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 .
Response to Amendment
The Response of 03/12/2026 is entered. Independent claims 1 and 8are amended.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2-8, 10-15 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant amended both independent claims, any changes to the rejections below were necessitated by these amendments.
Applicant amended claim 1 to require a new limitation requiring that the first filter segment and the second filter segment to include a same plurality of fiber strands, where the plurality of fiber stands extend from one end of the filter to the other end of the filter. Applicant amended claim 8 to require a new limitation requiring that the first filter segment to include the plurality of heterogeneous material particles and a second filter segment without the plurality of heterogeneous material particles formed from a same filter tow such that the plurality of fiber strands extend from one end of the filter to the other end of the filter, where the first filter segment and the second filter segment are not physically separated.
Applicant asserts that Figlar only discloses a filter comprising a plurality of compartments, each compartment being physically separated and containing different filter fibers, Remarks pg 8 lines 14-15 and relying on excerpts and depictions from Figlar reproduced on pg 8-9. This reading of Figlar is too narrow.
Figlar discloses a multi-section filter for a cigarette, where a first section comprises a general absorbent and a second section comprises a selective absorbant in separate sections within a single length of fibrous filter material, ([0028] Fig 7), Figlar discloses a plurality of fibrous strands extending from one end of a filter to another, with a first type of heterogeneous particles in a portion of that fibrous filter material and a portion of the fibrous filter material without the first type of heterogeneous particles, without any separation of the fibrous filter material.
PNG
media_image1.png
424
999
media_image1.png
Greyscale
There is no separation in the filter element (ref 630) as depicted, and the description makes clear that the different absorbents are dispersed in separate sections within a single length of fibrous filter material, as opposed to other embodiments where physically separate and assembled together.
Likewise, Applicant is reading the disclosure of Wang too narrowly. Wang discloses that the granular additives can be arranged in any way along an axial direction of the filter rod, dosage positions and intervals of various granular additives can be adjusted and changed randomly, ([0027]). So while Wang is capable of a highly arranged patterned distribution in the filter tow, this is not a requirement, and a random distribution of the additives, as depicted in Filgar, is within the teaching of Wang because Wang is capable of causing the granular additives to be arranged “any way”. Wang teaches a technique for adjusting the dispersion of powder-like granular additives, decreasing the velocity of the transporting airflow, creating a wider more dispersed distribution of the additives in the tow, ([0040]).
Applicant further argues that Wang does not disclose that the plurality of fiber strands extend from one end of the filter to the other wherein the first filter segment and the second segment are not physically separated, Remarks pg 10 1st paragraph. This does not appear to be a fair treatment of Wang, which discloses a method of forming a cigarette filter rod which features smooth and steady conveying of feed stock and is able to add multiple additives during the manufacture process, ([0009]), where the additives are added to filter tow through manifolds in accordance with certain time intervals, ([0016]).
Examiner’s understanding of Wang is that the additives are added at intervals to the continuously moving tow, and Wang is capable of creating the bands of dispersed additives within the tow, such that cut rods formed of the tow may include two portions, a first portion containing an additive and a second portion without the additive, in a single cut rod with a plurality of fibers extending from one end of the cut rod to the other.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-8, 10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figlar et al. (US 2004/0237984 A1), in view of Wang et al. (US 2015/0148207 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Figlar discloses a filter included in an aerosol-generating article, ([0006]).
FIglar discloses a plurality of embodiments comprising multiple filter segments, (see examples depicted in Fig 2-7), where segments without particles are present, segments with a first type of particles are present, and segments with a second type of particles are present, and where the first type of particles and the second type of particles are confined to particular segments.
Figlar discloses an embodiment of a multi-section filter where a general absorbent and a selective absorbent are dispersed in separate sections within a single length of fibrous filter material, ([0028]).
Figlar discloses an embodiment where a first filter segment including a first filter element comprising a plurality of fiber strands, with a plurality of heterogeneous material particles randomly dispersed between the plurality of fiber strands, ([0021]).
Figlar discloses an embodiment where a second filter segment including a second filter element comprising the plurality of fiber strands without the plurality of heterogeneous material particles dispersed between the plurality of fiber strands, ([0020]); and
a wrapper wrapping the first filter segment and the second filter segment, wherein the first filter segment and the second filter segment are aligned in a longitudinal direction of the filter, ([0018]), and
wherein the plurality of heterogeneous material particles are at least one selected from a group consisting of activated carbon particles, ([0021), and tobacco particles.
Figlar discloses the first filter segment including the plurality of heterogeneous material particles and the second segment without the plurality of heterogeneous material particles are formed from the same filter tow such that the plurality of fiber strands extend from one end of the filter to the other end of the filter, where the first filter segment and the second filter segment are not physically separated, ([0028] Fig 7).
Wang teaches a method for forming a cigarette filter rod with multiple granular additives, ([0009]), and is thus within the inventor’s field of endeavor. Wang teaches s device for furling filter material tows, and having a manifold of additives, and a doseage allocation unite capable of dispensing additives in accordance with a certain time interval, ([0016]). Wang teaches that with a method and device for forming a cigarette filter rod, a filter rod containing multiple granular additives can be formed in one step, with multiple granular additives that can be combined and arranged in any way along an axial direction of the filter rod, with dosage positions and intervals of various granular additives that can be adjusted and changed randomly, ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made the multi-segment filter of Figlar, according to the method of Wang, to produce the multi-segment filter by a method where the segments are not physically separated, to provide a simplified manufacturing process as taught by Wang, ([0027]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Figlar discloses the filter according to claim 1, Figlar further discloses the at least one plurality of heterogeneous material particles include activated carbon particles, ([0025]), and the first filter segment includes the activated carbon particles of 0.5 mg/mm to 5 mg/mm in the longitudinal direction of the filter, ([0025]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Figlar discloses the filter according to claim 1, Figlar further discloses the first filter segment and the second filter segment have a length ratio of 1:0.5 to 1.5 in the longitudinal direction of the filter, ([0025] the first filter segment has activated carbon disclosed as having a length of 10mm, the second filter segment is the end plug with no carbon and has a length of 7 mm).
Regarding claim 8, modified Figlar discloses the filter according to claim 1. Figlar by disclosing the filter is wrapped with a plug wrap, ([0018]), renders obvious a step of wrapping the filter tow with the plurality of heterogeneous material particles dispersed between the plurality of fiber strands at the preset length interval with a wrapper.
Wang teaches a method of making the filter by transporting a filter tow in one direction, ([0011] conveying forward cigarette filter materials that tend to furl to have a rod shape),
modifying a first filter element comprising a plurality of fiber strands of the filter tow, with a plurality of heterogeneous material particles randomly dispersed between the plurality of fiber strands at a preset length interval by injecting the plurality of heterogeneous material particles with a preset weight into the filter tow being transported at a preset period, ([0016], [0027], [0038]);
and cutting the filter tow wrapped with the wrapper into filters each including the plurality of heterogeneous material particles, wherein the plurality of heterogeneous material particles are at least one selected from a group consisting of activated carbon particles and tobacco particles, ([0039]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made the filter of modified Figlar according to the method of Wang. The teachings of Wang are considered to produce the limitations where a single filter tow with a plurality of fiber strands extend from one end to the other end of the filter, have a first segment comprising the plurality of heterogeneous material particles and the second segment does not, where the first segment and the second segment are not physically separated. Wang teaches the advantages of this method, ([0027]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Figlar discloses the method according to claim 8. Figlar further discloses the at least one plurality of heterogeneous material particles include activated carbon particles, ([0025]), and the first filter segment includes the activated carbon particles of 0.5 mg/mm to 5 mg/mm in the longitudinal direction of the filter, ([0025]).
It would be obvious to modify the method of Wang to achieve the activated particle dosing according to the requirements of Figlar, to provide a filter with the activated carbon amounts disclosed by Figlar.
Regarding claim 12, modified Figlar discloses the method according to claim 8. Figlar further discloses an embodiment with the filter segment with activated carbon is 10 mm long, ([0025]).
It would be obvious to modify the method of Wang to achieve a segment with activated particles dosed over 10 mm according to the requirements of Figlar, to provide a filter with the activated carbon according to the length disclosed by Figlar.
Regarding claim 13, modified Figlar discloses the method according to claim 8.
Wang teaches a method where the plurality of heterogeneous material particles are injected at the preset length interval by injecting the plurality of heterogeneous material particles with the preset weight into the filter tow being transported at the preset period, and causing the filter tow into which the plurality of heterogeneous material particles are injected at the preset length interval to pass through a compressor and compressing the filter tow, ([0040] disclosing that by using a low velocity airflow to inject the particles, a more difuse distribution of particles is achieved, Fig 1 (the injecting occurring within compressing funnel, which compresses the tow both before and after the injection of the particulates).
Regarding claim 14, modified Figlar discloses the method according to claim 8. Wang discloses injected at a preset length interval by injecting the heterogeneous material particle with a preset weight into the filter tow being transported at a preset period, ([0040] disclosing that by using a low velocity airflow to inject the particles, a more difuse distribution of particles is achieved, Fig 1 (the injecting occurring within compressing funnel, which compresses the tow both before and after the injection of the particulates), the injection of the particles into the filter tow is done via injection gas, ([0040]).
Claim(s) 4 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figlar et al. (US 2004/0237984 A1) and Wang et al. (US 2015/0148207 A1), as applied to claim 1, and in further view of SolCarb 208CM 30x70 Calgon Carbon Corporation 2013.
Regarding claims 4 and 11, modified Figlar discloses the filter according to claim 1. Figlar discloses using activated coconut carbon, but not the diameter of the particles of the coconut carbon.
Solcarb teaches a coconut based granular activated carbon for use in cigarette filters, ([paragraph 1 under description section]), and is thus within the inventor’s field of endeavor. Solcarb teaches the particulate sizes vary from 30 mesh (corresponding to 0.6 mm) to 70 mesh (corresponding to 0.212 mm), with 94% of the carbon falling within these ranges, ([specifications table under properties section).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a commercially available activated carbon from Solcarb to include in the filter of Figlar, and the method of making the filter of Figlar, because although Figlar discloses the use of activated carbon Figlar does not suggest a particular activated carbon or specifications of the carbon for use in the filter, and one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably believe that Solcarb is would work in the filter because it is designed to work in cigarette filters.
Claim(s) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figlar et al. (US 2004/0237984 A1) and Wang et al. (US 2015/0148207 A1), as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Coleman, III et al. (US 2007/0056600 A1).
Regarding claim 6 and 15, modified Figlar discloses the filter according to claim 1. Figlar discloses that the filter is wrapped in a filter plug wrap, but does not indicate whether the plug wrap is perforated, ([0018], Fig 1).
Coleman teaches a smoking article with a filter that includes an effective amount of activated charcoal, ([0005]), and is thus within the inventor’s field of endeavor. Coleman teaches providing an optional air dilution means, such as a series of perforations, ([0019]), for the obvious purpose of providing a diluted aerosol stream to a smoker, according to their preferences.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have further modified the invention of Figlar according to the teachings of Coleman, and provided at least one perforation in the wrapper of Figlar, and a step of perforating the wrapper, to provide ventilation in the filter and deliver a diluted aerosol stream to the smoker, to accommodate user preferences.
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 DANIEL E VAKILI whose telephone number is (571)272-5171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30 pm.
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.
/D.E.V./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights