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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/18/26 has been entered.
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 15, 16, 18-20, 22, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303).
Claim 15. Hwang et al. discloses a cigarette which may be inserted into a holder. When the cigarette is inserted into the holder, a heater 130 is located in the cigarette. Thus, an aerosol generating material of the cigarette is heated by the heated heater 130, and an aerosol is generated ([0023]). A cigarette 600 may include a tobacco rod 610 (aerosol-generating substrate), a first support segment 620, a second support segment 630 (aerosol-cooling element) (the first support segment 620 and second support segment 630 together forming an intermediate hollow section), and a mouthpiece 640 ([0101]; Figure 6). A length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 4 mm to 30 mm. For example, the length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be about 12 mm ([0077]). A length of the tobacco rod 210/610 (aerosol-generating substrate) may be about 12 mm ([0038]). The length of the cooling structure 222/630 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 7 mm to 20 mm ([0055]). The cooling structure 222 made of the crimped polymer sheet may be formed from a material having a thickness between about 5 μm and about 300 μm, for example, between about 10 μm and about 250 μm ([0060]).
Claim 16. Hwang et al. discloses that the length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 4 mm to 30 mm. For example, the length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be about 12 mm ([0077]). The length of the cooling structure 222/630 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 7 mm to 20 mm ([0055]). Thus, the length of the mouthpiece may be 12mm and the length of the cooling structure may be 7mm (the length of the mouthpiece is at least 2mm greater than the length of the cooling element).
Claim 18. Hwang et al. discloses first support segment 620 (support element) between second support segment 630 (aerosol-cooling element) and tobacco rod 610 (aerosol-generating substrate) (Figure 6). The first support segment 620 may include a tube-shaped structure including a hollow therein ([0104]).
Claim 19. Hwang et al. discloses that the first support segment 620 and the second support segment 630 may include a tube-shaped structure including a hollow therein. An inner diameter of the second support segment 630 may be larger than an inner diameter of the first support segment 620. According to an embodiment, a diameter of the first support segment 620 may be 7 mm to 9 mm, and the inner diameter of the first support segment 620 may be about 2.0 mm to about 4.5 mm. A diameter of the second support segment 630 may be 7 mm to 9 mm, and the inner diameter of the second support segment 630 may be about 3.0 mm to about 5.5 mm, for example, the inner diameter of the second support segment 630 may be 4.0 mm (thus, the ratio between the internal diameter of the second support segment 630 (aerosol-cooling element) and the internal diameter of the first support segment 620 is 4mm to 2mm) ([0104]; Figure 6).
Claim 20. Hwang et al. discloses that the inner diameter of the second support segment 630 (aerosol-cooling element) may be 4.0 mm ([0104]; Figure 6).
Claim 22. Hwang et al. discloses that the length of the cooling structure 222/630 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 7 mm to 20 mm. It is desirable that the length of the cooling structure 222/630 be about 14 mm. However, embodiments of the present disclosure are not limited thereto ([0055]; Figure 6). The first filter segment 221/620 may have an appropriate length within a range of 4 mm to 30 mm. However, embodiments of the present disclosure are not limited thereto ([0049]; Figure 6). Thus, the combined length of the first support segment 620 and second support segment 630 together forming an intermediate hollow section may be 11 mm (7mm cooling structure 222/630 and 4mm first filter segment 221/620).
Claim 26. Hwang et al. discloses that the combined length of the first support segment 620 and second support segment 630 together forming an intermediate hollow section may be 11 mm (7mm cooling structure 222/630 and 4mm first filter segment 221/620) ([0049]; [0055]; Figure 6) while the length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be appropriately employed from within a range of 4 mm to 30 mm. For example, the length of the mouthpiece 340/640 may be about 12 mm ([0077]).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 17 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303) in view of Koltyga (WO 2014/158051).
Claim 17. Hwang et al. discloses the article of claim 15 but does not explicitly disclose wherein the aerosol-cooling element further comprises a ventilation zone provided at a location along the hollow tubular segment of the aerosol-cooling element.
Koltyga discloses a wrapped rod 12 of tobacco cut filler which is attached at one end to an axially aligned filter 14. The filter 14 comprises a single segment 18 of cellulose acetate tow and a first cavity 16 provided between the tobacco rod 12 and the filter segment 18 (Page 7, lines 24-34). The mouthpiece wrapper may be provided with one or more ventilation zones about the first cavity. The ventilation zone may be provided around the upstream half of the first cavity, or the downstream half of the first cavity (Page 6, lines 1-8).
Koltyga teaches that the ventilation zone about the first cavity advantageously introduces cooler air into the first cavity as a consumer draws on the smoking article, which results in cooling of the aerosol entering the first cavity from the aerosol generating substrate. Cooling of the aerosol facilitates condensation of the particulate phase of the aerosol and therefore further reduces visible staining of the first segment of filtration material (Page 6, lines 1-8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a ventilation zone along the hollow tubular segment of the aerosol-cooling element in order to facilitate condensation of the particulate phase of the aerosol and therefore further reduce visible staining of the first segment of filtration material as taught by Koltyga.
Claim 29. Modified Hwang et al. does not explicitly disclose that the ventilation zone is located at about 2 millimetres from an upstream end of the second hollow tubular segment. However, Koltyga teaches that the ventilation zone may be provided around the upstream half of the first cavity, or the downstream half of the first cavity (Page 6, lines 1-8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the ventilation zone may be located at about 2 millimetres from an upstream end of the second hollow tubular segment.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303) in view of Nappi et al. (WO 2017/148773).
Claim 21. Hwang et al. discloses the article of claim 15 but does not explicitly disclose wherein a resistance to draw (RTD) of the aerosol-cooling element is less than 10 millimetres H20.
Nappi teaches a similar smoking article with a hollow tube segment wherein the resistance to draw of the hollow tube segment is between about 2 mm H20 and 10 mm H20 [0011]. Nappi also teaches that it is desired for the hollow tube to not substantially contribute to the resistance to draw (meaning low RTD) of the smoking article in order to allow smoke and air to freely flow through the hollow tubular area [0010] and [0011].
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 further modified Hwang et al. to incorporate the teachings of Nappi to provide the hollow tubular segment with a resistance to draw between about 2-10 mm H2O because doing so would not substantially contribute to the resistance to draw of the smoking article in order to allow smoke and air to freely flow through the hollow tubular area, as recognized by Nappi
[0010] and [0011].
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303).
Claim 27. Hwang et al. discloses the article of claim 15 wherein the tobacco rod is heated by a heater 130 ([0036]; [0053]-[0054]) but does not explicitly disclose that the heater is an inductive heating member wherein the aerosol-generating substrate comprises an elongate susceptor element extending in a longitudinal direction through the rod of aerosol-generating substrate. However, inductor/susceptor heating configurations are notoriously well known in the art and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the article of Hwang et al. may be heated by an inductive heating arrangement.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303) in view of Terao (US 2017/0340005).
Claim 28. Hwang et al. discloses the article of claim 15 but does not explicitly disclose that the rod of aerosol-generating substrate comprises a gel composition.
Terao teaches a gel-like composition for use in smoking goods (abstract). Terao also teaches that the advantage of this gel-like composition are at least in part to avoid the "loose end" phenomenon, make the formulation easily aerosolize with heat, and present a good smoking flavor [0005] and [0013].
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 further modified Hwang et al. to incorporate the teachings of Terao to make the aerosol-generating substrate a gel formulation because doing so would avoid the "loose end" phenomenon and allow for the formulation to be easily aerosolized with heat, and present a good smoking flavor, as recognized by Terao [0005] and [0013].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art is Hwang et al. (US 2021/0259303). Hwang et al. discloses the article of claim 15 but does not disclose or suggest an upstream element provided upstream of the tobacco rod 610 (aerosol-generating substrate).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments concern claim amendments that are addressed in the rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katherine A Will whose telephone number is (571)270-0516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00AM-6:00PM(EST).
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 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.
/KATHERINE A WILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1747