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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/03/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1 and 3-9 are currently pending and are subject to this office action. Claims 1 and 7 are amended. Claim 2 is canceled. This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 02/03/2026.
Response to Amendments
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s response filed on 02/03/2026 containing amendments and remarks to the claims.
In response to Applicant’s amendments filed 02/03/2026, the Examiner withdraws the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 1 and 7 for containing a relative term.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, on pages 5-9, filed 02/03/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Applicant has amended claims 1 and 7 to include a limitation that was not previously presented, specifically, “wherein the heating unit includes a first heater configured to heat the functional material prior to the functional material being supplied to the venturi area”. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Liu (CN 112075669 A).
The following are modified rejections based on Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023), and further in view of Liu (CN 112075669 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation)
With regard to Claim 1, Fernando, directed to an aerosol generation system, teaches (i) a device comprising a housing (Fig. 1: #12, [0061]) and a mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50, [0060]). (ii) Air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) are disposed around the circumference of the housing and separated from the mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50, [0061]). (iii) An airflow passage is formed from the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) to an air outlet (Fig. 1: #24) in the mouthpiece (Fig. 1:#50, [0071]). The airflow passage extends in a vertical direction upward from the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) and comprises a restricted cross section that decreases and expands [0010], meeting the claim limitation of a venturi area. (iv) The device includes a cartridge (Fig. 1: #20), within the housing (Fig. 1: #12), comprising a liquid aerosol forming substrate [0034].
(v) A spigot (Fig. 1: #32), meeting the claim limitation of a functional material supply port, is used to create a path between a liquid storage portion (Fig. 1: #30) and the restricted cross section of the airflow passage [0064]. (vi) A heating element (Fig. 1: #26), part of a heater assembly [0021], is disposed on the spigot (Fig. 1: #32) and restricted cross section of the airflow passage, between the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) and air outlet (Fig. 1: #24), meeting the claim limitation of a heating unit disposed on at least a portion of a perimeter of the venturi area. (vii) The liquid aerosol forming substrate is supplied to the restricted cross section of the airflow passage through the spigot (Fig. 2: #32, [0064]) and eventually leads to the air outlet (Fig. 1: #24) of the mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50), after being heated [0081]. (viii) The heater assembly comprises a heating element that is in communication with and supported on the spigot (Fig. 1: #32, [0064 & 0066]). Fernando teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however Fernando is silent to:
A first heater configured to heat the functional material prior to the functional material being supplied to the venturi area
PNG
media_image1.png
408
323
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Liu, directed to an atomizing device and electronic cigarette, teaches a heating element (Fig. 7: #11) configured to heat liquid [0045]. The heating element (Fig. 7: #11) is positioned before the air channel (Fig. 7: #15), in the direction of airflow, wherein the air channel (Fig. 7: #15) comprises a venturi area (Fig. 7: #151) to increase the volume of atomized aerosol received by a user [0005]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the first heater of Fernando with the location of the heating element of Liu to prevent heating the generated aerosol and scalding a user [0049].
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 first heater of Fernando to be configured to heat the functional material prior to the functional material being supplied to the venturi area because both Fernando and Liu are directed to improving volume of aerosol received by a user. Li teaches a heating element configured to heat liquid before reaching a venturi area to prevent heating the generated aerosol and scalding a user [0049] and this merely involves applying a known locational technique to a known heater of an aerosol generating device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 4, Fernando teaches wherein the aerosol-forming substrate comprises a mixture containing nicotine [0042].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023) and Liu (CN 112075669 A), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Rogan (US 20190116883 A1).
With regard to Claim 3, Fernando teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however Fernando is silent to:
An aerosol cartridge disposed in the housing and configured to accommodate an aerosol generating material
An aerosol supply port communicating with the aerosol cartridge and the venturi area
Wherein an aerosol from the aerosol cartridge is supplied to the venturi area through the aerosol supply port and transferred to the mouthpiece
PNG
media_image2.png
219
410
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Rogan, directed to an aerosol generating device with laser, teaches (i) a split reservoir configuration (Fig. 4A: #48A & 48B) within the housing, each configured to accommodate liquid to be vaporized [0032]. (ii) Each reservoir comprises a separate wick (Fig. 4A: #42A & 42B), wherein the liquid from the reservoir is supplied through a path to the wicks to be heated [0060]. (iii) Liquid from the reservoirs is atomized by the wicks and supplied to a channel to be inhaled through the mouthpiece by a user [0042]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the cartridge of Fernando to a split configuration, to give a user more flexibility in selecting the amount of liquid released or flavors of liquid [0032] and combining it with the venturi area of Fernando within the airflow passage, further improving vaporization efficiency of the device.
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 housing of Fernando to include an aerosol cartridge configured to accommodate an aerosol generating material, an aerosol supply port communicating with the aerosol cartridge and the venturi area, and where an aerosol from the aerosol cartridge is supplied to the venturi area through the aerosol supply port and transferred to the mouthpiece because both Fernando and Rogan are directed to preventing aerosol generating material from burning. Rogan teaches a split reservoir configuration to give a user more flexibility in selecting amount of liquid released or flavors of liquid and improve liquid control [0032] and this merely involves combining configurations for delivering atomized aerosol generating material according to known heating methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023) and Liu (CN 112075669 A), as applied to claims 1 and 4, and further in view of Emmett (WO 2020115155 A1, cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023).
With regard to Claim 5, Fernando teaches wherein the aerosol forming substrate may comprise homogenized plant material [0042] and all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Fernando is silent to:
Wherein the functional material has a form of fine granules or dry powder
Emmett, directed to an aerosol generating system, teaches where an aerosol forming substrate may be in the form of powder or granules which may containing homogenized tobacco to produce a more natural taste and appearance (pg. 14, Lines 30-36 & Pg. 15, Line 1). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the form of the aerosol forming substrate of Fernando with the powder or granules of Emmett to provide a stable source of aerosol generation and improve aerosol taste.
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 functional material of modified Fernando to have a form of fine granules or dry powder because both Fernando and Emmett are directed to providing stable aerosol forming material with a resistance to burning. Emmett teaches an aerosol forming substrate in the form of powder or granules to produce a more natural taste and appearance (pg. 14, Lines 30-36 & Pg. 15, Line 1) and this merely involves simple substitution of a one known form for aerosol generating material for another to obtain predictable results.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023), Liu (CN 112075669 A), and Rogan (US 20190116883 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 3, and further in view of Hejazi (US 20190289909 A1, cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023)
With regard to Claim 6, Fernando teaches a microprocessor [0038] and all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Fernando is silent to:
A controller configured to open and close the functional material supply port or the aerosol supply port
Wherein the controller opens the functional material supply port and closes the aerosol supply port in a functional material supply mode, and opens the functional material supply port and the aerosol supply port in a simultaneous supply mode
PNG
media_image3.png
614
293
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Hejazi teaches (i) an airflow controller (Fig. 7: #780) that may be a flap or gate controlled by an actuation device that directs the flow of air through or passed only a desired flavoring module [0100], where the user may also receive aerosol containing only the aerosol precursor with no flavor [0070]. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the airflow controller can be in the form of a flap or gate, where both generally perform the function of opening and closing, and would be motivated to combine it with the supply ports of modified Fernando to control the type of air passed through to the mouthpiece.
(ii) Furthermore, the airflow controller can switch through different modules containing different flavorant to allow the user to pick their desired flavoring [0100]. The use of an empty module would allow the user to receive aerosol containing only the aerosol precursor with no flavor [0070].
A person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the airflow controller, whether in the form of a flap or gate, to open one supply port while closing another because flaps and gates are generally used to regulate, redirect, or mix airflow in the art. This modification would perform the same function of allowing selective operation modes in which a flavorant may or may not be added to the aerosol before being delivered to the user, and it would also yield the same results. Additionally, combining the selective operation mode of the controller with the programmable microprocessor of modified Fernando would enhance user control by providing users with the option to receive aerosol with or without flavor received from the mouthpiece [0070].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the airflow controller of Hejazi with the controller of modified Fernando to be configured to open and close the functional material supply port or the aerosol supply port; wherein the controller opens the functional material supply port and closes the aerosol supply port in a functional material supply mode, and opens the functional material supply port and the aerosol supply port in a simultaneous supply mode because both Fernando and Hejazi are directed to providing flavorant in aerosol generating systems. Hejazi teaches an airflow controller that gives users the option to add flavorant to aerosol generated from an aerosol precursor composition before reaching a user and this merely involves combining two controlling mechanisms of Fernando and Hejazi according to known control methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023), and further in view of Rogan (US 20190116883 A1) and Liu (CN 112075669 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation).
With regard to Claim 7, Fernando, directed to an aerosol generation system, teaches (i) a device comprising a housing (Fig. 1: #12, [0061]) and a mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50, [0060]). (ii) Air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) are disposed around the circumference of the housing and separated from the mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50, [0061]). (iii) An airflow passage is formed from the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) to an air outlet (Fig. 1: #24) in the mouthpiece (Fig. 1:#50, [0071]). The airflow passage extends in a vertical direction upward from the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) and comprises a restricted cross section that decreases and expands [0010], meeting the claim limitation of a venturi area. (iv) The device includes a cartridge (Fig. 1: #20), within the housing (Fig. 1: #12), comprising a liquid aerosol forming substrate [0034].
(v) A heating element (Fig. 1: #26), part of a heater assembly [0021], is disposed on the spigot (Fig. 1: #32) above the restricted cross section of the airflow passage, between the air inlets (Fig. 1: #18) and air outlet (Fig. 1: #24), meeting the claim limitation of a heating unit disposed on at least a portion of a perimeter of the venturi area. (vii) The liquid aerosol forming substrate is supplied to the restricted cross section of the airflow passage through a spigot (Fig. 2: #32, [0064]) and eventually leads to the air outlet (Fig. 1: #24) of the mouthpiece (Fig. 1: #50), after being heated [0081]. (viii) The heater assembly comprises a heating element that is in communication with and supported on the spigot (Fig. 1: #32, [0064 & 0066]). Fernando teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however Fernando is silent to:
An aerosol cartridge communicating with the venturi area and configured to accommodate an aerosol generating material
A first heater configured to heat the functional material prior to the functional material being supplied to the venturi area
PNG
media_image2.png
219
410
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to i., Rogan, directed to an aerosol generating device with laser, teaches (i) a split reservoir configuration (Fig. 4A: #48A & 48B) within the housing, each configured to accommodate liquid to be vaporized [0032]. Liquid from the reservoirs is suppled to wicks to be atomized and supplied to a channel to be inhaled through the mouthpiece by a user [0042]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the cartridge of Fernando to a split configuration to comprise another form of aerosol generating material, to give a user more flexibility in selecting amount of liquid released or flavors of liquid [0032] and combine it with the venturi area of Fernando within the airflow passage aerosol generating material, further improving vaporization efficiency of the device.
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 housing of Fernando to include aerosol cartridge communicating with the venturi area and configured to accommodate an aerosol generating material because both Fernando and Rogan are directed to preventing aerosol generating material from burning. Rogan teaches a split reservoir configuration to give a user more flexibility in selecting amount of liquid released or flavors of liquid and improve liquid control [0032] and this merely involves combining configurations for delivering atomized aerosol generating material according to known heating methods to yield predictable results.
PNG
media_image1.png
408
323
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to ii., Liu, directed to an atomizing device and electronic cigarette, teaches (ii) a heating element (Fig. 7: #11) configured to heat liquid [0045]. The heating element (Fig. 7: #11) is positioned before the air channel (Fig. 7: #15), in the direction of airflow, wherein the air channel (Fig. 7: #15) comprises a venturi area (Fig. 7: #151) to increase the volume of atomized aerosol received by a user [0005]. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the first heater of Fernando with the location of the heating element of Liu to prevent heating the generated aerosol and scalding a user [0049].
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 first heater of Fernando to be configured to heat the functional material prior to the functional material being supplied to the venturi area because both Fernando and Liu are directed to improving volume of aerosol received by a user. Li teaches a heating element configured to heat liquid before reaching a venturi area to prevent heating the generated aerosol and scalding a user [0049] and this merely involves applying a known locational technique to a known heater of an aerosol generating device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 20170360093 A1, as cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023), Rogan (US 20190116883 A1), and Liu (CN 112075669 A), as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Hejazi (US 20190289909 A1, cited in IDS dated 06/27/2023).
With regard to Claim 8, Fernando teaches a microprocessor [0038] and all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Fernando is silent to:
A controller configured to selectively supply the functional material or the aerosol to the venturi area
Wherein the controller opens a functional material supply port and closes an aerosol supply port in a functional material supply mode, and opens the functional material supply port and the aerosol supply port in a simultaneous supply mode
PNG
media_image3.png
614
293
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Hejazi teaches (i) an airflow controller (Fig. 7: #780) that may be a flap or gate controlled by an actuation device that directs the flow of air through or passed only a desired flavoring module [0100], where the user may receive aerosol containing flavor or only the aerosol precursor with no flavor [0070], meeting the claim limitation of a controller configured to selectively supply the functional material or the aerosol to the venturi area. (ii) Furthermore, the airflow controller can switch through different modules containing different flavorant to allow the user to pick their desired flavoring [0100]. The use of an empty module would allow the user to receive aerosol containing only the aerosol precursor with no flavor [0070].
A person of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the airflow controller, whether in the form of a flap or gate, to open one supply port while closing another because flaps and gates are generally used to regulate, redirect, or mix airflow by performing an opening and closing function in the art. This modification would perform the same function of allowing selective operation modes in which a flavorant may or may not be added to the aerosol before being delivered to the user, and it would yield the same result. Further, combining the selective operation mode of the controller with the programmable controller of modified Fernando would enhance user control by providing users with the option to receive aerosol with or without flavor received from the mouthpiece [0070].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the airflow controller of Hejazi with the controller of modified Fernando to selectively supply the functional material or the aerosol to the venturi area; wherein the controller opens the functional material supply port and closes the aerosol supply port in a functional material supply mode, and opens the functional material supply port and the aerosol supply port in a simultaneous supply mode because both Fernando and Hejazi are directed to providing flavorant in aerosol generating systems, Hejazi teaches an airflow controller that gives users the option to add flavorant to aerosol generated from an aerosol precursor composition before reaching a user and this merely involves combining two controlling mechanisms of Fernando and Hejazi according to known control methods to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 9, Fernando teaches wherein the aerosol-forming substrate is supplied through an airflow passage, with a venturi effect [0010], to the heating element to be vaporized [0081]. The heating element is part of a heater assembly [0021].
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