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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/09/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, and 15-19 are currently pending and are subject to this office action. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 4, 9, and 14 are canceled. This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 01/09/2026.
Response to Amendments
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s response filed on 01/09/2026 containing amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, on pages 6-8, filed 01/09/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. The Applicant has amended claim 1 to include a limitation of canceled claim 9, specifically, “wherein the temperature sensor is located and retained between an outer side wall of the thermal conductive element and an inner side wall of the support”. The Applicant argues that Yamada and Halliday do not teach the limitation.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Yamada teaches a temperature sensor (Fig. 5: #60) that is provided on a wall surface of a bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50, [0036]). The temperature sensor (Fig. 5: #60) is retained on an inner side of the outside wall of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), wherein the downstream end (Fig. 5: #50a) of the bottom cap meets the claim limitation of a thermal conductive element. Yamada further teaches a second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47), meeting the claim limitation of a support, located towards the bottom of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41). The second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47) is connected to a portion of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) via the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50).
In combination, Halliday teaches a temperature sensor (Fig. 7: #216) retained within a resilient component (Fig. 7: #214). The resilient component may be thermally conductive (Pg. 6, Lines 4-5). The temperature sensor (Fig. 7: #216) is held between an outer wall of the resilient component (Fig, 7: #214) and an inner surface side wall (Fig. 7: #210a) of a battery support (Fig. 7: #120). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the structural relationship between the temperature sensor, bottom cap, and second ring-like member of Yamada to wherein the sensor is disposed between the bottom cap and second ring-like member to establish a stronger connection and improved sensing ability for the sensor to control the heating operation of the heater assembly (Pg. 19, Lines 9-12) and this merely involves combining the structural relationship of Halliday with the components of Yamada according to known temperature sensing methods to yield predictable results.
The following are modified rejections based on Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
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 1 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 1 recites the limitation "the support" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examining, “the support” will be interpreted as “a support”.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (WO 2020084761 A1, hereinafter citations referring to EP 3871525 A1 for English language equivalent) and Halliday (WO 2020182739 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
406
303
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 1, Yamada, directed to a suction device, teaches (i) an inhalation device (Fig. 1B: #10) configured to generate aerosol by heating a smoking article (Fig. 1B: #110, [0008]), (ii) The device comprises an opening (Fig. 5: #42a) for receiving the smoking article (Fig. 1B: #110, [0029]). (iii) A heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41), comprising a heating member (Fig 5: #43), is used to heat the smoking article (Fig. 1B: #110) received in the opening (Fig. 5: #42a, [0033]). (iv) A bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), an inner tube (Fig. 5: #42), and a top cap (Fig 5: #48) form an air channel that brings air into the user's mouth [0035], where each component is joined and surrounded by walls, meeting the claim limitation of a wall, defining or forming at least a part of an airflow path of an airflow that passes through the vapor generation device during an inhaling process.
Yamada further teaches (v) a temperature sensor (Fig. 5: #60) that is provided on a wall surface of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) and measures temperature to detect a user's puffing action [0036]. (vi) The device comprises a circuit portion (Fig. 5: #30) that is able to detect the user's puffing action in view of the temperature sensed by the temperature sensor [0036], meeting the claim limitation of a circuit, programmed to determine an inhaling action of a user in a case that the temperature sensor detects a temperature drop of the wall.
(vii) The bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), with the downstream end (Fig. 5: #50a) forming a side wall in connection with the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41), increases temperature due to heat transmission from the heating member (Fig. 5: #43, [0039]). A prior art structure that is capable of performing the same function as a claimed structure may establish a prima case of anticipation or obviousness should the examiner explain how the prior art possesses the functional limitations of the claimed apparatus (MPEP 2114(I)). A person of ordinary skill in the art would know that a thermally conductive element is a component that is capable of transferring heat from one area to another. The bottom cap is designed to transfer heated air flow from the heating element to reach the sensor placement portion (Fig. 5: #62, [0039]), similar in function to a thermal conductive element and is therefore considered prima facie obvious.
(viii) Yamada further teaches wherein the temperature sensor (Fig. 5: #60) is retained on an inner side of the outside wall of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50). (ix) Yamada teaches a second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47), meeting the claim limitation of a support, located towards the bottom of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41). The second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47) is connected to a portion of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) via the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50, [0031]). Yamada teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however Yamada is silent to:
Wherein the temperature sensor is located and retained between an outer side wall of the thermal conductive element and an inner side wall of the support
PNG
media_image3.png
634
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Halliday, directed to an aerosol provision device, teaches a temperature sensor (Fig. 7: #216). The temperature sensor (Fig. 7: #216) is retained within a resilient component (Fig. 7: #214), where the resilient component may be thermally conductive (Pg. 6, Lines 4-5), and an inner surface side wall (Fig. 7: #210a) of a battery support (Fig. 7: #120). A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the structural relationship between the temperature sensor, bottom cap, and second ring-like member to wherein the sensor is disposed between the bottom cap and second ring-like member to establish a stronger connection and improved sensing ability for the sensor to control the heating operation of the heater assembly (Pg. 19, Lines 9-12).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structural relationship between the temperature sensor, thermal conductive element, and the support of modified Yamada to include wherein the temperature sensor is located and retained between an outer side wall of the thermal conductive element and an inner side wall of the support because Yamada and Halliday are both directed to aerosol generating devices with temperature sensors for ensuring safe operation temperatures. Halliday teaches a temperature sensor retained between a resilient component and battery support to measure a temperature of the battery (Pg. 19, Lines 9-10) and this merely involves combining the structural relationship of Halliday with the components of Yamada according to known temperature sensing methods to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 2, Yamada teaches wherein (i) the circuit portion is capable of detecting the user's puffing action on the basis of the data received by the temperature sensor [0036], meeting the claim limitation of wherein the circuit is programmed to determine the inhaling action of the user. (ii) Yamada further teaches a temperature increase of 45-55 °C due to the heating of the bottom cap [0039] and an increase of 10-20 °C during inhalation when air enters the device [0040]. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that both an increase and decrease of temperature may occur during inhalation depending on the interaction of airflow with a heater and monitoring a temperature drop, as opposed to a temperature increase, is an equivalent alternative. Differences in temperature ranges alone does not establish patentability unless there is evidence indicating such temperature is critical. Without such evidence, a temperature drop in the range of 7 °C to 100 °C is considered routine optimization by a person of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05.II(A)).
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 3, Yamada teaches wherein an inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) enclosed in a surrounding wall, is formed within the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41) of the heating portion [0025],
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 5, Yamada teaches wherein the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is connected with the heating member (Fig. 5: #43) of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41).
PNG
media_image4.png
357
434
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 6, Yamada teaches wherein (i) the heating assembly (Fig. 3: #41) extends along a length of the first opening (Fig. 3: #42a) and surrounds the cavity (Fig. 3: "a" and "b"). (ii) The bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is located towards the bottom of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is located upstream of the heater.
Yamada further teaches wherein (iii) the heating assembly (Fig. 3: #41) comprises a second opening (Fig. 5: #42b) located in the same axis as the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the heater has an air inlet end portion close to the thermal conductive element in an axial direction. (iv) The bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is in communication with a vent hole (Fig. 5: #15) which is an air inlet that allows air to enter the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41, [0026]).
With regard to Claim 7, Yamada teaches wherein the bottom cap is cylindrically shaped and arranged along a linear axis, similar to the heating assembly of the heating portion [0035].
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 8, Yamada teaches (i) a second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47), meeting the claim limitation of a support, located towards the bottom of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41). The second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47) is connected to a portion of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) via the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), near the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b), to create a sealed space (Fig 5: #54) and support the containment of aerogel (Fig. 5: #44) in the sealed space (Fig. 5: #54, [0031]). (ii) The second ring-like member extends in a circumferential direction [0031] and seals the sealed space (Fig. 5: #54), where the heating member (Fig. 5: #43) is disposed in the sealed space (Fig. 5: #54).
Yamada teaches (iii) wherein the second ring-like member (Fig. 5: #47) is tightly connected to the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) via the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50, [0031]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the structure of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) and the second ring like structure (Fig. 5: #47), so that the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) partially fits into a hollow of the circumferential second ring-like member to ensure more effective heat transfer, meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is at least partially located in an annular hollow of the support.
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 10, Yamada teaches wherein the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) comprises an upstream end (Fig. 5: #50b) in which air from the vent hole (Fig. 5: #15) flows from the upstream end (Fig 5: #50b), through the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), and introduces air towards the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b) of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42, [0035]). The upstream end of the bottom cap performs the same airflow function as the claimed invention and produces the same results, therefore being considered a prima facie case of equivalence (MPEP 2183) and meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is provided with a notch through which the air enters the air inlet end portion during use.
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 11, Yamada teaches wherein a downstream end (Fig. 5: #50a) of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is connected to the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b) of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42, [0035]). The heating member (Fig. 5: #43) is disposed so as to abut against the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42). Figure 5 illustrates wherein the downstream end (fig. 5: #50a) of the (Fig. 5: #50) surrounds and contains the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is constructed to support the heater at the air inlet end portion.
With regard to Claim 12, Yamada teaches wherein the heating member may be a flexible film heater that is fabricated by sandwiching a heat-generating resistive element with two polyimide films or other like films [0030].
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 13, Yamada teaches wherein an inner tube (Fig. 5: #42) enclosed in a surrounding wall, is formed within the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41) of the heating portion [0025], meeting the claim limitation of wherein the wall is formed by at least a part of the heater.
With regard to Claim 15, Yamada teaches wherein the bottom cap is connected with the heating member of the heating assembly [0040].
PNG
media_image4.png
357
434
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 16, Yamada teaches wherein (i) the heating assembly (Fig. 3: #41) extends along a length of the first opening (Fig. 3: #42a) and surrounds the cavity (Fig. 3: "a" and "b"). (ii) The bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is located towards the bottom of the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is located upstream of the heater.
Yamada further teaches wherein (iii) the heating assembly (Fig. 3: #41) comprises a second opening (Fig. 5: #42b) located in the same axis as the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the heater has an air inlet end portion close to the thermal conductive element in an axial direction. (iv) The bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is in communication with a vent hole (Fig. 5: #15) which is an air inlet that allows air to enter the heating assembly (Fig. 5: #41, [0026]), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is configured to provide an airflow path for external air to enter the air inlet end portion.
With regard to Claim 17, Yamada teaches wherein the bottom cap is cylindrically shaped and arranged along a linear axis, similar to the heating assembly of the heating portion [0035].
PNG
media_image2.png
682
412
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 18, Yamada teaches wherein a downstream end (Fig. 5: #50a) of the bottom cap (Fig. 5: #50) is connected to the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b) of the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42, [0035]). The heating member (Fig. 5: #43) is disposed so as to abut against the inner tube (Fig. 5: #42). Figure 5 illustrates wherein the downstream end (fig. 5: #50a) of the (Fig. 5: #50) surrounds and contains the second opening (Fig. 5: #42b), meeting the claim limitation of wherein the thermal conductive element is constructed to support the heater at the air inlet end portion.
With regard to Claim 19, Yamada teaches wherein the heating member may be a flexible film heater that is fabricated by sandwich a heat-generating resistive element with two polyimide films or other like films [0030].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUWATOSIN O DIYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 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, 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.
/O.O.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755