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
Applicant’s amendment to claims 1, 6-7, and 12-15, cancellation of claims 8-9, addition of new claims 16-19, and supporting remarks filed 02/06/2026 (“Amendment”) have been entered. Accordingly, the claims objections are withdrawn. The claim rejections under 35 USC 102 are maintained (albeit edited to account for the amended claim language), and new rejections under 35 USC 103 are necessitated by the amendment. Claims 1-7 and 10-19 are pending, claims 7 and 10 remain withdrawn, and claims 1-6 and 11-19 are examined herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that (1) Tan fails to disclose the amended language of claim 1 because Tan’s four conducting sections 31-34 are not disclosed as being connected to the same liquid storage unit and are not in fluid communication with one another (Amendment p. 8), and (2) Chen and Hopps each fail to disclose the amended language of claim 1 because Chen’s heating elements 7 and 8 receive liquid from different oil storage subassemblies 13 and 14 rather than a common liquid storage unit, and Hopps’ disclosure is similarly deficient. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding (1), the Examiner respectfully disagrees because Tan clearly implies that the heating elements receive liquid from a common oil storage tank and one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize this from Tan’s disclosure. The heating elements 21-24 are arranged on a common oil guide 3 ([0071], Figs. 1-4), and Tan discloses that the “lower surface of the oil guide 3 contacts the e-cigarette liquid in the oil storage tank” [0009] (emphasis added). Tan further discloses that its method of alternating heaters is useful for preventing dry burning caused by an air cushion effect [0010, 0093-94], and in particular discloses that “as long as there is e-liquid in the oil storage tank, it can be continuously in the state of smoking” [0094], which imply that the heating elements all receive liquid supplied from the same oil storage tank.
Furthermore, the Examiner respectfully disagrees because whether Tan’s oil storage tank is a single common tank or multiple sub-sections of a tank is irrelevant to the claim language. Tan would anticipate claim 1 even if the heating elements 21-24 were supplied by separate storage tanks, for the same reasons that Chen and Hopps anticipate claim 1, which are discussed immediately below in (2).
Regarding (2), the Examiner respectfully disagrees because Chen’s oil storage subassemblies 13 and 14 (and in the other case Hopps’ liquid reservoirs 20, 21) together read on “a liquid storage unit” as recited in amended claim 1. The claim does not limit the “liquid storage unit” in any manner that prevents the Examiner from mapping multiple subassemblies in the prior art to the claimed liquid storage unit. Applicant’s specification also supports this interpretation at [0046] and Fig. 2, disclosing a liquid storage unit 12 which include a first unit 121 and a second unit 122.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to obviousness of the amended claim language (Amendment p. 9-11) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tan (CN 110664017 A, previously cited with English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Tan is directed to a method and apparatus for alternating heating of multiple heating elements in an atomizer (“electronic cigarette”) (Title):
the atomizer comprises an oil storage tank (“liquid storage unit”) containing an e-liquid to be vaporized [0005, 0094];
the atomizer includes at least two heating elements (“a first heating assembly and a second heating assembly”) for vaporizing the e-liquid [0005, 0020]. The heating elements 21 and 22 are “physically discrete” and “spaced apart” as claimed ([0045, 0071-73], Figs. 1-4);
a heating control device (“circuit”) controls the operation of the heating elements [0020] and the heating control device may be a heating control circuit [0015, 0117];
Tan discloses a method of alternating between the heating elements [0017] wherein each heating element is controlled to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053] (which reads on “A control method of an e-cigarette…wherein the control method comprises: controlling the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to alternately start heating according to an inhalation feature parameter of the e-cigarette during vaping of the e-cigarette”).
PNG
media_image1.png
274
538
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Tan discloses starting the first heating element upon inhalation by a user [0010, 0053], which reads on “controlling either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating in a case that an inhalation instruction of the e-cigarette is obtained”.
Regarding claim 3, Tan discloses stopping the first heater and alternating to a second heater after less than two seconds while a user is inhaling [0053], which reads on “obtaining the inhalation feature parameter in a case that either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly is controlled to start heating” and “controlling the either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to stop heating and controlling the other of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating according to the inhalation feature parameter”.
Regarding claim 4, Tan discloses alternating to the second heater after a time period has elapsed while a user is inhaling [0053], which reads on “comparing the inhalation feature parameter with a preset threshold” and “in a case that the inhalation feature parameter is higher than the preset threshold”.
Regarding claims 5 and 11, Tan discloses repeating the sequence of energizing the first heater, then turning off the first heater and energizing the second heater [0037-39], and each of the first and second heaters may be powered off while the other is powered on [0021], which reads on “after the controlling [step of claim 3]…obtaining the inhalation feature parameter again; and controlling the other of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to stop heating and controlling the either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating according to the inhalation feature parameter obtained again” in each of claims 5 and 11.
Regarding claims 6 and 12-15, Tan discloses controlling each heating element to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053], which reads on “wherein the inhalation feature parameter is…an inhalation duration” in each of claims 6 and 12-15.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (US 2021/0401057 A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Chen is directed to a disposable electronic cigarette (“electronic cigarette”) with a large number of puffs and its control method (Title):
the electronic cigarette comprises first and second oil storage subassemblies 13, 14 (together a “liquid storage unit”) containing an oil to be atomized ([0008, 0041], Figs. 1-2);
the electronic cigarette includes first and second heating elements 7, 8 (“a first heating assembly and a second heating assembly”) for atomizing the oil [0008, 0041]. As shown in Figs. 1-2, the heating elements 7, 8 are “physically discrete” and “spaced apart” as claimed;
a control unit (“circuit”) coupled to a control panel 5 controls the operation of the heating elements [0047] and the control unit may include a control circuit ([0026-27, 0036-39], Figs. 7-8);
Chen discloses a control method wherein a first heating element is activated, a number of puffs and/or time duration is counted, and after reaching a first default value, the first heating element is stopped and switched to the second heating element (Abstract, [0057-60]) (which reads on “A control method of an e-cigarette…wherein the control method comprises: controlling the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to alternately start heating according to an inhalation feature parameter of the e-cigarette during vaping of the e-cigarette”).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses starting the first heating element upon receiving a user’s suction signal [0057], which reads on “controlling either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating in a case that an inhalation instruction of the e-cigarette is obtained”.
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses stopping the first heating element and switching to the second after either a preset number of puffs or time duration is exceeded [0057-60], which reads on “obtaining the inhalation feature parameter in a case that either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly is controlled to start heating” and “controlling the either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to stop heating and controlling the other of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating according to the inhalation feature parameter”.
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses stopping the first heating element and switching to the second after either a preset number of puffs or time duration is exceeded [0057-60], which reads on “comparing the inhalation feature parameter with a preset threshold” and “in a case that the inhalation feature parameter is higher than the preset threshold”.
Regarding claims 6 and 12-15, Chen discloses stopping the first heating element and switching to the second after either a preset number of puffs or time duration is exceeded [0057-60], which reads on “wherein the inhalation feature parameter is…inhalation times” and “wherein the inhalation feature parameter is…an inhalation duration” in each of claims 6 and 12-15.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hopps (CN 104254258 A, US 2015/0047662 A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Hopps is directed to aerosol-generation devices (Title). Hopps discloses several embodiments of an electronic cigarette 10 (“e-cigarette”) ([0032-43], Figs. 3a-4b):
in the two embodiments illustrated in Figs. 3a-b, the electronic cigarette 10 includes liquid reservoirs 20, 21 (together a “liquid storage unit”) containing aerosol producing compositions [0034-37];
the electronic cigarette 10 further includes two heating elements 31, 32 (“a first heating assembly and a second heating assembly”) for producing the aerosol from the compositions ([0034-37], Figs. 3a-b). As shown in Figs. 3a-b, the heating elements 31, 32 are “physically discrete” and “spaced apart” as claimed;
control means (“circuit”) supply the power to the heating elements 31, 32 and the control means may comprise any kind of power supply circuitry [0035, 0037];
a user may operate a switch 14 to select which heating element 31, 32 to activate [0035-37], the user may alternate between heating elements 31, 32 ([0042] and Fig. 4b), and the switch 14 may be an inhalation-activated switch [0043] (which reads on “A control method of an e-cigarette…wherein the control method comprises: controlling the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to alternately start heating according to an inhalation feature parameter of the e-cigarette during vaping of the e-cigarette”).
Regarding claim 2, Hopps discloses the user selecting which heating element 31, 32 to begin supplying with power via an inhalation-activated switch [0035-37, 0043], as set forth immediately above, which reads on “controlling either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating in a case that an inhalation instruction of the e-cigarette is obtained”.
Regarding claim 3, Hopps discloses the user supplying power to the first heater, then switching to the second heater with the inhalation-activated switch [0042-43], as set forth above in the discussion of claim 1, which reads on “obtaining the inhalation feature parameter in a case that either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly is controlled to start heating” and “controlling the either of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to stop heating and controlling the other of the first heating assembly and the second heating assembly to start heating according to the inhalation feature parameter”.
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 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (CN 110664017 A) as applied to claim 1, in view of Chen (US 2021/0401057 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Tan discloses controlling each heating element to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053], as set forth above. Tan discloses alternating heaters in order to prevent one heater from operating for too long of a time and causing dry burning [0010, 0012, 0014-15]. Tan further discloses that this is useful for “large-volume and long-term smoking” [0012, 0103] (emphasis added). Thus, in addition to or as an alternative to alternating after a total heating time, it would be obvious to configure the heating control device to alternate heaters after a total puff volume (“inhalation volume”). However, Tan does not disclose a puff sensor or other means for measuring the puff volume. Puff sensors are generally well-known in the art of electronic aerosolization devices.
Chen is directed to a disposable electronic cigarette with a large number of puffs and its control method (Title). In the control method, a first heating element is activated, a number of puffs and/or time duration is counted, and after reaching a first default value, the first heating element is stopped and switched to the second heating element (Abstract, [0057-60]). Chen discloses a control unit and an airflow switch assembly for making such puff measurements [0008]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Chen’s control unit and airflow switch could similarly be used to determine a total puff volume (“inhalation volume”) as a matter of design choice, because such volume is determined by the number of puffs and puff duration.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Tan by incorporating Chen’s control unit and airflow switch into Tan’s atomizer and configuring them to alternate Tan’s heaters after a total puff volume has been achieved, because Tan and Chen are both directed to electronic aerosolization devices with separately controllable heaters, Tan teaches preventing overuse of each heater, measuring such overuse via puff volume rather than time duration would be an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Tan and Chen, and this would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 17, Tan discloses controlling each heating element to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053], as set forth above. Tan further discloses that this is useful for “large-volume and long-term smoking” [0012, 0103]. Thus, in addition to or as an alternative to alternating after a total heating time, it would be obvious to configure the heating control device to alternate heaters after a set puff frequency (“inhalation frequency”) which is closely related to the puff volume and total time. However, Tan does not disclose a puff sensor or other means for measuring the puff frequency. Puff sensors are generally well-known in the art of electronic aerosolization devices.
Chen is directed to a disposable electronic cigarette with a large number of puffs and its control method (Title). In the control method, a first heating element is activated, a number of puffs and/or time duration is counted, and after reaching a first default value, the first heating element is stopped and switched to the second heating element (Abstract, [0057-60]). Chen discloses a control unit and an airflow switch assembly for making such puff measurements [0008]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Chen’s control unit and airflow switch could similarly be used to determine a puff frequency (“inhalation frequency”) as a matter of design choice, because such frequency is determined by the number of puffs within a total time.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Tan by incorporating Chen’s control unit and airflow switch into Tan’s atomizer and configuring them to alternate Tan’s heaters after a puff frequency has been achieved, because Tan and Chen are both directed to electronic aerosolization devices with separately controllable heaters, Tan teaches preventing overuse of each heater, measuring such overuse via puff frequency rather than time duration would be an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Tan and Chen, and this would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan (CN 110664017 A) as applied to claim 1, in view of Zhao (EP 3613302 B1).
Regarding claim 18, Tan discloses controlling each heating element to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053], as set forth above. Tan discloses alternating heaters in order to prevent one heater from operating for too long of a time and causing dry burning [0010, 0012, 0014-15]. Tan discloses that this keeps the heater temperature from rising excessively and causing dry burning ([0010-12, 0053, 0061-63, 0087, 0089], Figs. 9-11). Thus, in addition to or as an alternative to alternating after a total heating time, it would be obvious to configure the heating control device to alternate heaters after a heater temperature is exceeded, in order to avoid the dry burning. However, Tan fails to disclose alternating the heaters due to a “resistance value” or “resistance value change” of either heater as claimed. Tan further fails to disclose a temperature sensor or other components for measuring the temperature and/or resistance of the heaters.
Zhao is directed to an electronic atomizing device, control method thereof, heating assembly, electronic apparatus and storage media (Title). Zhao discloses a memory chip which stores a correspondence between a heater resistance and heater temperature [0003]. A controlling assembly controls the temperature of the heating body accordingly [0003]. The device further includes a detecting module for detecting the resistance (“resistance value”) of the heating body [0003]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Zhao’s memory chip, controlling assembly, and detecting module could similarly be used in Tan to determine the resistance and temperature of Tan’s heaters.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Tan by incorporating Zhao’s memory chip and detecting module into Tan’s atomizer, and configuring the memory chip, detecting module, and Tan’s heating control device to alternate heaters after a certain heater resistance value (and thus temperature value) is exceeded, because Tan and Zhao are both directed to electronic aerosolization devices with controllable heaters, Tan teaches preventing overuse of each heater and measuring such overuse via temperature rather than time duration would be an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Tan, Zhao teaches that heater temperature can be determined via heater resistance, and this would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 19, Tan discloses controlling each heating element to operate for two seconds or less and then alternate while a user inhales [0053], as set forth above. Tan discloses alternating heaters in order to prevent one heater from operating for too long of a time and causing dry burning [0010, 0012, 0014-15]. Tan discloses that this keeps the heater temperature from rising excessively and causing dry burning ([0010-12, 0053, 0061-63, 0087, 0089], Figs. 9-11). Thus, in addition to or as an alternative to alternating after a total heating time, it would be obvious to configure the heating control device to alternate heaters after a heater temperature is exceeded, in order to avoid the dry burning, which reads on “wherein the inhalation feature parameter is…a temperature of the first heating assembly or the second heating assembly”. However, Tan fails to disclose a temperature sensor or other components for measuring the temperature of the heaters.
Zhao is directed to an electronic atomizing device, control method thereof, heating assembly, electronic apparatus and storage media (Title). Zhao discloses a memory chip which stores a correspondence between a heater resistance and heater temperature [0003]. A controlling assembly controls the temperature of the heating body accordingly [0003]. The device further includes a detecting module for detecting the resistance of the heating body [0003]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Zhao’s memory chip, controlling assembly, and detecting module could similarly be used in Tan to determine the resistance and temperature of Tan’s heaters.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Tan by incorporating Zhao’s memory chip and detecting module into Tan’s atomizer, and configuring the memory chip, detecting module, and Tan’s heating control device to alternate heaters after a certain heater resistance value (and thus temperature value) is exceeded, because Tan and Zhao are both directed to electronic aerosolization devices with controllable heaters, Tan teaches preventing overuse of each heater and measuring such overuse via temperature rather than time duration would be an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Tan, Zhao discloses components for measuring heater temperature via resistance, and this would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I); see also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
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 MICHAEL PATRICK MULLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-7 ET.
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, Michael H. Wilson can be reached at (571) 270-3882. 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.
/MICHAEL PATRICK MULLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747