in the cartridge (“consumable”) 114 and may include a bar code or QR code (the as filed specification lists these as possible “coded portions” on pages 5-6), [0057] and vaporizer may suggest a heating profile based on identified contained material [0187]). Bowen also teaches that identifying the vaporizable material in the cartridge allows for the device to adjust the operation of the vaporizer as desired as well as determine information about the material contained therein such as expiration date [0043].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Bowen to provide a coded portion on the consumable such as a bar code or QR code which when identified has information on possible heating profiles for the contained material because doing so would allow for the device to adjust the operation of the vaporizer as desired as well as determine information about the material contained therein such as expiration date, as recognized by Bowen [0043].
Regarding claim 3, modified Atkins teaches the AP system according to claim 1, wherein the first predetermined heating profile heats at a first power level and the second predetermined heating profile heats at a second power level, wherein the first power level and the second power level are different power levels (Atkins, first heater to a first temperature and second heater to a different temperature ([0019]), which can be done by controlling the power applied to the heater or circuitry, [0021]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Atkins teaches the AP system according to claim 1, wherein the first predetermined heating profile heats for a first time period and the second predetermined heating profile heats for a second time period, wherein the first 0139 time period and the second time period are different time periods (Atkins, heating can be done by controlling heating temperature over time and heating profiles can be different (meaning having different time periods), [0021]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Atkins teaches the AP system according to claim 1, wherein the first predetermined heating profile heats according to a first heating curve and the second predetermined heating profile heats according to a second heating curve, wherein the first heating curve and the second heating curve are different heating curves (Atkins, heating profiles (analogous to the “heating curves”) disclosed and that the first and second resistive heaters can vaporize the first and second materials with different temperature/heating profiles, [0021]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Atkins teaches the AP system according to claim 1, further comprising a container for aerosol generating material (Atkins, Figure 1, first and second stacked compartments 114 and 214 are containers holding vaporizable material, [0139]),
the container arranged to removably receive aerosol generating material (Atkins, cartomizer may be refillable, [0112]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Atkins teaches the AP system according to claim 7, wherein the container is arranged to removably receive aerosol generating material in a cartridge (Atkins, cartomizer may comprise a cartridge and may be refillable, [0112]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Atkins teaches a system, comprising: the AP system of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above),
and a cartridge comprising aerosol generating material (Atkins, Figure 1, cartridge 14 contains vaporizable material, [0139]),
program a predetermined heating profile and heat the aerosol generating material with the predetermined heating profile to produce an aerosol (heating profiles in [0021] and button mechanism activates specific heater within cartridge (meaning can pick profile), [0137]).
Atkins fails to disclose the system arranged to: detect the presence of the cartridge in the AP system.
Bowen teaches a similar electronic vaporizer wherein the system is arranged to detect the presence of the cartridge in the AP system (detection of the removal of the cartridge can be performed by the controller, [0052]). Bowen also teaches that detecting the removal of the cartridge allows for the user to remove the cartridge to set the desired temperature in the device [0052].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Bowen to detect the removal of the cartridge by the controller because doing so would allow for the user to remove the cartridge to set the desired temperature in the device, as recognized by Bowen [0052].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atkins et al. (US 2019/0124982) in view of Bowen et al. (US 2018/0043114) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Rostami et al. (US 2017/0258138).
Regarding claim 9, modified Atkins discloses the AP system according to claim 7, as set forth above. Atkins fails to disclose wherein the container is arranged to removably receive a plurality of cartridges.
Rostami teaches a similar vaping device wherein the container is arranged to removably receive a plurality of cartridges (Figure 2a, cartridge holder 80 removably couples with multiple separate cartridges 22-1 to 22-N, [0118]). Rostami also teaches that the ability to removable couple with multiple cartridges enables variety and customization of the sensory experience provided during vaping, [0119].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Atkins to incorporate the teachings of Rostami to provide a cartridge holder which removably couples with multiple separate cartridges because doing so would allow for variety and customization of the sensory experience provided during vaping, as recognized by Rostami [0119].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights