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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamada et al. (WO 2019/146061, reference to US 2020/0352246, note: US reference in IDS dated August 5, 2022).
Regarding claim 1, Yamada teaches an aerosol-generating device (Figure 1A, aerosol-generation device 100A, [0125]) comprising:
a first container configured to accommodate an aerosol-generating substance (Figure 1A, storage unit 116A, [0125]);
a heater configured to heat the aerosol-generating substance (Figure 1A, heater including load 132, [0129]);
a shunt resistor electrically connected to the heater (Figure 2, shunt resistor 212, [0142]),
and configured to receive a voltage corresponding to a current flowing through the heater (Figure 2, sensor 112 detects current and/or voltage flowing through load 132 and/or shunt resistor 212, [0144]);
a puff sensor configured to sense inhalation by a user (Figure 1A, inhaling operation detected by sensor 112, [0127]),
and a controller (Figure 1A, control unit 106, [0134]) configured to:
based on a voltage applied to the shunt resistor being lower than a preset reference voltage, change at least one of a level of electric power supplied to the heater for the heater to generate heat or a time period for which the electric power is supplied (first voltage value is lower than second voltage value and each has a reference value (see [0182]) and based on result, a voltage is applied to the load (i.e., heater) according to changes in temperature of the load (i.e., heater) (see [0151]),
and based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as lower than the reference voltage a number of times which exceeds a predetermined number of times, determine that a remaining amount of the aerosol-generating substance is less than a minimum amount (control unit determines whether preset count value is equal to or greater than predetermined count threshold and if yes, determines that the aerosol source is insufficient in quantity, [0155] and [0156], this process uses the voltage values and references discussed above, (see [0182]))
and decrease the predetermined number of times decreases as a number of puffs according to inhalation by the user increases (count value decreases by 1 for each use, [0189]).
Regarding claim 2, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, wherein after generation of heat by the heater, the controller is configured to:
perform control such that a preset amount of voltage is applied to the heater and the shunt resistor (output voltage of conversion unit is predetermined target voltage [0148]),
and check the voltage applied to the shunt resistor (control unit measures value of voltage applied to shunt resistor using sensor, [0158]).
Regarding claim 3, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a puff sensor configured to sense inhalation by a user (Figure 1A, inhaling operation detected by sensor 112, [0127]),
wherein the predetermined number of times decreases as a number of puffs according to inhalation by the user increases (count value decreases by 1 for each use, [0189]).
Regarding claim 4, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to:
based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as lower than a predetermined first reference voltage, perform control to decrease the level of electric power supplied to the heater and shorten the time period for which the electric power is supplied to the heater (when temperature of load rises voltage applied decreases through the measurement of whether voltage applied to shunt resistor is equal to or lower than predetermined threshold, [0164]),
and based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as higher than or equal to the first reference voltage and lower than a second reference voltage, perform control to decrease the level of electric power supplied to the heater (when temperature of load rises voltage applied decreases through the measurement of whether voltage applied to shunt resistor is equal to or lower than predetermined threshold, which is also equal to or higher than second voltage value, [0164] and [0165]).
Regarding claim 5, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 4, wherein the number of times is a number of times that the voltage applied to the shunt resistor is lower than the first reference voltage (Figure 3, count value is number of times that voltage value is detected as lower than second voltage value, [0155] and [0182]).
Regarding claim 6, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to: based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as lower than a predetermined first reference voltage, perform control to decrease the level of electric power supplied to the heater by a first level heater (when temperature of load rises voltage applied decreases through the measurement of whether voltage applied to shunt resistor is equal to or lower than predetermined threshold, [0164]),
and based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as higher than or equal to than the first reference voltage and lower than a second reference voltage, perform control to decrease the level of electric power supplied to the heater by a second level (when temperature of load rises voltage applied decreases through the measurement of whether voltage applied to shunt resistor is equal to or lower than predetermined threshold, which is also equal to or higher than second voltage value, [0164] and [0165]),
wherein the second level is less than the first level (second voltage value is higher than first voltage value (here the “second voltage value” is equivalent to the first level and the “first voltage value” is equivalent to the second level), [0183]).
Regarding claim 7, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: an amplification circuit configured to amplify the voltage applied to the shunt resistor (Figure 7, circuit 700 including amplifiers 706 and 708, [0215]),
wherein the controller is configured to check the voltage applied to the shunt resistor based on an output voltage of the amplification circuit (Figure 7, circuit 700 includes shunt resistor 212 and obtains a value of the voltage, [0215]).
Regarding claim 8, Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, further comprising: a housing having a reception space formed therein to allow a cartridge including the first container to be inserted thereinto (Figure 1A, housing can hold cartridge 104A, [0125]);
and a cartridge detection sensor configured to sense mounting of the cartridge (control unit detects attachment or detachment of the cartridge, [0191]),
wherein the controller is configured to:
based on mounting of the cartridge sensed using the cartridge detection sensor, perform control such that a preset amount of voltage is applied to the heater and the shunt resistor (control unit detects attachment and allows usage if attached, [0191]),
based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected within a preset range of voltage, control the heater to generate heat, and based on the voltage applied to the shunt resistor being detected as not within the preset range of voltage, determine that the cartridge is unusable (the control unit determines whether the count value is within allowable amount and allows usage based on the result (and is able to reset if a new cartridge is detected), [0192]).
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.
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.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada et al. (WO 2019/146061, reference to US 2020/0352246, note: US reference in IDS dated August 5, 2022) in view of Spencer et al. (WO 2020/0201707, reference to US 2022/0175040, note: WO reference in IDS dated February 11, 2025).
Regarding claim 9, Yamada discloses the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, as set forth above. Yamada fails to disclose the device further comprising: a second container configured to be rotatable about a rotating shaft and comprising a plurality of partitioned chambers, and wherein the plurality of partitioned chambers is arranged around the rotating shaft of the second container.
Spencer teaches a similar aerosol provision system including containers rotatable around a rotating shaft and comprising a plurality of partitioned chambers, and wherein the plurality of partitioned chambers is arranged around the rotating shaft of the container (Figure 1, plurality of doses 114 contained in surface 112 are rotatable around shaft (shown in middle of Figure 1 rotated around axis A), [0024]). Spencer also teaches that providing the plurality of doses that are rotatable allows for the device to rapidly deliver an aerosolized payload to the user and avoid long warmup times of the aerosol [0004].
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 Yamada to incorporate the teachings of Spencer to include a plurality of doses that are rotatable around a shaft because doing so would allow for the device to rapidly deliver an aerosolized payload to the user and avoid long warmup times of the aerosol, as recognized by Spencer [0004].
Regarding claim 10, modified Yamada teaches the aerosol-generating device according to claim 9, further comprising: 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 (Spencer, Figure 1, the movement mechanism 130 may be a Geneva wheel, which is two gears interlocked together, in order to rotate the shaft, [0043]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (pages 6-7 of Remarks) that Yamada’s “count value” and associated features do not correspond (and are opposite) to the “decreasing the predetermined number of times” in amended claim 1, Examiner contends that as currently claimed, the “count value” of Yamada being decreased does meet the limitation as both Yamada and the claims are specific to decreasing a “count value” (Yamada) or “predetermined number of times” (claimed invention), even if the end result of this “decreasing” might be different as argued by Applicant.
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 Adam Z. Baratz whose telephone number is (703)756-1613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30 - 4:30 CT.
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.
/A.Z.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
