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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2025 August 28 has been entered.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (US 20230083064 A1 with priority to PCT/JP2020/041794) in view of Bless (US 20190200673 A1) and Landa (WO 2020089890 A1).
Claims 1 and 10: Yamada teaches an aerosol-generating device (fig. 1, #100A) comprising:
a first container (123) configured to accommodate an aerosol-generating substance [52];
a heater (121A) configured to heat the aerosol-generating substance [54];
a second container (131) that is an application chamber (aerosol flows along path 180);
and a controller (fig. 1, #116A) configured to: determine a cumulative usage of an application chamber (fig. 7 and [153]), wherein the cumulative usage corresponds to an amount of component cumulatively extracted from a solid medium (the controller determines a cumulative number of first container puffs; the cumulative number of first container puffs correlates/corresponds to a cumulative amount of flavor extracted from the second container) in the application chamber (131) perform control such that the heater is heated to a first temperature (40°C) based on the cumulative usage being greater than or equal to a first reference (more than five puffs) and less than a second reference (fewer than ten puffs), and perform control such that the heater is heated to a second temperature (45°C) based on the cumulative usage being greater than or equal to the second reference (more than ten puffs) and less than a third reference (fewer than fifteen puffs), wherein the second temperature is higher than the first temperature.
Yamada does not explicitly teach that the second container is configured to be rotatable about a rotating shaft and comprises a plurality of partitioned chambers, that a rotation detection sensor is configured to output a signal corresponding to rotation of the second container, that the controller is configured to determine one of the plurality of partitioned chambers as being the application chamber through which an aerosol generated in the first container passes based on a signal received from the rotation detection sensor, or that the plurality of partitioned chambers is arranged around the rotating shaft of the second container.
Bless teaches an aerosol-generating device (fig. 4 and [62], #500) comprising:
a first container (530) configured to accommodate [70] an aerosol-generating substance (602);
a second container (522) configured to be rotatable about a rotating shaft ([79], cartridge base assembly comprising #522 can be rotated relative to reservoir assembly comprising #530) and comprising a plurality of partitioned chambers (fig. 10, #572) arranged around the rotating shaft (longitudinal axis of 522);
a rotation indicator ([80], detents or markings) configured to indicate rotation of the second container (522);
wherein a user determines one of the plurality of partitioned chambers (fig. 10, #572) as being an application chamber through which an aerosol generated in the first container passes [81] based on an indication from the rotation indicator, such that the user can select a flavorant corresponding to one of the partitioned chambers and apply the flavorant to the aerosol [6], thereby enabling customization by a user.
Yamada’s (Yamada fig. 1 and [56], #131) and Bless’s (Bless fig. 4 and [80], #522) second containers both impart flavor to generated aerosol to yield expectation to succeed.
In applying Bless to Yamada, one of ordinary skill would modify Yamada’s control scheme concordant to modified Yamada’s structure. Yamada contains one aerosol channel extending from a first container (Yamada fig. 1 and [45], #123) through a second container (131). Modified Yamada contains a plurality of aerosol channels extending from a first container (Yamada fig. 1 and [45], #123) through a plurality of chambers (Bless fig. 10, #572) in a second container. One of ordinary skill expanding Yamada’s number of chambers would be motivated to expand Yamada’s usage determination to determine usage of each chamber, such that each usage reflects each chamber’s flavorant which have distinct delivery forms and properties [Bless 73-74]. One of ordinary skill would accomplish so by making modified Yamada, for each puff, identify which chamber is the application chamber and increment usage for the corresponding chamber.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use, as Yamada’s generic second container, Bless’s specific second container such that Yamada’s second container is configured to be rotatable about a rotating shaft and comprises a plurality of partitioned chambers, and that the plurality of partitioned chambers is arranged around the rotating shaft of the second container, wherein a user determines one of the plurality of partitioned chambers as being an application chamber through which an aerosol generated in the first container passes based on an indication from a rotation indicator, wherein a user increments usage for each application chamber at the time of each puff in order to determine a cumulative usage of the application chamber, because doing so would enable a user to apply a selected flavorant to generated aerosol, thereby enabling customization by a user.
Landa teaches an aerosol-generating device (fig. 1, #101) comprising a rotation detection sensor (fig. 15C, #1517) configured to output a signal corresponding to rotation of a container (p. 30, lines 21-25), which is used to determine one of a plurality of partitioned chambers as an application chamber through which an aerosol passes (p. 30, lines 8-11), such that rotational position of the device can be detected and set to desired positions (p. 30, lines 21-25).
Moreover, providing a rotation detection sensor would be automating the manual activity of observing Bless’s rotational position. See MPEP 2144.04(III): In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958). The courts have held that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add Bless’s rotation detection sensor configured to output a signal corresponding to rotation of the second container, and to make the controller configured to determine one of the plurality of partitioned chambers as being an application chamber through which an aerosol generated in the first container passes based on a signal received from the rotation detection sensor, because doing so would enable rotational positioning of the device to be detected and would otherwise be a patentably indistinct automation.
Claim 2: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, wherein based on the cumulative usage of the application chamber being greater than or equal to a preset maximum reference ([155], Table 13, after fifteen puffs), the controller is configured to perform control such that supply of electric power to the heater is interrupted (heating is turned off).
Claim 3: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: a puff sensor (required by fig. 7; fig. 1, #112A) configured to sense an inhalation by a user, wherein the controller is configured to update data on the cumulative usage of the application chamber based on sensing that the inhalation of the user has ended [153].
Claim 4: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: a puff sensor (required by fig. 7; fig. 1, #112A) configured to sense an inhalation by a user; and a memory (required by fig. 7; fig. 1, #114A) configured to store a plurality of temperature profiles (35°C, 40°C, and 45°C), wherein the controller is configured to: determine a number of consecutive puffs according to inhalation by the user sensed using the puff sensor (fig. 7) from when power of the aerosol-generating device is turned on (the device must be powered in order to operate the memory and controller) and one of the plurality of partitioned chambers is determined to be the application chamber (claim 1), and determine, from the plurality of temperature profiles (35°C, 40°C, and 45°C) stored in the memory, a temperature profile corresponding to the determined number of consecutive puffs for heating the heater (fig. 7).
Claim 6: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to initialize the number of consecutive puffs (fig. 7, puff zero) based on power of the device being turned off ([153], detecting the first puff starts the present heating profile, so the number of consecutive puffs resets upon (de)powering the device in preparation for the next heating profile), and the controller is configured to initialize the number of consecutive puffs based on a change in the application chamber (depowering the device would stop aerosol from flowing through the application chamber).
Claim 9: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1.
Modified Yamada does not explicitly teach a first gear disposed such that an inner surface thereof is in contact with an outer peripheral surface of the second container; and a second gear configured to be engaged with an outer peripheral surface of the first gear, wherein the rotation detection sensor is a rotary switch mounted coaxially with the second gear.
Landa teaches an aerosol-generating device (fig. 1, #101) comprising a first gear (fig. 15A-C, #1510) disposed such that an inner surface thereof is in contact with an outer peripheral surface of a container (p. 30, lines 7-18, cartridge above #1503); and a second gear (1503) configured to be engaged with an outer peripheral surface of the first gear (1510), wherein the rotation detection sensor (#1517 and p. 30, lines 21-25, electronics connected to #1517 in fig. 15C) is a rotary switch mounted coaxially with the second gear (1503), such that rotational position of the device can be detected and set to desired positions (p. 30, lines 21-25).
“Rotary switch” is interpreted to include the meaning of “switch operated by rotation”.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add Landa’s first gear disposed such that an inner surface thereof is in contact with an outer peripheral surface of the second container; and a second gear configured to be engaged with an outer peripheral surface of the first gear, wherein the rotation detection sensor is a rotary switch mounted coaxially with the second gear, because doing so would enable rotational positioning of the device to be detected.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (US 20230083064 A1 with priority to PCT/JP2020/041794) in view of Bless (US 20190200673 A1) in further view of Landa (WO 2020089890 A1) as applied to claim 4 in further view of Larsen (US 20200237004 A1).
Claim 5: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 4.
Modified Yamada does not explicitly teach that the controller is configured to: determine, based on the number of consecutive puffs being less than a predetermined number, a first temperature profile from the plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, and determine, based on the number of consecutive puffs being greater than or equal to the predetermined number, a second temperature profile from the plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, wherein a temperature of the heater heated according to the first temperature profile is higher than a temperature of the heater heated according to the second temperature profile.
Larsen teaches an aerosol-generating device comprising a controller configured to determine, based on a number of consecutive activations being less than a predetermined number ([145], fewer than five activations), a first temperature profile (maximum temperature is 150°C) from a plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, and determine, based on the number of consecutive activations being greater than or equal to the predetermined number (five or more activations), a second temperature profile (maximum temperature is 250°C) from the plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, wherein a temperature of the heater (150°C) heated according to the first temperature profile is higher than a temperature of the heater (ambient “sleep mode” temperature which is reasonably understood to be lower than 150°C) heated according to the second temperature profile, such that a user can easily customize the active temperature profile [145].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add Larsen’s temperature profiles additional to Yamada’s three temperature profiles and provide that the controller is configured to: determine, based on the number of consecutive puffs being less than a predetermined number, a first temperature profile from the plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, and determine, based on the number of consecutive puffs being greater than or equal to the predetermined number, a second temperature profile from the plurality of temperature profiles for heating the heater, wherein a temperature of the heater heated according to the first temperature profile is higher than a temperature of the heater heated according to the second temperature profile, because doing so would enable a user to easily customize the active temperature profile.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (US 20230083064 A1 with priority to PCT/JP2020/041794) in view of Bless (US 20190200673 A1) in further view of Landa (WO 2020089890 A1) as applied to claim 1 in further view of Gill (WO 2019129843 A1).
Claim 7: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: a housing having a reception space ([75], #120 is mounted in #100) formed therein to allow a cartridge comprising the first container (113) to be inserted thereinto.
Modified Yamada does not explicitly teach a cartridge detection sensor configured to sense mounting of the cartridge, wherein the controller is configured to initialize partition use of each of the plurality of partitioned chambers based on sensing demounting of the cartridge using the cartridge detection sensor.
Gill teaches an aerosol-generating device comprising a cartridge detection sensor configured to sense mounting of the cartridge (p. 29, line 28 – p. 30, line 2), wherein a controller is configured to initialize vaporization data based on sensing demounting of the cartridge using the cartridge detection sensor (p. 30, lines 1-2), such that the aerosol-generating device can be prepared for a next smoking session (p. 29, lines 24-32).
“Initialize use” is interpreted to include the meaning of “initialize data which describes an amount of usage”, consistent with applicant [455, 492, and 519-520] which all disclose initializing data. The difference between “initialize us(ag)e” and “determine us(ag)e” is noted.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Gill’s cartridge detection sensor configured to sense mounting of the cartridge, wherein the controller is configured to initialize partition use of each of the plurality of partitioned chambers based on sensing demounting of the cartridge using the cartridge detection sensor, because doing so would be a simple combination of a cartridge detection sensor and an aerosol-generating device comprising a cartridge and would predictably enable the use data of the partitioned chambers to be initialized based on sensing demounting of the cartridge.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (US 20230083064 A1 with priority to PCT/JP2020/041794) in view of Bless (US 20190200673 A1) in further view of Landa (WO 2020089890 A1) as applied to claim 1 in further view of Mizuguchi (US 20200107582 A1).
Claim 8: modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: a puff sensor (required by fig. 7; fig. 1, #112A) configured to sense an inhalation by a user, wherein the controller is configured to: determine a number of consecutive puffs using the puff sensor (fig. 7) from when power of the aerosol-generating device is turned on (the device must be powered in order to operate the memory and controller) and one of the plurality of partitioned chambers is determined to be the application chamber (claim 1), based on the determined number of consecutive puffs being smaller than a predetermined number (fewer than five puffs), perform control such that the heater is heated to a third temperature (35°C) from when inhalation by the user ends to when inhalation by the user is sensed again (temperature is held at 35°C between puffs), wherein the third temperature (35°C) is lower than the first temperature (40°C).
Modified Yamada does not explicitly teach that the controller is configured to: based on the determined number of consecutive puffs being greater than or equal to the predetermined number, perform control such that the heater is heated to a fourth temperature or lower from when inhalation by the user ends to when inhalation by the user is sensed again, wherein the fourth temperature is lower than the third temperature.
Mizuguchi teaches an aerosol-generating device (abstract) comprising a controller configured to: perform control such that a heater is heated to a third temperature (fig. 12, #T1a) or lower, wherein the third temperature is lower than a first operation temperature ([122], generation of cracked gas is suppressed), perform control such that the heater is heated to a fourth temperature (fig. 12, #T2a) or lower, wherein the fourth temperature is lower than the third temperature [130], such that between the third and fourth temperature, discharge is prevented [124] while diagnosis of device health is enabled [121], and such that below the fourth temperature, discharge and diagnosis of device health are prohibited [121].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the controller configured to: based on the determined number of consecutive puffs being greater than or equal to the predetermined number, perform control such that the heater is heated to a fourth temperature or lower from when inhalation by the user ends to when inhalation by the user is sensed again, wherein the fourth temperature is lower than the third temperature, because doing so would enable device health to be diagnosed without also enabling discharge of the device between the third and fourth temperatures.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Claim 11: the art of record does not teach all three of (1) a first container that can be heated and a second container comprising a plurality of chambers, (2) directly monitoring usages of each of the plurality of chambers, and (3) controlling a heater to increase temperature based on usage of an identified application chamber. Control functions (2) and (3) together depend on structure (1), so the three limitations are tightly linked.
Bless teaches (1) a first container (fig. 4, #510) that can be heated and a second container (520) comprising a plurality of chambers.
Yamada teaches (3) controlling a heater (fig. 1, #121A) to increase temperature based on usage of an identified application chamber (131).
The logical flow of modification stemming from Yamada in view of Bless does not directly monitor each of a plurality of chambers. No teaching, suggestion, or motivation has been found to incorporate identifying control function (2) which bridges structure (1) and heating control function (3).
Claims 12-20 are allowed by dependence on claim 11.
Response to Arguments
Claim 1: applicant’s arguments of 2025 August 28 have been carefully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (p. 10, [3]) that Yamada determines a usage of a first container (Yamada fig. 1, #123) rather than a usage of an application chamber among a plurality of chambers in a second container. However, in the examiner’s proposed modification, modified Yamada does determine a cumulative usage of an application chamber without directly measuring the application chamber.
Yamada teaches a first, precursor-housing container (123) and a second, flavor-housing container (131) with generic structure. Bless teaches a flavor-housing container comprising a plurality of chambers for the benefit of allowing a user to select a desired flavorant, thereby enabling customization. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to use, as Yamada’s generic flavor-housing container, Bless’ specific flavor-housing container having a plurality of flavor-housing chambers.
In the resulting modification, one of ordinary skill expanding Yamada’s number of chambers would be motivated to expand Yamada’s usage determination to determine usage of each chamber, such that each usage reflects each chamber’s flavorant which have distinct delivery forms and properties [Bless 73-74]. One of ordinary skill would accomplish so by making modified Yamada, for each puff, identify which chamber is the application chamber and increment usage for the corresponding chamber.
Claim 11: applicant’s arguments of 2025 August 28 have been carefully considered and are persuasive to move the case towards allowance.
Applicant argues (p. 11, [3] – p. 14, [1]) that applicant’s arguments of 2025 July 29 attacked the examiner’s proposed modification before the examiner established a case of obviousness such that MPEP 2145(IV)’s guidance against attacking references individually does not apply. However, the examiner did establish a case of obviousness in the final rejection of 2025 April 30. The issue appears to hinge on whether (A) applicant disagrees with facts set forth by the examiner (for example, applicant argues that Yamada’s monitoring a first container could not be modified to read on the instant monitoring an application chamber of a second container), or (B) applicant disagrees with the preponderance of obviousness alleged by the examiner (for example, applicant argues that the mere act of combining Yamada and Bless is nonobvious). MPEP 2145(IV) is directed to possibility (B). Now that the crux of the issue has been identified as possibility (A), the examiner’s response on the facts bear the most relevance, as in the above response with respect to claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tobey C. Le whose telephone number is (703)756-5516. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:30-18:30 ET.
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 on 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.
/TOBEY C LE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747