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 .
This office action is in response to preliminary amendment filed on 02/15/2023. As directed by the amendment, claims 1-21 were canceled, claims 22, 41, and 44 were amended, and no claims were newly added. Thus, claims 22-47 are presently pending in this application.
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 “a locking mechanism” of claim 23 line 2 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 Objections
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 9 reads “andis” should be corrected to --and is-- for spelling correctness.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an actuating mechanism” of claim 22 line 6, claim 38 line 5, claim 41 line 7, claim 43 line 7, claim 44 line 6
“a locking mechanism” of claim 23 line 2
“an element” of claim 25 lines 1-2, and claim 28 lines 1-2, and claim 31 lines 1-2
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 26-30 and 35-47 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.
Regarding claim 26 line 3, the term “a sensor” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than “at least one sensor” of claim 22 line 8.
Regarding claim 27 line 3, the term “the storage device” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 28 line 1-2, the term “an element” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than “an element” of claim 25 lines 1-2.
Regarding claim 29 line 3, the term “the user” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 30 line 3, the term “a data signal” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than “a data signal” of claim 22 line 12.
Regarding claim 35 line 3, the term “an inhaler according to claim 22” is unclear as to if the term “an inhaler” is the same or different than claim 22 line 1. In line 5, the term “the terminal device” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 37 line 1, the term “the terminal” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 38 line 9, the term “a person” is unclear as to if the term is referring to a same or different person compared to “a user” introduced in line 4.
Regarding claim 40 line 4, the term “the authorised person” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 41 line 3, the term “an inhaler” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than claim 38 line 2. In line 6, the term “a mouthpiece” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than claim 38 line 2.
Regarding claim 43 line 5, the term “the current user” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis. In line 7, the term “the actuating mechanism” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 44 line 2, the terms “a mouthpiece” and “a sensor” are unclear as to if the terms are the same or different than claim 43 lines 1 and 2 respectively. In line 5, the term “a mouthpiece” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than claim 43 line 1 or claim 44 line 2. In line 6, the term “an actuating mechanism” is unclear as to if the term is the same or different than claim 43 line 7.
Regarding claim 44 line 9 and claim 45 line 2, the term “a person” is unclear as to if the term is referring to a same or different person compared to “the current user” in claim 43 line 5.
Regarding claim 45 line 2, the term “a person” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 46 line 3, the term “the lips” is indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis.
Any remaining claims are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
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 22-31 and 35-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tremblay (US 2015/0181945).
Regarding claim 22, Tremblay discloses an inhaler, configured and adapted for inhaling an inhalation medium enriched with active ingredients and/or flavouring substances (electronic vaping device 100; [0059] substance includes a liquid that may contain nicotine, product that is flavored, etc.), comprising:
a cartridge carrier (housing 115);
a storage tank which contains the inhalation medium (container 124; [0059] stores substance to provide the vapor drawable by the user);
a mouthpiece associated with the cartridge carrier (outlet 152; [0051] user “vapes”, i.e. draw vapor through an outlet 152);
an actuating mechanism for releasing the inhalation medium out of the storage tank in a direction of the mouthpiece (regulator 140/141 including electrical circuit device 142/143; [0089-0092] regulator cuts off power to (i.e. disables) the fluid-drawing detector 154 when desired, or to one or more components such as the heater of the vapor producer 120. Cutting off the heater prevents vapor from being produced to the user, or cutting off the detector 154 stops the vapor from being produced. The turning on/off of vital components of the device is actuating the inhalation medium from releasing);
at least one sensor associated with the mouthpiece (Fig. 6 depicts user interface 150 comprising outlet 152, then [0176] user interface receives authorization information 750 via a “biometric sensor”), the sensor being configured and adapted to detect characteristics of lips of a person using the inhaler and to provide a data signal formed from the characteristics ([0198-0199] e-cigarette 100 acquires buccal biometric input 520, where it can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips. The biometric sensor of [0176] could measure this buccal biometric input); and
an electronic control unit (control system 130, Fig. 5), the sensor and the actuating mechanism being connected to the electronic control unit such that the inhalation medium is released on a basis of the data signal (Sensor: User interface 150, comprising biometric sensor collecting buccal biometric input 520, is within Control system 130. Actuating mechanism: [0091-0092] Regulator 140/141 comprises electrical circuit 142/143 for running fluid-drawing detector 154, which communicates directly with controller 160, part of Control system 130. Overall: [0198] unauthorized use of cigarette 100 is prevented (i.e. actuation is not completed) when the sensor does not recognize buccal biometrics of an authorized user).
Regarding claim 23, Tremblay discloses the actuating mechanism comprises a locking mechanism configured and adapted to enable and prevent release of the inhalation medium by the electronic control unit based on the data signal (Figs. 8-10 regulators 140, 141, 144 comprise locking mechanisms in the forms of electrical circuit devices 142, 143 or valve 145; [0089] “the electrical circuit device 142 may be an electrical switch, relay, fuse, circuit breaker, etc. for altering supply of power from the power source 110 to one or more components of the fluid-drawing detector 154”; [0092] valve 145 (electrically-controlled valve) prevents fluid flow).
Regarding claim 24, Tremblay discloses the locking mechanism is configured to be mechanical and/or electronic and/or electromechanical and/or computer-implemented or a combination of the aforementioned (see rejection to claim 23, where electrical circuit devices 141, 142 are electronic, electromechanical, and computer-bases; and valve 145 is mechanical, controlled by a computer/electrically).
Regarding claim 25, Tremblay discloses an element configured and adapted to convert the data signal formed by the at least one sensor into a biometric signature ([0201] buccal biometric reference obtained during programming phase 510, during which controller first takes the input and then utilizes the input. This can include reprogramming), wherein the biometric signature forms an electronic lock as the locking mechanism for the actuating mechanism (Fig. 27 biometric input is compared in order to determine action of the e-cigarette 100, so as to prevent unauthorized users from use due to a mismatch biometric input).
Regarding claim 26, Tremblay discloses the at least one sensor is an capacitive skin print sensor or comprises such a sensor ([0176] biometric sensor; [0200] “the additional functionality for acquiring the buccal biometric input may be provided by a pressure sensor that detects a pressure applied by the user's lips” which may include reading the lip-print as that is an optional characteristic from [0199]).
Regarding claim 27, Tremblay discloses the electronic control unit is configured as a programmable logic control unit (Control system 130 comprises controller 160) which is configured and adapted to store the biometric signature and to read out the biometric signature from the storage device (Fig. 27 control logic for controller 160, includes storing buccal biometric input from user and compare it to the memory of the correct user to authorize use of e-cigarette 100).
Regarding claim 28, Tremblay discloses an element configured and adapted for digital verification of the identity of the person using the inhaler ([0198] controller 160 runs process to acquire buccal biometric input 520 and effect a control action to control the e-cigarette 100 to operate only for the authorized user’s lip features. This identifies the correct person using the device).
Regarding claim 29, Tremblay discloses for initial verification, the programmable logic control unit is configured and adapted to form a data set formed from the biometric signature and a digital proof of identity of the user (see Fig. 27 step 520 to acquire buccal biometrical input for any use, followed by step 530 comparing the current input to reference inputs for the specific identity of the user) and to store and read out the data set (Fig. 29 [0211] e-cigarette 100 communicates to communication device 400 (phone, etc.) of potential unauthorized use of the device. This is the data acquired in Fig. 27 steps).
Regarding claim 30, Tremblay discloses for re- verification, the programmable logic control unit is configured and adapted to compare the stored data set with a data signal currently formed from the characteristics during each individual use (see Fig. 27 [0197] “he vapor-providing capability of the electronic cigarette 100 may be altered (e.g., enabled, disabled, etc.) based on buccal biometrics of the user”).
Regarding claim 31, Tremblay discloses an element configured and adapted to establish a wireless connection to a network-enabled terminal device (Fig. 29 communication link 440).
Regarding claim 35, Tremblay discloses a system, configured and adapted for inhaling inhalation medium enriched with active ingredients and/or flavouring substances (System of Fig. 2 for electronic vaping device 100; [0059] substance includes a liquid that may contain nicotine, product that is flavored, etc.), comprising:
an inhaler according to claim 22 (see rejection to claim 22 above); and
a network-enabled terminal (Fig. 7 communication device 400);
wherein the inhaler and the terminal device are wirelessly in signal connection with each other (communication link 440, may be wireless link).
Regarding claim 36, Tremblay discloses the inhaler and/or the terminal device are wirelessly connected to a network ([0068] WiFi network connection, as one example).
Regarding claim 37, Tremblay discloses the terminal has a user-defined account which is linked to the inhaler ([0263] “The server may maintain a record (e.g., an account) for the electronic cigarette 100 and keep track of advertisements presented on the electronic cigarette 100.”).
Regarding claim 38, Tremblay discloses a method for inhaling inhalation medium enriched with active ingredients and/or flavouring substances (System of Fig. 2 for electronic vaping device 100; [0059] substance includes a liquid that may contain nicotine, product that is flavored, etc.) by an inhaler having a mouthpiece (outlet 152), comprising steps of:
sucking at the mouthpiece of the inhaler by a user ([0064] “Fluid that can be drawn (e.g., puffed, inhaled, etc.) though the outlet 152 may include vapor produced by the vapor producer 120 and/or air or another gas or liquid contained within the electronic cigarette 100”); and
simultaneously actuating an actuating mechanism of the inhaler (Fig. 8 actuating done by regulator 140, controlled when fluid-drawing detector 154 detects the user drawn fluid through outlet 152), whereby the inhaler is activated for inhaling the inhalation medium ([0064] above);
establishing a connection between an identity of the user and characteristics of lips of the user ([0198-0199] e-cigarette 100 acquires buccal biometric input 520, where it can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips. The biometric sensor of [0176] could measure this buccal biometric input.) and storing the characteristics before sucking for the first time (Fig. 27 [0198] “stored buccal biometric reference associated with an authorized user 530”); and
during sucking comparing the characteristics of the lips of a person currently using the inhaler with the stored characteristics (Fig. 27 step 530 compare to reference), in such a manner that activation of the actuating mechanism only takes place if the respective characteristics match to a defined minimum degree ([0202] Regarding step 530, “the comparing may produce a positive outcome not only when there is an exact match, but also when there is sufficient similarity between the buccal biometric input and the buccal biometric reference”).
Regarding claim 39, Tremblay discloses an initially detected and saved connection is stored as authorisation to use the inhaler ([0198] “a stored buccal biometric reference associated with an authorized user 530”).
Regarding claim 40, Tremblay discloses a lip wrinkle pattern of the user is detected by means of a sensor and converted into a biometric signature (buccal biometric input 520 can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips; [0201] buccal biometric reference obtained during programming phase 510, during which controller first takes the input and then utilizes the input. This can include reprogramming), wherein the biometric signature is linked to an authorisation to use the inhaler and deactivates the actuating mechanism as an electronic lock until the authorised person sucks on the inhaler (Fig. 27 biometric input is compared in order to determine action of the e-cigarette 100, so as to prevent unauthorized users from use due to a mismatch biometric input).
Regarding claim 41, Tremblay discloses an inhaler comprising;
a cartridge carrier (housing 115);
a storage tank which contains the inhalation medium (container 124; [0059] stores substance to provide the vapor drawable by the user);
a mouthpiece associated with the cartridge carrier (outlet 152; [0051] user “vapes”, i.e. draw vapor through an outlet 152);
an actuating mechanism for releasing the inhalation medium out of the storage tank in a direction of the mouthpiece (regulator 140/141 including electrical circuit device 142/143; [0089-0092] regulator cuts off power to (i.e. disables) the fluid-drawing detector 154 when desired, or to one or more components such as the heater of the vapor producer 120. Cutting off the heater prevents vapor from being produced to the user, or cutting off the detector 154 stops the vapor from being produced. The turning on/off of vital components of the device is actuating the inhalation medium from releasing);
at least one sensor associated with the mouthpiece (Fig. 6 depicts user interface 150 comprising outlet 152, then [0176] user interface receives authorization information 750 via a “biometric sensor”), the sensor being configured and adapted to detect characteristics of lips of a person using the inhaler and to provide a data signal formed from the characteristics ([0198-0199] e-cigarette 100 acquires buccal biometric input 520, where it can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips. The biometric sensor of [0176] could measure this buccal biometric input); and
an electronic control unit (control system 130, Fig. 5), the sensor and the actuating mechanism being connected to the electronic control unit such that the inhalation medium is released on a basis of the data signal (Sensor: User interface 150, comprising biometric sensor collecting buccal biometric input 520, is within Control system 130. Actuating mechanism: [0091-0092] Regulator 140/141 comprises electrical circuit 142/143 for running fluid-drawing detector 154, which communicates directly with controller 160, part of Control system 130. Overall: [0198] unauthorized use of cigarette 100 is prevented (i.e. actuation is not completed) when the sensor does not recognize buccal biometrics of an authorized user),
a network-enabled terminal (communication device 400);
wherein the inhaler and the terminal device are wirelessly in signal connection with each other (Fig. 7 e-cigarette 100 connects to communication device 400 via communication link 440).
Regarding claim 42, Tremblay discloses the step of comparing during sucking comprises comparing during each suck (Fig. 27 [0198] “comparing the buccal biometric input to a stored buccal biometric reference associated with an authorized user 530, and effecting a control action to alter (e.g., disable) the vapor-providing capability of the electronic cigarette 100 based on a result of the comparing 540”, seemingly at every suck this would have to occur since each inhale requires contact with the lips as described above).
Regarding claim 43, Tremblay discloses a method for controlling an inhaler (System of controlling for Fig. 2 for electronic vaping device 100) having a mouthpiece (outlet 152) with a sensor ([0176] user interface receives authorization information 750 via a “biometric sensor”; [0200] “the additional functionality for acquiring the buccal biometric input may be provided by a pressure sensor that detects a pressure applied by the user's lips”), as a result of which the inhaler is activated for inhaling an inhalation medium ([0064] “Fluid that can be drawn (e.g., puffed, inhaled, etc.) though the outlet 152 may include vapor produced by the vapor producer 120 and/or air or another gas or liquid contained within the electronic cigarette 100”), comprising steps of:
recording of data (Fig. 27 step 520 to acquire present buccal biometric input [0198]);
verifying the recorded data of the current user with initially stored data (Fig. 27 step 530 comparing present input to stored input data [0202]); and
if the initially stored data matches the recorded data of the current user to a defined minimum degree ([0202] Regarding step 530, “the comparing may produce a positive outcome not only when there is an exact match, but also when there is sufficient similarity between the buccal biometric input and the buccal biometric reference”), enabling the actuating mechanism of the inhaler (Fig. 27 step 540 control action of the e-cigarette 100 based on comparing).
Regarding claim 44, Tremblay discloses a cartridge carrier (housing 115);
a storage tank which contains the inhalation medium (container 124; [0059] stores substance to provide the vapor drawable by the user);
a mouthpiece associated with the cartridge carrier (outlet 152; [0051] user “vapes”, i.e. draw vapor through an outlet 152);
an actuating mechanism for releasing the inhalation medium out of the storage tank in a direction of the mouthpiece (regulator 140/141 including electrical circuit device 142/143; [0089-0092] regulator cuts off power to (i.e. disables) the fluid-drawing detector 154 when desired, or to one or more components such as the heater of the vapor producer 120. Cutting off the heater prevents vapor from being produced to the user, or cutting off the detector 154 stops the vapor from being produced. The turning on/off of vital components of the device is actuating the inhalation medium from releasing);
at least one sensor associated with the mouthpiece (Fig. 6 depicts user interface 150 comprising outlet 152, then [0176] user interface receives authorization information 750 via a “biometric sensor”), the sensor being configured and adapted to detect characteristics of lips of a person using the inhaler and to provide a data signal formed from the characteristics ([0198-0199] e-cigarette 100 acquires buccal biometric input 520, where it can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips. The biometric sensor of [0176] could measure this buccal biometric input); and
an electronic control unit (control system 130, Fig. 5), the sensor and the actuating mechanism being connected to the electronic control unit such that the inhalation medium is released on a basis of the data signal (Sensor: User interface 150, comprising biometric sensor collecting buccal biometric input 520, is within Control system 130. Actuating mechanism: [0091-0092] Regulator 140/141 comprises electrical circuit 142/143 for running fluid-drawing detector 154, which communicates directly with controller 160, part of Control system 130. Overall: [0198] unauthorized use of cigarette 100 is prevented (i.e. actuation is not completed) when the sensor does not recognize buccal biometrics of an authorized user).
Regarding claim 45, Tremblay discloses the step of recording of data comprises recording of data comprising characteristics of lips of a person currently using the inhaler by the sensor ([0198-0199] e-cigarette 100 acquires buccal biometric input 520, where it can include one or more measured features of one or more parts of the user's mouth, such as characteristics such as texture, shape of the lips. Step 520 of Fig. 27 measures the buccal biometric input 520 when e-cigarette 100 is brought to the lips)
Regarding claim 46, Tremblay discloses the step of verifying the recorded data of the current user with initially stored data comprises verifying the recorded data of the current user with initially stored characteristics of the lips (Fig. 27 step 530 [0202] comparing present biometric input to reference for match to verified user of the specific e-cigarette 100).
Regarding claim 47, Tremblay discloses if the initially stored data matches the recorded data of the current user to a defined minimum degree ([0202] Regarding step 530, “the comparing may produce a positive outcome not only when there is an exact match, but also when there is sufficient similarity between the buccal biometric input and the buccal biometric reference”), activating the actuating mechanism of the inhaler (Fig. 27 step 540 control action of the e-cigarette 100 based on comparing).
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.
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 32-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tremblay as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Stevens et al. (US 2016/0211693; hereinafter “Stevens”).
Regarding claim 32, Tremblay discloses a vaporiser cartridge associated with the cartridge carrier (see Tremblay vapor producer 120 comprises vaporizer 126)
an energy source associated with a unit formed from the cartridge carrier and vaporiser cartridge (see Tremblay power source 110).
Tremblay discloses connection between the vaporiser cartridge and storage tank (see Tremblay [0064] “The vaporizer 126 responds by vaporizing a portion of the liquid (that may have been drawn from the container 124), but does not explicitly disclose the vaporiser cartridge has a hollow body with a continuous flow channel;
the storage tank is configured to receive the liquid inhalation medium and has at least one access opening to the flow channel; and
a vaporiser unit extends over the entire at least one access opening andis arranged in a region of each of the at least one access openings.
However, Stevens teaches the vaporiser cartridge has a hollow body with a continuous flow channel (see Stevens [0110-0111] straw-like tube 105 placed near/within substance container 110, drawing vaporized substance from out of vaporization chamber 130; meaning tube 105 travels through both sites);
the storage tank is configured to receive the liquid inhalation medium and has at least one access opening to the flow channel (see Stevens tube 105 passes through container 110); and
a vaporiser unit extends over the entire at least one access opening andis arranged in a region of each of the at least one access openings (see Stevens tube 105 extends vaporization process from the vaporization chamber 130, through the substance 110, to the mouthpiece 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection between the vaporiser cartridge and storage tank of Tremblay with the addition of an adjoining continuous flow channel as taught by Stevens so as to facilitate direct pathway from vaporization to the mouthpiece for inhalation of the full amount of vaporization by the user.
Regarding claim 33, modified Tremblay discloses the vaporizer unit has a wick member (see Tremblay [0064] “The vaporizer 126 responds by vaporizing a portion of the liquid (that may have been drawn from the container 124, e.g., using a wicking material), producing vapor”) and a heating member (see Tremblay [0060] “the vaporizer 126 may comprise a heater to heat the liquid for vaporizing it”), the vaporiser unit comprising electrical contacts for electrically contacting the energy source (see Tremblay Fig. 2 power source 110 and vapor producer 120 connected; [0064] vaporizer 126 controlled by controller 160, which is powered by electrical power source 110).
Regarding claim 34, modified Tremblay discloses the vaporiser unit with the energy source forms the actuating mechanism(see Tremblay [0091] cutting off power to vapor producer 120 is done by regulator system 140 comprising electrical circuit device 142 [actuating mechanism], meaning actuating mechanism is linked between the vaporizer 126 and power source 110), wherein the actuating mechanism is controlled and/or regulated by the electronic control unit (see Tremblay [0091-0092] Regulator 140/141 comprises electrical circuit 142/143 for running fluid-drawing detector 154, which communicates directly with controller 160, part of Control system 130).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Rosser et al. (US 2020/0138117) is cited to show a vaporizer device with a capacitive lip sensor.
Kilger et al. (US 2022/0015437) is cited to show an e-cigarette with a lip recognition sensor for registered user use identification.
Davidson et al. (US 2022/0160047) is cited to show a substrate delivery device with an authentication module using a lip sensor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GWYNNETH L HOWELL whose telephone number is (703)756-4742. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 M-F.
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, Justine Yu can be reached at (571) 272-4835. 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.
/GWYNNETH L HOWELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785