Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/007,170

Portable Liquid Vaporizer

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 27, 2023
Priority
Aug 19, 2020 — provisional 63/067,523 +1 more
Examiner
SZEWCZYK, CYNTHIA
Art Unit
1741
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Synergy Imports, LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
696 granted / 944 resolved
+8.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
983
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
84.0%
+44.0% vs TC avg
§102
7.5%
-32.5% vs TC avg
§112
3.8%
-36.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 944 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DILLMAN et al. (US 2018/0255834). Dillman teaches a portable liquid vaporizer comprising a reservoir (4) for holding a liquid to be vaporized; a heater (20) for vaporizing the liquid to a vapor; a mouthpiece (80) for withdrawal of the vapor; and an air path (10) extending through the vaporizer, comprising a heating section (22) and a cooling section (3). Figures 1 and 2 show the heating section extends along the heater and the cooling section extends directly downstream from the heater to the mouthpiece. Dillman teaches the cooling section has an effective length that is sufficient for allowing the vapor to cool down and leave the mouthpiece at below 40°C (abstract) and that the temperature may be cooled to room or ambient temperature (para. 0020) which overlaps with the claimed range of 20°C or less above environmental temperature. Regarding claim 7, figures 1 and 2 show the air path extends through the reservoir upstream from the heating section. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TASCHNER et al. (US 2018/0000160) in view of DILLMAN et al. (US 2018/0255834) and TRZECIESKI (US 2020/0171266). Taschner teaches a portable liquid vaporizer comprising a reservoir (301 in figure 3) for holding a liquid to be vaporized; a heater (302) for vaporizing the liquid to a vapor; a mouthpiece (322) for withdrawal of the vapor; and an air path (309) extending through the vaporizer, comprising a heating section and a cooling section (para. 0037). Figure 3 shows the heating section extends along the heater and the cooling section extends directly downstream from the heater to the mouthpiece. Taschner teaches the cooling section has an effective length that is sufficient for allowing the vapor to cool down (para. 0037) but is silent to the temperature to which the vapor is cooled down. Dillman teaches a portable liquid vaporizer comprising a reservoir (4) for holding a liquid to be vaporized; a heater (20) for vaporizing the liquid to a vapor; a mouthpiece (80) for withdrawal of the vapor; and an air path (10) extending through the vaporizer, comprising a heating section (22) and a cooling section (3). Figures 1 and 2 show the heating section extends along the heater and the cooling section extends directly downstream from the heater to the mouthpiece. Dillman teaches the cooling section has an effective length that is sufficient for allowing the vapor to cool down and leave the mouthpiece at below 40°C (abstract) and that the temperature may be cooled to room or ambient temperature (para. 0020) which overlaps with the claimed range of 20°C or less above environmental temperature. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the temperature suggested by Dillman in the vaporizer of Taschner because Trzecieski teaches that cooling vapor before it reaches the user prevents scalding or injuring the user (para. 0131). Regarding claim 2, figure 3 of Taschen shows cooling section has an effective length greater than 50% of a length of the vaporizer. Regarding claim 3, figure 3 of Taschen shows the mouthpiece defines a top of the vaporizer, the heater is located in a lower half of the vaporizer. Regarding claim 4, figure 2 of Taschen shows a power source (240) arranged between the heater and the mouthpiece. Regarding claim 5, figure 3 of Taschen shows a longitudinal extension of the cooling section is offset from a longitudinal axis of the vaporizer. Regarding claim 6, figure 3 of Taschen shows the air path extends from a bottom of the vaporizer to the mouthpiece. Regarding claim 7, Taschen teaches the air path extends through the reservoir upstream from the heating section (figure 3, para. 0037). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed November 3, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Dillman does not teach allowing the vapor to cool down and leave the mouthpiece at 20°C or less above environmental temperature upon withdrawal of the vapor; however, Dillman teaches the cooling section has an effective length that is sufficient for allowing the vapor to cool down and leave the mouthpiece at below 40°C (abstract) and that the temperature may be cooled to room or ambient temperature (para. 0020) which overlaps with the claimed range of 20°C or less above environmental temperature. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CYNTHIA SZEWCZYK whose telephone number is (571)270-5130. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10 am - 6 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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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. /CYNTHIA SZEWCZYK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Nov 03, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12635731
AEROSOL GENERATION DEVICE HAVING DIFFERENTIATED HEATING FUNCTION AND AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLE APPLIED THERETO
3y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12635732
AEROSOL-GENERATING DEVICE AND SYSTEM COMPRISING AN INDUCTIVE HEATING DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME
2y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12628881
CHARGER FOR AEROSOL-GENERATING DEVICE WITH INSERTION MECHANISM
3y 1m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12616805
NON-COMBUSTIBLE AEROSOL DELIVERY SYSTEM, FILTER UNIT AND ASSEMBLY
3y 4m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12610979
HOLLOW TUBULAR ELEMENT FOR AN AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLE
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+9.9%)
2y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 944 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month