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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 19 September 2025 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 19 September 2025:
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-13, 15-21 and 22-24 are pending
Claim 1 and 15 are amended
Claims 5, 8, 14 and 21 are cancelled
Claims 22-24 are new
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 19 September 2025, with respect to the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended Claim 1 to explicitly state that the insulation sleeve is “arranged against the heating chamber” and argues that modifying Egoyants with Carpanzano simply place the insulation inside of the Egoyant’s disclosed casing and not against the actual heating chamber. Examiner agrees with the Applicant’s argument and therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chau et al (Publication No. US20200297028A1).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 13, 18 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
On Page 7 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that adding a casing or packaging material to Carpanzano’s disclosed fibers would not be obvious considering that said fibers would already be modified to be within a metal casing as disclosed by Egoyants and therefore does not necessitate the casing to increase cohesion. As Examiner no longer relies on Egoyants, the argument is moot.
On Page 8 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that the thickness of the insulation as disclosed by Egoyants is very different from that disclosed by Carpanzano and therefore would not have looked upon Carpanzano to use a sheet of a thickness of at most 5mm in the device disclosed by Egoyants. As Examiner no longer relies on Egoyants, this argument is moot.
The following is a new rejection based on amendments to the claims and the newly found prior art.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the washer or ring must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 23 is indefinite for reciting “an opposite end of the heating chamber” because it is unclear what end is being referred to in relation to the “opposite end”. Since Claim 23 is dependent on Claim 22 which discloses an end comprising a flange, it would appear that the “opposite end” may refer to an end that is opposite to the end comprising the flange.
For examination purposes the term “an opposite end of the heating chamber” is interpreted as “an opposite end of the heating chamber opposite to the end with the formed flange”.
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.
Claim 1-4, 6-7, 9-10, 12-13, 15-17, 19-20 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chau et al (Publication No. US20200297028A1) in view of Carpanzano et al (Publication No. US20130105746A1 cited in IDS dated 05 October 2022).
Regarding Claim 1, Chau discloses an aerosol generating device (Device 1000) comprising:
a heating chamber (Figs. 1-3; [0030]; Heating tube 3)
and an insulation sleeve (Fig. 2; [0034]; Insulating layer 4);
wherein the insulation sleeve is arranged against the heating chamber (3) (see Fig. 2; [0034]; discloses the insulation sleeve layer to be disposed against the outer side of the heating tube chamber).
Chau further discloses the insulating layer may comprise of ceramic (i.e., non-organic) fibers [0034]. Chau does not disclose the following:
the insulation sleeve comprises natural organic fibres, wherein the natural organic fibres comprise at least one of: hemp fibres, banana fibres, sisal fibres, kenaf fibres, and jute fibres;
and wherein the insulation sleeve is comprised of a sheet, pad or mat including the natural organic fibres.
Regarding (I-II), Carpanzano, directed to a thermal insulation material, discloses said material comprises of microfibers from stem fibers of banana fruit trees (i.e., natural organic fibers) that can be formed into sheets [Abstract, 0045]. The thermal insulation made of banana fruit tree stem fibers, being natural fibers, have the advantage of being recyclable and also costing less to manufacture as be used in their natural state as raw material, without requiring treatments or extractions [0013-0014, 0039].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve disclosed by Chau to comprise natural organic fibers such as banana fibers formed into a sheet as disclosed by Carpanzano, as both are directed to a thermal insulation fiber material, where Carpanzano teaches the advantage of using banana stalk fibers for insulation material as it is less costly and more quick to manufacture in comparison to other insulation materials [0013-0014, 0039]; this also involves applying a known teaching to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2, Chau further discloses that the aerosol generating device (1000) is configured to detachably contain and to heat an aerosol generation consumable (Cigarette 100) (Figs. 1-3; [0030, 0035]; Discloses that the heating chamber is used to receive/contain the cigarette; the cigarette is stated to be inserted into the device which implies that it is detachable).
Regarding Claim 3, Chau further discloses the insulation sleeve (4) is configured to insulate heat ([0034]; sleeve layer is used for isolating/insulating heat to protect electronics).
Regarding Claim 4, Carpanzano further discloses the natural organic fibers have a thermal conductivity of at most 0.10 W/m.K ([0048]; Banana fiber insulation material has a thermal conductivity of about 0.038 W/m.K which is less than 0.10 W/m.K).
Regarding Claim 6, Carpanzano further discloses the natural organic fibers are banana peel or stalk (i.e., stem) fibers [0019-0020].
Regarding Claim 7, Carpanzano further discloses the natural organic fibers are microfibers (Abstract); said microfibers having an average diameter of at most 1 mm and of at least 0.01 mm [0041].
Regarding Claim 9, Modified Chau does not disclose natural organic fibers being combined with a binder.
However, Carpanzano, directed to a thermal insulation material, discloses said material comprising of microfibers from stem fibers of banana fruit trees (i.e., natural organic fibers) that are mixed with a binder (Carpanzano, [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve of Modified Chau to comprise natural organic fibers such as banana fibers that are mixed with a binder as disclosed by Carpanzano, as both are directed to a thermal insulation material, where Carpanzano teaches the advantage of mixing organic fibers with a binder to improve their cohesion and agglomeration (Carpanzano, [0061]); this also involves applying a known teaching/technique to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 10, Carpanzano further discloses the binder is a dry fibrous binder, an aqueous organic binder, or an inorganic aqueous binder [0062-0064].
Regarding Claim 12, Chau further discloses the sleeve (4) is comprised of a material having a thickness less than 20 mm ([0034]; discloses insulation sleeve layer has a thickness ranging from 1 to 5 mm; disclosed thickness range is less than 20 mm as recited in the instant claim).
Regarding Claim 13, Modified Chau does not explicitly teach the sleeve further comprises a casing or packaging material.
However, Carpanzano, directed to a thermal insulation material, discloses said material comprising of microfibers from stem fibers of banana fruit trees (i.e., natural organic fibers) that are mixed with a binder to make them cohesive and improve their agglomeration ( [0061]; binder is considered equivalent to casing/packaging material).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve of Modified Chau to comprise natural organic fibers such as banana fibers that are mixed with a binder (i.e., casing/packaging material) as disclosed by Carpanzano, as both are directed to a thermal insulation material, where Carpanzano teaches the advantage of mixing organic fibers with a binder to improve their cohesion and agglomeration (Carpanzano, [0061]); this also involves applying a known teaching/technique to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 15, Chau further discloses the sheet or mat having an average thickness of at most about 5 mm ([0034]; discloses insulation sleeve layer has a thickness ranging from 1 to 5 mm; the disclosed thickness range is within the claimed range of at most about 5 mm).
Regarding Claim 16, Chau further discloses the insulation sleeve (4) substantially has a shape of a cylinder (see Figs. 2-4; heating tube 3 is shown to have a cylindrical shape; the insulation sleeve layer is disclosed to be disposed on the outer side of said tubular/cylindrical heating tube which implies that said layer will also have a cylindrical/tubular shape).
Regarding Claim 17, Egoyants further discloses the insulation sleeve is arranged between a heating assembly (Heating tube 3) comprised in the aerosol generating device (1000) and a housing (1) of the aerosol generating device (Figs. 1, 3, annotated Fig. 2; [0030, 0033-0034]; the heating tube is disclosed to also act as a heating element that heats the aerosol-generating cigarette consumable, and therefore is considered equivalent to a heating assembly; as shown in annotated Fig. 2 below, the insulation sleeve layer is between the heating chamber and housing).
PNG
media_image1.png
1050
840
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Carpanzano further discloses the natural organic fibers are combined via compaction (i.e., non-woven method) [0042]. They do not disclose the fibers being combined in a woven method.
However, it is known in the art that fibers can either be woven together or combined together with a non-weaving method (such as compaction) to bind the fibers together into various shape forms such as a sheet, board, or roll. Therefore, one ordinarily skilled in the art would find it obvious to try and form the insulation sleeve from fibers by weaving said fibers together with a reasonable expectation of success (see MPEP § 2143.I.E).
Regarding Claim 20, Carpanzano further discloses the natural organic fibers are combined via compaction (i.e., non-woven method) ([0042]; compacting fibers is a combination method that doesn’t involve weaving the fibers).
Regarding Claim 24, Chau discloses an aerosol generating device (Device 1000) comprising:
an insulation sleeve (Fig. 2; [0034]; Insulating layer 4);
the aerosol generating device (1000) further comprising a heating chamber (Heating tube 3) having a tube part (Figs. 1-3; [0030]; the heating chamber is shown to be a tube which is equivalent to having a tube part);
the heating chamber (3) is surrounded by the insulation sleeve (4) (Figs. 1-3; [0034]; discloses the insulation sleeve layer is disposed on the outer side of the heating chamber which implies that it surrounds said chamber);
and the insulation sleeve (4) abutting (i.e., disposed on) the tube part of the heating chamber (3) (see Figs. 2-3; [0034]; discloses the insulation sleeve layer is disposed on the outer side of the heating chamber which is considered equivalent to abutting against the heating chamber via the outer side).
Chau further discloses the insulating layer may comprise of ceramic (i.e., non-organic) fibers [0034]. Chau does not disclose the following:
the insulation sleeve comprises natural organic fibres, wherein the natural organic fibres comprise at least one of: hemp fibres, banana fibres, sisal fibres, kenaf fibres, and jute fibres;
and wherein the insulation sleeve is comprised of a sheet, pad or mat including the natural organic fibres.
Regarding (I-II), Carpanzano, directed to a thermal insulation material, discloses said material comprises of microfibers from stem fibers of banana fruit trees (i.e., natural organic fibers) that can be formed into sheets [Abstract, 0045]. The thermal insulation made of banana fruit tree stem fibers, being natural fibers, have the advantage of being recyclable and also costing less to manufacture as be used in their natural state as raw material, without requiring treatments or extractions [0013-0014, 0039].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve disclosed by Chau to comprise natural organic fibers such as banana fibers formed into a sheet as disclosed by Carpanzano, as both are directed to a thermal insulation fiber material, where Carpanzano teaches the advantage of using banana stalk fibers for insulation material as it is less costly and more quick to manufacture in comparison to other insulation materials [0013-0014, 0039]; this also involves applying a known teaching to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Claims 11 and 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chau et al (Publication No. US20200297028A1) in view of Carpanzano et al (Publication No. US20130105746A1 cited in IDS dated 05 October 2022) as applied to Claim 9 and 13 above, and further in view of Wihsmann et al (Patent No. US6086998).
Regarding Claim 11, Modified Chau further discloses that the insulation material consists of at least 50% banana microfibers (i.e., natural organic fibers) (Carpanzano, [0040]; overlaps with the claimed range of at least 60% natural organic fibers) but does not explicitly state that it is by weight percentage.
However, Wihsmann, directed to a fiber product as an insulating material, discloses said fiber product comprising of cellulose fibers derived from various sources such as hemp, jute, coconut, or flax (i.e., natural organic fibers) which comprise 50 to 97% by weight of the insulation material/fiber product (Wihsmann, Col. 2, Lines 13-22). The cellulose fibers and fiber composition disclosed by Wihsmann generate a nonflammable boron-free insulation product that is also inexpensive to produce as the fibers can be sourced from recycled material waste containing cellulose that typically would have been incinerated (Col. 1, Lines 47-54). The fiber composition range disclosed by Wihsmann overlap with the range disclosed in Claim 11 and are therefore considered prima facie obvious (See MPEP § 2144.05.I).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve comprising of natural organic fibers of Modified Chau to have a fiber composition of 57-90% by weight as disclosed by Wihsmann as both are directed to an insulation material, where Wihsmann teaches the advantage of using natural organic fibers to create a nonflammable boron-free fiber insulation product that is inexpensive to manufacture (Col. 1, Lines 47-54); and this applies a known teaching of an insulation fiber composition to a similar insulation material to yield a predictable result of an insulation component comprising of natural organic fibers that is capable of heat insulation.
Regarding Claim 18, Modified Chau does not explicitly disclose that the casing or packaging material (i.e., binder) is Phenol formaldehyde or Urea formaldehyde.
However, Wihsmann, directed to a fibrous insulating material, discloses said material comprises of fiber materials such as flax, hemp, or jute that are bonded together using a phenol-formaldehyde resin binder to mold the fiber product into boards or other molded articles (Wihsmann, Col. 3, Lines 54-58).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the insulation sleeve of Modified Chau to further comprise a phenol formaldehyde binder resin (i.e., packaging material) as disclosed by Wihsmann as both are directed to an insulation material, where Wihsmann teaches the advantage of using binder as it improves the moldability of the fiber product (Wihsmann, Col. 3, Lines 54-56); and this also involves applying a known teaching/technique to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Claims 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chau et al (Publication No. US20200297028A1) in view of Carpanzano et al (Publication No. US20130105746A1 cited in IDS dated 05 October 2022) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Hu et al (Publication No. US20230337738A1).
Regarding Claim 22, Modified Chau does not disclose the following:
a flange formed at an end of the heating chamber;
and is configured to abut the insulation sleeve that is disposed over the heating chamber.
Regarding (I), Hu, directed to an aerosol generating device, discloses a heating mechanism (20) comprising a tubular base (231) that defines a chamber (232) for receiving and heating a smokable material (A) (i.e., aerosol generating consumable) (Fig. 2; [0075, 0078]; the heating mechanism’s components form the chamber that heats the consumable and therefore is considered equivalent to a heating chamber).
The heating mechanism (20) (i.e., heating chamber) further comprises an upper support element (40) (i.e., flange) formed at an end of said heating mechanism chamber to provide support to a tube-shaped heat insulating element (30) (i.e., heat insulation sleeve) arranged on (i.e., disposed over) the outside of the heating mechanism, and stably retain said insulating sleeve element within the device shell/housing (see Fig. 2; [0075-0076]; the upper support element is disclosed to be a ring and shown to have a protruding ridge that is considered equivalent to a flange).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the heating chamber disclosed by Modified Chau to further comprise a flange at one end of said heating chamber as disclosed by Hu, as both are directed to an aerosol generating device with an insulating sleeve/element, where Hu teaches the advantage of using a flange/supporting element to provide support to the insulating sleeve so that it is stably retained with the device’s shell/housing [0076].
Regarding (II), it should be noted that rearrangement of parts without modifying the operation of the device is held to be an obvious matter of design choice that gives predictable results (see MPEP § 2144.04.VI.C). In this case, Hu illustrates the flange (40) being next to the insulating element (30), while stating that said flange/support element is meant to provide support to the insulating element to retain it (see Fig. 2; [0076]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious design choice for one ordinarily skilled in the art to arrange the flange support next to the insulating element such that the two components abut each other, and predictably result in said flange support providing support and retaining the insulating sleeve.
Regarding Claim 23, Modified Chau does not disclose a ring is provided at an end of the heating chamber opposite to the end with the formed flange, to maintain the insulation sleeve in place against the heating chamber.
However, Hu, directed to an aerosol generating device, discloses a heating mechanism (20) comprising a tubular base (231) that defines a chamber (232) for receiving and heating a smokable material (A) (i.e., aerosol generating consumable) (Fig. 2; [0075, 0078]; the heating mechanism’s components form the chamber that heats the consumable and therefore is considered equivalent to a heating chamber).
The heating mechanism (20) (i.e., heating chamber) further comprises a ring-shaped lower support element (50) (i.e., ring) formed at an end of said heating mechanism chamber opposite to an end with an upper support element (40) (i.e., flange) to provide support to a tube-shaped heat insulating element (30) (i.e., heat insulation sleeve) arranged on (i.e., disposed over) the outside of the heating mechanism, and stably retain said insulating sleeve element within the device shell/housing (see Fig. 2; [0075-0076]; the heating mechanism/chamber and insulating element are disposed adjacent to each other; since the support is disclosed to maintain/retain the insulating element inside the shell, it also implies that the current position of said insulating element against the heating chamber is maintained).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the heating chamber disclosed by Modified Chau to further comprise a ring at a heating chamber end opposite of the end forming the flange as disclosed by Hu, as both are directed to an aerosol generating device with an insulating sleeve/element, where Hu teaches the advantage of using a flange/supporting element to provide support to the insulating sleeve so that it is stably retained with the device’s shell/housing [0076].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Vu P Pham whose telephone number is (703)756-4515. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th (7:30AM-4:00PM 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, Philip Louie can be reached at (571) 270-1241. 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.
/V.P./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755