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
This action is responsive to the amendment filed 12/23/2025. Claim 20 has been canceled thus claims 1-19 and 21-23 remain pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 12/23/2025 has been considered however 33 foreign references were not considered as a copy of the reference was not provided and instead only a translation of the abstract was provided.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-10, 17-18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rushforth (US 2024/0138486 A1) in view of Dessertine (US 5,020,527).
Regarding claim 1, Rushforth discloses a cooldown system for a device (abstract), the cooldown system comprising: at least one processor (#22 fig 1, 3 par 0049 "the controller (processor circuitry) 22"); and a memory (#22 fig 1, 3 "The controller 22 also comprises one or more data storage elements e.g. a memory element") coupled to the at least one processor and storing instructions, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to, detect when a session has ended (par 0076 "the controller 22 is configured to identify an end of a usage session"), activate a cooldown timer associated with a cooldown time (par 0076 "In some examples, the controller 22 can start a cooldown timer after identifying the end of the usage session") in response to a heater of the device or a consumable of the device being heated to a minimum threshold (par 0083 discloses a predefined threshold related to estimated usage amount, par 0082 discloses usage amount being estimated based on heater power), provide an indication of a completed cooldown timer (par 0092), and in response to the cooldown time elapsing, return the device to normal operation (par 0020 discloses the indication of the end of the cooldown indicating the device can be safely put away thus disclosing returning to normal operation).
Rushforth is silent to the system being configured to provide an indication of a remaining time of the cooldown time.
Dessertine teaches an inhalation device similar to that of Rushforth that provides an indication of a remaining time of a timer (col 3 ln 45, #55 fig 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rushforth to display the cooldown timer as taught by Dessertine as doing so provides the user information regarding the timer throughout the timer’s process rather than only at the end.
Regarding claim 2, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to obtain a signal from a control button, the signal indicating that the device has been switched off and the session has ended (par 0080 " In some examples, a user interaction with a user interface (such as button 14) is taken by controller 22 to indicate that the usage session has ended. For example, the user may transition the device to a sleep, inactive or off mode ").
Regarding claim 3, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to obtain a signal from a mechanism detection switch, the signal indicating that a lid mechanism has been opened and that the session has ended (par 0080 discloses detecting when a user removes or detaches the consumable part or recognizes opening door 51 which the consumable is inserted in).
Regarding claim 5, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to obtain a signal from a battery monitoring system, the signal indicating that the device has entered a low battery state and that the session has ended (par 0080 sleep mode).
Regarding claim 6, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to detect when the device is in a fault state, the fault state indicating that the session has ended (par 0080-0083 discloses a variety of indications of end of session that can be considered a "fault" state).
Regarding claim 9, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses a second timer activated after the cooldown timer (see fig 4, first cooldown timer #225, 235 steps, and second timer #240, 250). Rushforth does not expressly disclose the second timer is a refresh timer wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to activate a refresh timer after the cooldown timer is activated.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second timer act as a refresh timer, in order to better ensure that the device cools completely before informing the user.
Regarding claim 10, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 9. Rushforth does not expressly disclose the refresh timer is configured to measure a refresh time and to reset if the cooldown timer is active when the refresh time elapses, the refresh time being less than the cooldown time.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the refresh timer measure a refresh time and reset the cooldown timer once elapsed, as the second/refresh timer ensure that device has fully cooled and thus resetting the cooldown timer prepares the cooldown timer for the next usage session.
Regarding claim 17, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the cooldown time is based on a length of a session of the device (par 0076 "the cooldown timer is a period of time which is predefined based on the length of the usage session").
Regarding claim 18, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses a temperature sensor (par 0089).
Regarding claim 21, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the minimum threshold is the heater being heated for at least ten seconds (par 0050 and 0069 disclose a powered-on time of 210 seconds before completing a usage session).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Rushforth as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Marubashi (US 2021/0274850 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth is silent to the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to obtain a signal from a charging connection, the signal indicating that the device is connected to a charger and that the session has ended.
Marubashi teaches a similar aerosol system that obtains a signal from a chagrining connection, the signal indicating the device is connected to a charger and that the session has ended (par 0086 discloses recognizing charging and powering the device off/ending a usage session to enter charging mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Rushforth to recognize an end of a usage session in response to the device being placed to charge as taught by Marubashi as doing so allows for the device recognize a further instance of a usage end session to begin cooling down in response to.
Claims 7-8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Rushforth as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schennum (US 2016/0120218).
Regarding claim 7, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further teaches the system having a user interface for communicating with the user (par 0079 “user interface of the device”, par 0047 disclosing a display unit for displaying usage information).
Rushforth is silent to the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to display an alert icon on a user interface of the device if a lid mechanism of the device is opened while the cooldown timer is active.
Schennum teaches a similar vapor delivery system that display an alert icon on a user interface of the device if a lid mechanism of the device is opened (par 0161).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an alert icon when a lid is opened as taught by Schennum on the system of modified Rushforth as doing so can alert the user that the device is not yet cooled and is not safe to touch with the open lid. It would have been obvious to provide the device with a variety of alert icons as doing so provides the user with more information on the state and temperature of the device during and after use.
Regarding claim 8, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further teaches the system having a user interface for displaying alerts (par 0079 “user interface of the device”, par 0047 disclosing a display unit for displaying usage information).
Rushforth is silent to the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to display a cooldown alert icon if a lid mechanism of the device is opened while the session is underway and prior to the cooldown timer being activated.
Schennum teaches a similar vapor delivery system that display an alert icon on a user interface of the device if a lid mechanism of the device is opened (par 0161).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a cooldown alert icon when a lid is opened as taught by Schennum on the system of modified Rushforth as doing so can alert the user that the device is not cooled and is not safe to touch with the open lid. It would have been obvious to provide the device with a variety of alert icons as doing so provides the user with more information on the state and temperature of the device during and after use.
Claims 11-16 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Rushforth as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoon (US 2022/0256932 A1).
Regarding claim 11, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 10. Rushforth is silent to the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to refresh a timer icon when the refresh time elapses.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize timer icon as taught by Yoon on the device of modified Rushforth that refreshes when the timer is complete as doing so can indicate to the user that the refresh timer has elapsed thus communicating to a user that the device has fully cooled.
Regarding claim 12, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further teaches a user interface for communicating with the user (par 0079 “user interface of the device”, par 0047 disclosing a display unit for displaying usage information), and providing the user with an indication when the cooldown time has elapsed (par 0092).
Rushforth does not expressly disclose the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to display, on a user interface of the device, a capsule eject icon when the cooldown time has elapsed, the capsule eject icon indicating that a capsule of the device may be removed.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the indication that the cooldown timer has elapsed be a capsule eject icon as taught by Yoon, as doing so indicates to the user that the device has cooled enough to remove the capsule/consumable part.
Regarding claim 13, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to activate a holdoff timer (#225-235 fig 4, cooldown timer being #240-250 fig 4) for a holdoff time and display, on a user interface of the device, an indication while activating the cooldown timer (#235 discloses indicating that the holdoff period has concluded thus indicating the cooldown timer is being activated).
Rushforth is silent to a system icon.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a system icon as taught by Yoon for the indication of the completed holdoff timer/activated cooldown timer of Rushforth as doing so can provide a clear visual indication to the user.
Regarding claim 14, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 13. Modified Rushforth does not expressly disclose the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to display a cooldown aware icon after the holdoff time elapses.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate a cooldown aware icon as taught by Yoon, when the holdoff timer elapses to further communicate to the user that the hold off time has elapsed and the cooldown timer is running.
Regarding claim 15, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to activate a holdoff timer for a holdoff time (#225-235 fig 4, cooldown timer being #240-250 fig 4).
Rushforth is silent to the system being configured to display a power off indication if the device is turned off while the cooldown timer is active.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display a power off indication as taught by Yoon on the system of Rushforth to inform the user that the device has been turned off and no cooldown timer complete indication will be provided.
Regarding claim 16, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 15. Rushforth further discloses the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to provide a cooldown indication after the holdoff time elapses (#235 fig 4).
Rushforth does not expressly disclose the indication being a cooldown aware icon and maintaining the icon until the cooldown timer has elapsed.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a cooldown aware icon as taught by Yoon on the system of modified Rushforth to provide a clear indication of the cooldown state to a user. It would have further been obvious to maintain the icon until the cooldown timer has elapsed to provide continuous feedback to the user.
Regarding claim 23, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth is silent to the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to cause the cooldown system to: set a session underway flag when the session has started; and clear the session underway flag when the session has ended.
Yoon teaches a similar aerosol device with a variety of icons for communicating with a user (#1400 fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display a session underway flag during a usage as taught by Yoon as doing so provides further feedback to the user that the heater is on and the device is in use.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Rushforth as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Garcia (US 2023/0096771 A1).
Regarding claim 19, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 18. Rushforth is silent to the cooldown time is based on a temperature measured by the temperature sensor.
Garcia Garcia teaches an aerosol device with a cooldown system wherein the cooldown time is based on a temperature (par 0064 “timers for the duration of the third heat-off phase H3 may be adjusted depending on the exact temperature of the heating element 11 within the operational temperature range TR at the time when the heating element is switched off”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of thew claimed invention to further modify Rushforth to adjust the cooldown timer based on the temperature when the session ends as taught by Garcia Garcia as doing so allows the cooldown timer to more accurately predict when the device has sufficiently cooled.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Rushforth as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US 2018/0049473 A1).
Regarding claim 22, modified Rushforth discloses the system of claim 1. Rushforth is silent to the minimum threshold is at least 60 Joules of energy being injected into the heater.
Chen teaches a heater shutoff threshold being defined by Joules supplied to the heater (par 0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Joules as taught by Chen for the minimum threshold of modified Rushforth as doing so ensures a certain amount of energy has been supplied to the heater to heat the consumable before shutting off.
The amount of joules supplied to the heater effects the amount of consumable that is vaporized. As Joules is a result effective variable, it would have further been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize at least 60 Joules as the minimum threshold as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding amended claim 1, applicant asserts that Rushforth fails to disclose that the cooldown timer is activated in response to any minimal condition such as the ones disclosed in paragraphs 0028-0083 of Rushforth as relied on in the prior rejection of claim 20 (see pg 7 of the response filed 12/23/2025). However the cooldown timer of Rushforth is disclosed as being activated based on the identification of an end of a usage session (see Rushforth par 0076 “the controller 22 can start a cooldown timer after identifying the end of the usage session”) and the end of a usage session is disclosed as being identified in response to the minimal conditions/thresholds of a usage amount (See Rushforth par 0082-0083 “the controller 22 is configured to identify the end of the usage session based on an estimated usage amount”). Therefore, it remains seen that the reaching of the predefined thresholds is identified by the controller to indicate an estimated usage amount, which then indicates and end of usage session which triggers the cooldown timer, thus it is seen that the minimal conditions disclosed in par 0082-0083 of Rushforth trigger the cooldown timer.
Regarding claim 11, applicant asserts that Yoon fails to disclose refreshing a timer icon (see pg 8 of the response filed 12/23/2025). Although the icons of Yoon are not connected to timer icons, its is seen that Yoon discloses utilizing icons to communicate with a user. As modified Rushforth has a timer that resets, and displays the changing cooldown timer (as taught by Dessertine), it is seen that incorporation of a communicating icon as taught by Yoon would involve having the icon refresh when the timer concludes, as not refreshing the icon would miscommunicate the timer state with a user.
Regarding claim 21, applicant asserts again that the usage time as disclosed by Rushforth is not connected to the activation of the cooldown timer (see pg 9 of the response filed 12/23/2025). As the usage time of Rushforth is disclosed as indicating an elapsed usage time/end of a usage session, and Rushforth further discloses that a cooldown timer is activated in response to recognition of an end of a usage session (see Rushforth par 0076), it remains seen that the disclosure of a powered-on timer reaching a threshold such as 210 seconds discloses a minimal threshold of 210 seconds of power on to trigger a cooldown timer.
Regarding claim 22, applicant asserts that heater shutoff threshold of Chen does not disclose the triggering of a cooldown timer as required by the claim (see pg 9 of the response filed 12/23/2025). As Rushforth discloses the cooldown timer being triggered by the end of a usage session, which may be indicated when power is shut off to the device (See Rushforth par 0076 “identify an end of a usage session (e.g. the time at which aerosol generator stops generating aerosol and/or the time at which power ceases to be supplied to the aerosol generator 48”), it is seen that the triggering of a heater shut off as taught by Chen would trigger the activation of a cooldown timer of Rushforth. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the examiner upholds the rejections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bellinger US 2015/0359263 A1 discloses a device with a timer to determine when the heating element has returned to room temperature
Henry US 2016/0219933 A1 discloses a safety timer resetting the device if control is unstable
Yuan US 2023/0211094 A1 discloses a vaporizer that utilizes a timer to determine when the device returns to room temperature
Singleton US 2023/0117750 A1 discloses a heating device that utilizes a timer to determine when the device is cool enough to touch before unlocking the door to the capsule
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 KIRA B DAHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0190. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/KIRA B DAHER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785