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 1-3, 5, 7, 9-12, 14-15, 17-18, 20-22, and 24-26 are pending. Claims 2, 9, 12, 14-15, 17-18, 20-22, and 24-26 are withdrawn. Claims 1, 5, and 24 have been amended.
Response to Amendments
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant's response filed on 6/29/2026 containing amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8 of Remarks filed 6/29/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3-5, 7, 10, and 11 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Applicant has amended claim 1 to include limitations that were not previously presented and are not anticipated by the previous mapping of Reevell included in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 3/27/2026. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of a new mapping of Reevell.
Applicant's further arguments filed 6/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that “the consumable/article and the heating element move together”. This argument is not persuasive as, while a user technically could move both the consumable/article and the heating element of Reevell together, the components are not required to move together, as evidenced by the fact that the consumable/article needs to be placed on the heating element (¶ 0055).
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reevell (US 2020/0245682 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Reevell discloses a non-combustible aerosol provision device (“aerosol-generating device 10”, Fig. 1a, ¶ 0047) for generating an aerosol (“aerosol”, ¶ 0047) from an article (“consumable”, ¶ 0047) comprising an aerosol-generating material (“aerosol-forming substrate”, ¶ 0047), the device comprising:
a receptacle (“chamber 16 for inserting a consumable containing aerosol-forming substrate”, Fig. 1a, ¶ 0046) to receive, in use, the article;
a heating system (combination of “heating regions 18.1, 18.2”, “induction coil 20”, and “second housing portion 14”, Figs. 7a-7d, ¶ 0055, 0058) for heating the aerosol-generating material when the article is received in the receptacle (¶ 0046), the heating system comprising a plurality of parts (“heating regions 18.1, 18.2”, “induction coil 20”, and “second housing portion 14”, Figs. 7a-7d, ¶ 0055, 0058);
a selector (“support member 40”, Fig. 7a, ¶ 0052) operable to select one or more portions of the aerosol-generating material, from a plurality of portions of the aerosol-generating material, for heating by the heating system (“a first region of the consumable 34 with the length 44 corresponding to the length 44 of one of the heating regions 18.1, 18.2 can be heated. Thereafter, the heating element 18 can be partly pushed out of the chamber 16 such that a second portion of the consumable 34 can be heated.”, ¶ 0055, see Figs. 7a-7b); and
a controller (“sliding actuator 50”, Figs. 9a-9c, ¶ 0057) configured to cause the plurality of parts of the heating system to move relative to the receptacle to be positioned such that, in use, the one or more portions of the aerosol-generating material is, or are, heatable by the heating system (“The sliding actuator 50 is connected with the heating element 18 by means of connecting means such that a sliding action of the sliding actuator 50 is conveyed to the heating element 18 by the connecting means”, ¶ 0057, see Figs. 7c-7d and 9a-9c);
wherein when the article is received within the receptacle, each of the plurality of parts of the heating system is independently movable, in use, relative to other parts of the plurality of parts (parts 18.1 and 18.2 are independently movable relative to parts 14 and 20, as seen in Figs. 7a-7d, and correspondingly, parts 14 and 20 are therefore independently movable relative to parts 18.1 and 18.2).
Reevell discloses that parts 18.1 and 18.2 of the heating system are independently movable, in use, relative to the receptacle, and relative to the article, to heat different ones of the plurality of portions of the aerosol-generating material (“In this way, when a consumable 34 is inserted into the chamber 16 and pushed over the heating element 18, a first region of the consumable 34 with the length 44 corresponding to the length 44 of one of the heating regions 18.1, 18.2 can be heated. Thereafter, the heating element 18 can be partly pushed out of the chamber 16 such that a second portion of the consumable 34 can be heated”, ¶ 0055).
However, Reevell does not explicitly disclose in the embodiment shown in Figs. 7a-7d that parts 14 and 20 of the heating system are independently movable relative to the receptacle, and relative to the article, to heat different ones of the plurality of portions of the aerosol-generating material.
In a different embodiment, Reevell discloses that parts 14 and 20 of the heating system may be independently movable, in use, relative to the receptacle and, therefore, also relative to the article (“FIG. 10 shows an embodiment of the induction coil, in which the induction coil is arranged movable”, Figs. 10a-10c, ¶ 0045). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to making parts 14 and 20, in addition to parts 18.1 and 18.2, independently movable, in use, relative to the receptacle and to the article, in that it allows for increased control over which portion of the aerosol-generating material is heated at any given moment (¶ 0058). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make both the parts 14 and 20 of Reevell movable, in use, relative to the receptacle and relative to the article, in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 3, the obvious modification of Reevell discloses the device according to claim 1 as stated above. Reevell further discloses wherein the plurality of parts of the heating system are translatable relative to the receptacle in a direction of a second axis of the receptacle (Figs. 7a-7b and 9a-9c).
Regarding claim 5, the obvious modification of Reevell discloses the device according to claim 1 as stated above. Reevell further discloses wherein the controller is configured to cause the plurality of parts of the heating system to heat the one or more portions of the aerosol-generating material in a non-successive order (as there is an insulating region separating the plurality of parts of the heating system (“a separating element 48, which facilitates a thermal insulation between the heating regions 18.1, 18.2”, ¶ 0055) the heating system will heat portions of the aerosol-generating material which are adjacent to the heating regions in a non-successive order as the controller pushes the heating system).
Regarding claim 7, the obvious modification of Reevell discloses the device according to claim 1 as stated above. Reevell further discloses wherein the heating system comprises an induction heating system (“induction”, ¶ 0055), comprising a susceptor (“heating element 18”, Figs. 7a-7d, ¶ 0055) and an induction coil (“induction coil 20”, Figs. 7c-7d, ¶ 0055) operable to cause heating of the susceptor in use (¶ 0046).
Regarding claim 10, the obvious modification of Reevell discloses the device according to claim 7 as stated above. Reevell further discloses that the plurality of parts of the heating system comprises the susceptor (“heating element 18”, Figs. 7a-7d, ¶ 0055) and the induction coil (“induction coil 20”, Figs. 7c-7d, ¶ 0055).
Regarding claim 11, the obvious modification of Reevell discloses the device according to claim 10 as stated above. Further, in the device of the obvious modification of Reevell in which both the susceptor and the induction coil are movable, in use, relative to the receptacle, the induction coil is movable in unison with the susceptor (by sliding the coil at the same speed as sliding the controller).
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 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
Prosecution Insights