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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/19/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-12 and 14-15 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. Claim 1 has been amended.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s response filed on 1/20/2026 containing
amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, filed 1/20/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The applicant has amended claim 1 to recite the substrate held by the tray is compressed against heating element, whereas previously it was only required for the substrate to be pressed against the heating element. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found art and previously applied art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner (US2021/0205552) in view of Smith (US20180368475) and Batista (US2021/0212364).
Regarding claim 1, Conner teaches:
An aerosol generation device (aerosol delivery device 100, figure 1) comprising: a substrate (substrate tablet 110, [0079]); an aerosol generation chamber configured to receive and heat the substrate to generate aerosol (support cylinder 119 that has a tubular configuration and surrounds substrate table 110 as shown in figure 2, [0082]), the aerosol generation chamber comprising at least a heating element (induction coil 118, [0079]).
a housing (housing 108, [0073], figure 2).
a tray configured to receive and hold the substrate (receiving compartment 120 that may comprise a sliding tray and may be configured to receive a single substrate tablet, [0080]).
whereby the tray is translated in the longitudinal direction into the aerosol generation chamber (as the receiving compartment may be a sliding tray that receives a substrate ([0080]) and the receiving compartment 120 has an opening 109 at a longitudinal end of the compartment (figure 2), it is evident that the tray would translate in the longitudinal direction into the aerosol generation chamber).
Conner does not appear to explicitly disclose (I) the substrate having a shape of a plate, a pad, or a disc, (II) the housing is oblong, (III) a lid connected to the tray and configured to be in a closed position covering the aerosol generation chamber and in an open position exposing the aerosol generation chamber; wherein when the lid is in the open position, the tray is located at least partially outside of the aerosol generation chamber and is configured to receive the substrate, or the substrate held by the tray can be removed from the tray by a hand of a user, and when the lid is in the closed position, the substrate is contained in the aerosol generation chamber; and the lid is configured to transition from the open position to the closed position by translating towards the aerosol generation chamber in a longitudinal direction of the housing, and (IV) the substrate held by the tray is compressed against the heating element.
In regard to (I), Conner further teaches that the term “tablet” as used herein should not be interpreted as a limitation on size and/or shape and the substrate tablet may have a non-circular profile shape and/or a non-cylindrical overall shape ([0079]). Therefore it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the substrate have a shape of a plate, a pad, or a disc because the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See MPEP § 2144.04 IV B.
In regard to (II), Conner further teaches that the overall design of the housing can vary and can comprise an elongated shell that is substantially tubular in shape, substantially rectangular, or substantially rectangular cuboid shape ([0059]). Therefore it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the housing be oblong because the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See MPEP § 2144.04 IV B.
In regard to (III), Conner further teaches that the receiving compartment may be located in the mouthpiece portion ([0080]). Conner is silent to further details of the sliding tray.
Smith, directed to an aerosol-generation device, teaches:
A tray configured to receive and hold a substrate (tray 250, figure 4, [0030]).
A lid connected to the tray (mouthpiece portion 13) and configured to be in a closed position covering the aerosol generation chamber (the linear countermovement slides the tray 250 into a cavity of the battery position and closes the cavity by the mouthpiece portion, [0030]) and in an open position exposing the aerosol generation chamber (as shown in figure 4, by the linear movement, the cavity is opened and the tray is slid out of a cavity of the battery portion, [0029]).
Wherein when the lid is in the open position, the tray is located at least partially outside of the aerosol generation chamber and is configured to receive the substrate or the substrate held by the tray can be removed from the tray by a hand of a user (as shown in figure 4, a liquid reservoir 234 (also called capsules) can be laid on the tray in the insertion configuration, [0029]).
When the lid is in the closed position, the substrate is contained in the aerosol generation chamber (the linear countermovement slides the tray 250 into a cavity of the battery position and closes the cavity by the mouthpiece portion, [0030]).
The lid is configured to transition from the open position to the closed position by translating towards the aerosol generation chamber in a longitudinal direction of the housing (linear counter-movement along the main axis X, [0029]).
The tray is part of one of the battery portion 12 and the mouthpiece portion 13 ([0032]).
The cavity comprises a tray for ease of insertion ([0045]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the tray of Conner to be configured with a lid as taught by Smith, because both Conner and Smith are directed to aerosol-generating devices with trays to receive and hold a substrate, Smith teaches the tray allows for ease of insertion, and this merely involves incorporating a known way to configure a tray for receiving and holding a substrate to a similar tray for an aerosolisation device to yield predictable results.
In regard to (IV), Batista, directed to an article for forming an aerosol, teaches:
Insertion of the article into the heating chamber of the device may at least partially compress the article, enhancing contact or the article with heating surfaces of the heating device, and the transfer of thermal energy into the article may be enhanced ([0087]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Conner to partially compress the substrate when it is inserted into the heating chamber as taught by Batista, because both Conner and Batista are directed to aerosol-generating devices with substrates inserted into heating chambers, Batista teaches this may enhance the transfer of thermal energy into the substrate, and this merely involves incorporating a known way to configure insertion of a substrate into a heating chamber to a similar aerosolisation device to yield predictable results.
As Conner teaches the heating element may be on the inner surface of the heating chamber ([0082]: the coil may be positioned at an inner surface of the support cylinder), compression of the article when inserted into the chamber would teach the substrate held by the tray is compressed against the heating element.
Regarding claim 14, Conner does not appear to teach wherein the tray comprises a recess configured to receive and hold the substrate, as Conner is silent to the structure of the tray.
However, Smith further teaches wherein the tray comprises a recess configured to receive and hold the substrate (as shown in figure 4, tray 250 has a recess where the liquid reservoir 234 is inserted).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the tray of Conner to comprise a recess configured to receive and hold the substrate as taught by Smith, because both Conner and Smith are directed to aerosol-generating devices with trays for receiving substrates, and this merely involves a known way to configure a tray for receiving and holding a substrate to a similar tray for an aerosolisation device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 15, as modified Conner has the substrate being compressed when inserted into the heating chamber to enhance contact of the substrate with the heating surfaces of the heating chamber (see [0087] of Batista), multiple edges of the substrate would be pressed against the heating element when inserted into the heating chamber via the tray, and thus modified Conner teaches wherein the lid being configured to transition from the open position to the closed position by translating towards the aerosol generation chamber in the longitudinal direction of the housing causes the two edges of the substrate held by the tray are pressed against the heating element.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner (US2021/0205552), Smith (US20180368475), and Batista (US2021/0212364) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Price (US2005/0072841).
Regarding claim 2, modified Conner does not appear to disclose wherein the tray comprises at least one bolt that is configured to be placed inside a guide rail.
Price, directed to a portable ashtray, teaches:
An ashtray assembly 20 comprising a drawer 12 that slides in and out of an outer housing 10. A slide mechanism 15 is located on a longitudinal side 41 as to facilitate opening and closing of the ashtray assembly 20 ([0031], figures 3A-3D).
The slide mechanism 15 is comprised of a guide like rectangular opening 14 along the length of the longitudinal side 41 of the rectangular outer housing 10. Attached to the rectangular inner housing 12 is a protrusion 16 ([0031], figures 3A-3D).
The slide mechanism comprises at least one bolt (protrusion 16) that is configured to be placed inside a guide rail (guide opening 14), ([0031], figures 3A-3D).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the tray of Conner by incorporating the slide mechanism as taught by Price, because both Conner and Price are directed to sliding trays for smoking material, Price teaches a sliding mechanism for sliding a drawer in and out of an outer housing, and this merely involves incorporating a known way to slide a tray in and out of a housing to a similar sliding tray to yield predicable results.
Regarding claim 3, modified Conner does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one bolt consists of or comprises a pair of studs.
However, the mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 VI B. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the slide mechanism of modified Conner because this is merely involving the duplication of parts. Modified Conner having two protrusions reads on the at least one bolt consisting of or comprising a pair of studs.
Regarding claim 4, modified Conner further teaches a guide rail (guide opening 14, Price) configured to receive the at least one bolt and guide the tray during translation into or out of the aerosol generation chamber (Price, [0031], sliding the protrusion 16 back and forth along the guide opening 14).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner (US2021/0205552) in view of Smith (US20180368475), Batista (US2021/0212364), and Price (US2005/0072841) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Beaudoin (US2006/0226747).
Regarding claim 7, modified Conner does not appear to disclose wherein the guide rail is movably mounted in the aerosol generation device and is guided by a second guide rail by at least one second bolt such that the two guide rails form a telescopic mechanism.
Beaudoin, directed to a drawer slide assembly, teaches:
A drawer slide assembly that comprises a telescopic pair of first and second rails slidable between a retracted closed position and an extended open position for respectively closing and opening the drawer. It also includes a rail catch mechanism for resisting slide extension from the retracted position ([0013]). The telescopic pair of first and second rails reads on a guide rail that is movable mounted and is guided by a second guide rail such that the two guide rails form a telescopic mechanism.
In order that a drawer does not inadvertently come partially open, catch mechanisms can be used to hold or bias the drawer in its closed position ([0003]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the sliding tray mechanism of modified Conner to have a second guide rail where the guide rails form a telescopic pair of first and second guide rails as taught by Beaudoin, because both Conner and Beaudoin are directed to tray/drawer sliding assemblies, Beaudoin teaches the telescopic mechanism has a catch mechanism so that the drawer does not inadvertently open, and this merely involves incorporating a known mechanism for sliding a tray into and out of a housing (i.e. with a telescopic pair of first and second rails) to a similar slidable tray to yield predicable results. When modifying Conner to have the second guide rail as taught by Price, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to use the same mechanism to guide the rail, that being the protrusion 16 of Price ([0031], figures 3A-3D), and yielding at least one second bolt that guides the second guide rail.
Regarding claim 8, modified Conner does not appear to explicitly teach wherein the at least one second bolt consists of or comprises a second pair of studs. However, the mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 VI B. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the at least one second bolt of modified Conner because this is merely involving the duplication of parts. Modified Conner having two protrusions guiding the second guide rail reads on the at least one second bolt consisting of or comprising a pair of studs.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conner (US2021/0205552), Smith (US20180368475), and Batista (US2021/0212364) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Trzecieski (US2020/0163382).
Regarding claim 12, modified Conner does not appear to disclose wherein the lid comprises a recess portion located at an end of the lid which faces the aerosol generation chamber.
Trzecieski, directed to a vaporization device, teaches:
A lid (mouthpiece lid 104) that comprises a recess portion (indent 104i) at the end of the lid which faces the aerosol generation chamber (as shown in figure 1A, indent 104i is at the end of the mouthpiece lid 104 that faces the heating chambers 106 and 206, [0071]).
The indent 104i enables the user to remove the lid ([0071]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the lid of Conner by incorporating a recess portion located at an end of the lid which faces the aerosol generation chamber as taught by Trzecieski, because both Conner and Trzecieski are directed to vaporization devices with mouthpiece lids, Trzecieski teaches the recess enables the user to remove the lid, and this merely involves incorporating a known element to the end of a mouthpiece element (i.e. recess) to a similar vaporization device to yield predicable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 9, and 10-11 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 5-6 and 10-11, No prior art alone or in combination with references discloses or reasonably suggests the aerosol generation device as recited in claim 5. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose wherein the tray during translation in the longitudinal direction into the aerosol generation chamber is also translated in a direction substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction and towards the heating element. The closest prior art is considered to be Smith (US20180368475) which teaches an aerosol generation device (electronic smoking device 210, figure 4, [0029]) comprising a tray configured to receive and hold the substrate (tray 250, figure 4, [0030]) and is translated in the longitudinal direction into the aerosol generation chamber (linear counter-movement along the main axis X, [0029]).
However, Smith does not teach where the tray is also translated in a direction substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction and towards the heating element. Therefore, claim 5 is indicated as being allowable over the prior art. Claims 6 and 10-11 are similarly indicated as being allowable for being dependent on claim 5.
Regarding claim 9, No prior art alone or in combination with references discloses or reasonably suggests the aerosol generation device as recited in claim 9. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose wherein the second guide rail tapers in an inclination along an edge thereof further away from the heating element. The closest prior art is considered to be Smith (US20180368475) which teaches an aerosol generation device (electronic smoking device 210, figure 4, [0029]) comprising a tray configured to receive and hold the substrate (tray 250, figure 4, [0030]) and is translated in the longitudinal direction into the aerosol generation chamber (linear counter-movement along the main axis X, [0029]).
Beaudoin (US2006/0226747) directed to a drawer slide assembly, teaches:
A drawer slide assembly that comprises a telescopic pair of first and second rails slidable between a retracted closed position and an extended open position for respectively closing and opening the drawer.
However, Smith and Beaudoin do not teach wherein the second guide rail tapers in an inclination along an edge thereof further away from the heating element. Therefore, claim 9 is indicated as being allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicole A Szumigalski whose telephone number is (703)756-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00 - 4:30 EST.
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.
/N.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights