Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/780,147

ELECTRONIC AEROSOL PROVISION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 26, 2022
Examiner
CULBERT, COURTNEY GUENTHER
Art Unit
1747
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nicoventures Trading Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
28%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
40%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 28% of cases
28%
Career Allow Rate
11 granted / 39 resolved
-36.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 39 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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. Status of the Claims Claims 1-18, 21, and 23 are pending. Claims 14, 18, and 21 have been amended. Claim Objections Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: "a first portion" should be "the first portion". Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 3, "wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on the first portion of aerosol generating material on two separate occasions", fails to further limit claim 1, "wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions", from which claim 3 depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 13, "wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on the first portion of aerosol generating material on two separate occasions", fails to further limit claim 11, "wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions", from which claim 13 depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 1-7 and 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Courbat et al. (US 2020/0375255 A1). Regarding claim 1, Courbat discloses an aerosol provision device (“aerosol-generating device 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0158) for use with an aerosol generating article (“aerosol-forming article 10”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153) comprising aerosol generating material (“aerosol-forming segment 20”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153), the aerosol provision device comprising: one or more aerosol generating components (see “susceptor elements 180”, Figs. 2-4, ¶ 0158; although Fig. 4 only shows two aerosol generating components, Courbat discloses that there can be four aerosol generating components (“three or more susceptors”, ¶ 0018) arranged in a square pattern (“square pattern”, ¶ 0058) such as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner) arranged to aerosolize different portions of the aerosol generating material (“Thus, sequential heating of three or more zones in the aerosol-forming substrate may be achieved”, ¶ 0018); and control circuitry (combination of “power supply 140” and “controller 150”, ¶ 0155) for supplying power to the one or more aerosol generating components (“inductor coil 130 . . . receive[s] power from the power supply 140”, ¶ 0155, and “a high-frequency alternating current is passed through the inductor coil 130 to generate an alternating magnetic field . . . . The fluctuating field generates eddy currents within the susceptor elements 180”, ¶ 0158), wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions (as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner, the aerosol generating material located in the bottom half and heated by aerosol generating components 1 and 2 may be considered a “first portion”, and the aerosol generating material located in the top half and heated by aerosol generating components 3 and 4 may be considered a “second portion”; because the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, e.g, 1, then 2, then 3, then 4), the first portion of the aerosol generating material is heated to perform an aerosolization process on at least two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 2 is heated)). PNG media_image1.png 203 224 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure, Annotated by Examiner Regarding claim 2, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 1 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process of one portion of the aerosol generating material at any one time (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially and, as such, one portion of the aerosol generating material is aerosolized at any one time). Regarding claim 3, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 1 as stated above. Courbat discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on the first portion of aerosol generating material on two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 2 is heated, see rendering in the Figure in the rejection of claim 1 above, annotated by the examiner). Regarding claim 4, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 1 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the one or more aerosol generating components are heating elements (“heated susceptor elements 180 heat”, ¶ 0158). Regarding claim 5, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to cause heating of a first portion of the aerosol generating material at least on two separate occasions before causing heating of a second portion of the aerosol generating material (as seen in the rendering in the Figure in the rejection of claim 1 above, annotated by the examiner, the first portion will be heated twice (when aerosol generating components 1 and 2 are heated) before the second portion is heated (when aerosol generating component 3 is heated)). Regarding claim 7, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to receive a signal signifying a user's intent to generate aerosol, and in response to receiving the signal, cause heating of a portion of the aerosol generating material (“Such actuation may be manually operated or may occur automatically in response to a user drawing on the aerosol-generating article 10, for example by using a puff sensor”, ¶ 0158). Regarding claim 10, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein each heating element has an areal extent no greater than 130 mm2 (“If a susceptor element has a constant cross-section, for example a circular cross-section, it has a preferable width or diameter of between 1 millimetres and 5 millimetres”, ¶ 0075, which corresponds to an areal extent of 1 to 20 mm2). Since the range 1 to 20 mm2 falls within the claimed range of no greater than 130 mm2, the range is anticipated (MPEP § 2131.03). Regarding claim 11, Courbat discloses an aerosol provision system (“aerosol-generating device 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0158) for generating aerosol (“aerosol”, ¶ 0158) from an aerosol generating material (“aerosol-forming segment 20”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153), the system comprises: an aerosol generating article (“aerosol-forming article 10”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153) comprising a plurality of portions of aerosol generating material (e.g., top half and bottom half); one or more aerosol generating components (see “susceptor elements 180”, Figs. 2-4, ¶ 0158; although Fig. 4 only shows two aerosol generating components, Courbat discloses that there can be four aerosol generating components (“three or more susceptors”, ¶ 0018) arranged in a square pattern (“square pattern”, ¶ 0058) such as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner) arranged to aerosolize different portions of the aerosol generating material (“Thus, sequential heating of three or more zones in the aerosol-forming substrate may be achieved”, ¶ 0018); and control circuitry (combination of “power supply 140” and “controller 150”, ¶ 0155) for supplying power to the one or more aerosol generating components (“inductor coil 130 . . . receive[s] power from the power supply 140”, ¶ 0155, and “a high-frequency alternating current is passed through the inductor coil 130 to generate an alternating magnetic field . . . . The fluctuating field generates eddy currents within the susceptor elements 180”, ¶ 0158), wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions (as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner, the aerosol generating material located in the bottom half and heated by aerosol generating components 1 and 2 may be considered a “first portion”, and the aerosol generating material located in the top half and heated by aerosol generating components 3 and 4 may be considered a “second portion”; because the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, e.g, 1, then 2, then 3, then 4), the first portion of the aerosol generating material is heated to perform an aerosolization process on at least two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 2 is heated)). PNG media_image1.png 203 224 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure, Annotated by Examiner Regarding claim 12, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 11 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process of one portion of the aerosol generating material at any one time (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially and, as such, one portion of the aerosol generating material is aerosolized at any one time). Regarding claim 13, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 11 as stated above. Courbat discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on the first portion of aerosol generating material on two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 2 is heated, see rendering in the Figure in the rejection of claim 11 above, annotated by the examiner). Regarding claim 14, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 11 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the one or more aerosol generating components are heating elements (“heated susceptor elements 180 heat”, ¶ 0158) having an areal extent no greater than 130 mm2 (“If a susceptor element has a constant cross-section, for example a circular cross-section, it has a preferable width or diameter of between 1 millimetres and 5 millimetres”, ¶ 0075, which corresponds to an areal extent of 1 to 20 mm2). Since the range 1 to 20 mm2 falls within the claimed range of no greater than 130 mm2, the range is anticipated (MPEP § 2131.03). Regarding claim 15, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 14 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to cause heating of a first portion of the aerosol generating material at least on two separate occasions before causing heating of a second portion of the aerosol generating material (as seen in the rendering in the Figure in the rejection of claim 11 above, annotated by the examiner, the first portion will be heated twice (when aerosol generating components 1 and 2 are heated) before the second portion is heated (when aerosol generating component 3 is heated)). Regarding claim 17, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 15 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to receive a signal signifying a user's intent to generate aerosol, and in response to receiving the signal, cause heating of a portion of the aerosol generating material (“Such actuation may be manually operated or may occur automatically in response to a user drawing on the aerosol-generating article 10, for example by using a puff sensor”, ¶ 0158). Alternatively regarding claim 1, Courbat discloses an aerosol provision device (“aerosol-generating device 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0158) for use with an aerosol generating article (“aerosol-forming article 10”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153) comprising aerosol generating material (“aerosol-forming segment 20”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153), the aerosol provision device comprising: one or more aerosol generating components (see “susceptor elements 180”, Figs. 2-4, ¶ 0158; although Fig. 4 only shows two aerosol generating components, Courbat discloses that there can be four aerosol generating components (“three or more susceptors”, ¶ 0018) arranged in a square pattern (“square pattern”, ¶ 0058) such as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner) arranged to aerosolize different portions of the aerosol generating material (“Thus, sequential heating of three or more zones in the aerosol-forming substrate may be achieved”, ¶ 0018); and control circuitry (combination of “power supply 140” and “controller 150”, ¶ 0155) for supplying power to the one or more aerosol generating components (“inductor coil 130 . . . receive[s] power from the power supply 140”, ¶ 0155, and “a high-frequency alternating current is passed through the inductor coil 130 to generate an alternating magnetic field . . . . The fluctuating field generates eddy currents within the susceptor elements 180”, ¶ 0158), wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions (as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner, the aerosol generating material located in the left half and heated by aerosol generating components 1 and 4 may be considered a “first portion”, and the aerosol generating material located in the right half and heated by aerosol generating components 2 and 3 may be considered a “second portion”; because the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, e.g, 1, then 2, then 3, then 4), the first portion of the aerosol generating material is heated to perform an aerosolization process on at least two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 4 is heated)). PNG media_image2.png 203 266 media_image2.png Greyscale Figure, Annotated by Examiner Alternatively regarding claim 4, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 1 as stated in the alternative rejection of claim 1 above. Courbat further discloses wherein the one or more aerosol generating components are heating elements (“heated susceptor elements 180 heat”, ¶ 0158). Regarding claim 6, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated in the alternative rejection of claim 4 above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to cause sequential heating of each portion of aerosol generating material on one occasion, before causing heating of the first portion of aerosol generating material on a second occasion (the first portion will be heated when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and then the second portion will be heated when aerosol generating component 2 is heated before the first portion is heated on a second occasion when aerosol generating component 4 is heated, see rendering in the Figure in the alternative rejection of claim 1 above, annotated by the examiner). Alternatively regarding claim 11, Courbat discloses an aerosol provision system (“aerosol-generating device 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0158) for generating aerosol (“aerosol”, ¶ 0158) from an aerosol generating material (“aerosol-forming segment 20”, ¶ 0153), the system comprises: an aerosol generating article (“aerosol-forming article 10”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0153) comprising a plurality of portions of aerosol generating material (e.g., left half and right half); one or more aerosol generating components (see “susceptor elements 180”, Figs. 2-4, ¶ 0158; although Fig. 4 only shows two aerosol generating components, Courbat discloses that there can be four aerosol generating components (“three or more susceptors”, ¶ 0018) arranged in a square pattern (“square pattern”, ¶ 0058) such as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner) arranged to aerosolize different portions of the aerosol generating material (“Thus, sequential heating of three or more zones in the aerosol-forming substrate may be achieved”, ¶ 0018); and control circuitry (combination of “power supply 140” and “controller 150”, ¶ 0155) for supplying power to the one or more aerosol generating components (“inductor coil 130 . . . receive[s] power from the power supply 140”, ¶ 0155, and “a high-frequency alternating current is passed through the inductor coil 130 to generate an alternating magnetic field . . . . The fluctuating field generates eddy currents within the susceptor elements 180”, ¶ 0158), wherein the control circuitry is configured to perform an aerosolization process on a first portion of the aerosol generating material on at least two separate occasions (as seen in the rendering in the Figure below, annotated by the examiner, the aerosol generating material located in the left half and heated by aerosol generating components 1 and 4 may be considered a “first portion”, and the aerosol generating material located in the right half and heated by aerosol generating components 2 and 3 may be considered a “second portion”; because the aerosol generating components are heated sequentially (“sequential heating”, ¶ 0018, e.g, 1, then 2, then 3, then 4), the first portion of the aerosol generating material is heated to perform an aerosolization process on at least two separate occasions (once when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and again when aerosol generating component 4 is heated)). PNG media_image2.png 203 266 media_image2.png Greyscale Figure, Annotated by Examiner Alternatively regarding claim 14, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 11 as stated in the alternative rejection of claim 11 above. Courbat further discloses wherein the one or more aerosol generating components are heating elements (“heated susceptor elements 180 heat”, ¶ 0158). Regarding claim 16, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 14 as stated in the alternative rejection of claim 14 above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to cause sequential heating of each portion of aerosol generating material on one occasion, before causing heating of the first portion of aerosol generating material on a second occasion (the first portion will be heated when aerosol generating component 1 is heated and then the second portion will be heated when aerosol generating component 2 is heated before the first portion is heated on a second occasion when aerosol generating component 4 is heated, see rendering in the Figure in the alternative rejection of claim 11 above, annotated by the examiner). Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rojo-Calderon et al. (US 11,910,510 B2). Regarding claim 23, Rojo-Calderon discloses an aerosol generating article (“aerosol-generating pellet”, Col. 5, Line 47) comprising a plurality of portions of aerosol generating material (“An aerosol-generating pellet may comprise a compacted plurality of identical particles or a compacted plurality of different types of aerosol-generating particles”, Col. 5, Lines 47-49), wherein each of the plurality of portions of aerosol generating material has a thickness of between 0.5 mm (“preferably not smaller than 0.5 mm”, Col. 6, Line 21) and 2 mm (“a maximum size . . . preferably 2 mm”, Col. 6, Lines 17-18). Since the range 0.5 mm to 2 mm falls within the claimed range of 0.05 mm to 2 mm, the range is anticipated (MPEP § 2131.03). 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. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courbat et al. (US 2020/0375255 A1) as applied to claim 4 above. Regarding claim 8, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to heat the one or more heating elements to a temperature of greater than 250°C (“Preferred elongate susceptor elements may be heated to a temperature in excess of 250 degrees Celsius.”, ¶ 0063). Since the range greater than 250°C overlaps the claimed range of no greater than 350°C, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05(I)). Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courbat et al. (US 2020/0375255 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Butin et al. (US 2021/0145071 A1). Regarding claim 9, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision device of claim 4 as stated above. Courbat does not disclose the specific time it takes the control circuitry to heat the one or more heating elements to an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated to determine if it falls within the claimed range. Butin, in the same field of endeavor, discloses forming a heating element such that the time it takes the heating element to reach an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated is no longer than 10 consecutive seconds (“the inductive heating device of the present invention may heat the susceptor to a temperature in the range of 300-400 degrees Celsius in a time period of around five seconds, or even less than five seconds in some embodiments”, ¶ 0111). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to minimizing the time it takes to heat the heating element to the operational temperature in that it reduces the amount of time the user needs to wait for the aerosol to be formed. 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 configured the control circuitry of Courbat to heat the one or more heating elements to an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated to be around five seconds or less as taught by Butin (which is no longer than 10 consecutive seconds) in order to achieve this benefit. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courbat et al. (US 2020/0375255 A1) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Butin et al. (US 2021/0145071 A1). Regarding claim 18, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 14 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to heat the one or more heating elements to a temperature of greater than 250°C (“Preferred elongate susceptor elements may be heated to a temperature in excess of 250 degrees Celsius.”, ¶ 0063). Since the range greater than 250°C overlaps the claimed range of no greater than 350°C, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05(I)). Courbat does not disclose the specific time it takes the control circuitry to heat the one or more heating elements to an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated to determine if it falls within the claimed range. Butin, in the same field of endeavor, discloses forming a heating element such that the time it takes the heating element to reach an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated is no longer than 10 consecutive seconds (“the inductive heating device of the present invention may heat the susceptor to a temperature in the range of 300-400 degrees Celsius in a time period of around five seconds, or even less than five seconds in some embodiments”, ¶ 0111). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to minimizing the time it takes to heat the heating element to the operational temperature in that it reduces the amount of time the user needs to wait for the aerosol to be formed. 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 configured the control circuitry of Courbat to heat the one or more heating elements to an operational temperature at which aerosol is generated to be around five seconds or less as taught by Butin (which is no longer than 10 consecutive seconds) in order to achieve this benefit. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courbat et al. (US 2020/0375255 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Rojo-Calderon (US 2018/0352858 A1). Regarding claim 21, Courbat discloses the aerosol provision system of claim 11 as stated above. Courbat further discloses wherein the aerosol generating material is an amorphous solid (“The aerosol-forming substrate may comprise homogenised plant-based material. The aerosol-forming substrate may comprise homogenised tobacco material. Homogenised tobacco material may be formed by agglomerating particulate tobacco”, ¶ 0114). Courbat discloses that the aerosol generating material comprises a sheet (“crimped sheet”, ¶ 0114) but does not disclose that the aerosol generating material has a thickness within the claimed range. Rojo-Calderon, in the same field of endeavor, discloses forming an aerosol generating material comprising a sheet (“sheet of aerosol forming substrate”, ¶ 0046) having a thickness in a range of about 0.1 mm to 2 mm (“A sheet of aerosol-forming substrate, for example comprising tobacco material and an aerosol former may have a thickness between 0.1 millimeter and 2 millimeter”, ¶ 0046). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to minimizing the thickness of the sheet in that it allows for a more precise control over the total diameter of the aerosol generating material which is formed form the sheet. 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 formed the sheet taught by Courbat to have a thickness in a range of about 0.1 mm to 2 mm as taught by Rojo-Calederon in order to obtain this benefit. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0874. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm. 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. /C.G.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1747 /Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 26, 2022
Application Filed
May 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Aug 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 11, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 02, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582162
NICOTINE POD ASSEMBLIES AND NICOTINE E-VAPING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582163
NON-NICOTINE POD ASSEMBLIES AND NON-NICOTINE E-VAPING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575607
NON-NICOTINE POD ASSEMBLIES AND NON-NICOTINE E-VAPING DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12532916
THIN PLATE HEATING ELEMENTS FOR MICRO-VAPORIZERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12478101
ELECTRONIC VAPORIZATION DEVICE AND VAPORIZATION CORE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
28%
Grant Probability
40%
With Interview (+11.7%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 39 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