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 .
Status of the Claims
This office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 18 December 2025:
Claims 1-11 are pending
Claims 1 and 5 are amended
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendments to the claims filed 18 December 2025 have been acknowledged. The rejection to Claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn due to amendments of the claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On Pages 4-5 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that the lever is not “partially engaged with the cover so as to eject at least a portion of the substrate” as recited in Claim 1 because Wei’s lever is attached to a piston which is the component that performs the ejection through its engagement with the cover.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Wei specifically states that “the lever rod 28 comprises a piston 30” which means that the piston itself is a component of the lever rod. Therefore, if the piston is performing the component ejection, it subsequently means that the lever rod is performing said ejection by virtue of its piston component. Similarly, if the piston is engaged with the cover, the lever rod is also considered engaged with the cover by virtue of its piston component which is considered a part of the lever.
Applicant’s arguments filed 18 December 2025, with respect to the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
On Page 6 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant has amended Claim 1 to further recite a new limitation wherein the substrate is ejected by rotating the lever “about a fixed axis of rotation”. Applicant argues that Wei does not disclose this additional new limitation as Wei’s lever rod rotates about an axis, wherein said axis has a vertical translation to induce the lever rod’s rotational motion.
Examiner agrees with the Applicant’s arguments and therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Guan (Publication No. CN105292788A).
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (Publication No. US20220202072A1) in view of Guan (Publication No. CN105292788A cited in IDS dated 20 February 2026, see provided English translated copy).
Regarding Claim 1, Wei discloses an aerosol generation device, comprising:
an aerosol generation chamber (Heating chamber 14) configured to receive and heat an aerosol-forming substrate (18) to generate aerosol (Figs. 1A-B; Abstract, [0087]);
a cover (Mouthpiece 12) which can be moved into a first position (i.e., closed position) that closes (i.e., covering) the aerosol generation chamber (14) (see Fig. 2A; [0090-0091]);
and in a second position (i.e., open position) that at least partially exposes or opens the aerosol generation chamber (14) (see Fig. 2B; [0090-0091]);
and an ejection (i.e., mechanical movement) mechanism having a lever (Lever rod 28) (Fig. 2B; [0092-0094]; discloses a mechanical movement means/mechanism comprising a lever which drives a piston configured to eject a used substrate; considered equivalent to an ejection mechanism);
and being at least partially engaged with the cover (12) so as to eject at least a portion of the substrate (18) out of the aerosol generation chamber (14) when the cover (12) is in the second (i.e., open) position (see Fig. 2B; [0090-0094]; discloses the mouthpiece is engaged/connected to the crankshaft and lever components of the mechanical movement mechanism; discloses that ejection of the substrate occurs when a first movement occurs, wherein the first movement is the mouthpiece cover moving from the first/closed to second/open position);
wherein the ejection (i.e., mechanical movement) mechanism is configured to be in an ejected state in which the substrate (18) protrudes from the aerosol generation chamber (14) (see Fig. 2B; [0093-0094]; substrate is shown to protrude out of the generation chamber when ejected);
and in a non-ejected state in which the substrate (18) is fully contained by the aerosol generation chamber (14) (see Figs. 2A-B; in the non-ejected state wherein the cover 12 is closed, the substrate is shown to be fully contained within the generation heating chamber);
and the ejection (i.e., mechanical movement) mechanism translates from the non-ejected state to the ejected state when the cover (12) is moved from the first (i.e., closed) position to the second (i.e., open) position, thereby ejecting the substrate (18) by rotating the lever (28) via the transfer shaft (26) (see Figs. 2A-B; [0091-0094]; discloses that the lever is rotatable in response to the mouthpiece cover movement).
Wei does not explicitly disclose that the substrate is ejected by the lever rotating about a fixed axis of rotation.
However, Guan directed to a cigarette ejection device, discloses an ejection mechanism comprising a connecting rod (7) (i.e., lever), lower push rod (52), cigarette tip rod (8), and a rotating shaft provided in the middle of the connecting rod (7) in which said connecting rod rotates around the shaft (Figs. 2-3; [0042]; Guan’s rod/lever 7, push rod 52 and tip rod 8 are similar to Wei’s own rod 28, piston 26 and piston 30; the rotating shaft is shown to be fixed when the lever rod is rotated).
When the push rod (52) is pushed down, it rotates the rod/lever (7) which in turn drives the push rod 8 upwards to both eject a cigarette from an internal cavity and open the cover (3) to allow the cigarette to eject outwards (see Figs. 2-3; [0042, 0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the lever rod disclosed by Wei to have a rotating shaft disposed in the middle of said lever rod as disclosed by Guan, as both are directed to an ejection mechanism for a cigarette, where one ordinarily skilled in the art can reasonably apply a lever and shaft ejection mechanism disclosed by Guan to a similar lever and shaft ejection mechanism disclosed by Wei, to predictably result in an ejection mechanism capable of ejecting a cigarette/substrate via rotating said lever about a fixed axis via rotation shaft disposed in the middle of said lever.
Regarding Claim 2, Wei further discloses when the cover (12) is moved from the second (i.e., open) position to the first (i.e., closed) position, the lever (28) rotates back to an original position so as to enter the non-ejected state, in which the substrate is fully inserted into the aerosol generation chamber (see Figs. 2A-B; [0091]; discloses a second movement wherein the cover is moved in the opposite direction of the first movement to reclose the heating chamber; reclosing the heating chamber implies that the cover returns to the first/closed position which is shown to be the position wherein the substrate is fully inserted into the chamber, equivalent to a non-ejected state).
Regarding Claim 3, Wei further discloses the cover is configured to be in a third (i.e., intermediate) (see Fig. 2C; [0091]). Wei also discloses that the cover (12) is connected to a transfer shaft (26) which rotates the lever via linear movement to eject a substrate (18) when the cover moves from a first (i.e., closed position) to a second (i.e., open) position (see Figs. 2A-B; [0092-0093]).
Wei does not explicitly disclose the cover (12) is configured to be in an intermediate (i.e., third) position between the second (i.e., open) position and the first (i.e., closed) position;
the lever (28) does not rotate when the cover (12) is moved from the first (i.e., closed) position to the intermediate position (32);
and the lever (28) ejects the substrate (18) by rotating when the cover (12) is moved from the intermediate position to the second (i.e., open) position.
However, it should be noted that Wei discloses another proposed embodiment of the ejection/mechanical movement mechanism comprising of a cover (12), sliding shaft (42) (i.e., transfer shaft), and base support (46) (i.e., lever) (Figs. 3A-B; [0097-0100]). The cover is configured with a locked closed position which can be rotated to an unlocked (i.e., intermediate) position via pivotal movement parallel to the longitudinal axis of the aerosol-generating article in a first movement (see Figs. 3A-B; [0097-0100]).
Similar to the prior embodiment disclosed in Figures 2A-B, Wei discloses that the alternative embodiment ejects the substrate (18) in a second movement where the cover (12) in the unlocked (i.e., intermediate) position is further moved linearly (i.e., open position) to cause the base support (46) (i.e., lever) to move and eject the substrate (18) via the sliding shaft (43) (i.e., transfer shaft) (see Figs. 3A-B; [0099-0100]; the intermediate position is implied to be between the closed and open position because the first and second movement naturally progress from closed, intermediate, then open; it is implied that the base support/lever does not move and/or rotate in the intermediate position as it does not eject the substrate at this point in the movement).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to modify Wei’s cover and ejection mechanism/movement disclosed in Figures 2A-B, to include an unlocking (i.e., intermediate) position between the first (i.e., locked/closed) position and second (i.e., open/ejecting) position as disclosed in Figures 3A-B, and reasonably expect that the resulting modified movement/ejection mechanism will be capable of unlocking the cover without operating the lever when going from the closed to intermediate position, then proceeding to eject the substrate when the sliding/transfer shaft provides a linear movement to induce the lever to rotate and push the substrate when moving from the intermediate to open (i.e., second) position.
Regarding Claim 4, Wei further discloses the lever (28) further comprises a piston (30) which at least partially defines a bottom surface of the aerosol generation chamber (14) (see Figs. 2A-B; [0093]; the piston is disclosed to extend into the heating generation chamber and positioned at the base/bottom surface); piston is illustrated to define said bottom/base surface of said heating generation chamber).
Claims 5-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (Publication No. US20220202072A1) and Guan (Publication No. CN105292788A cited in IDS dated 20 February 2026, see provided English translated copy) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Shibuya (Publication No. JP2000197472A cited in IDS dated 25 July 2025, see IDS provided translated copy).
Regarding Claim 5, Wei further discloses the ejection (i.e., mechanical movement) mechanism has a sliding track (see annotated Fig. 2C; the space which the transfer shaft 26 moves up and down is considered equivalent to a sliding track);
and a sliding block (26) that is arranged to slide in the sliding track so as to trigger the rotation of the lever (28) (see Figs. 2A-B; the transfer shaft is disclosed to have a linear movement and is shown to move up and down in a non-rotatable manner; the linear movement is considered equivalent to a sliding motion; the lever is disclosed to be rotatable and is shown to rotate when the transfer/sliding shaft block moves/slides linearly up and down).
PNG
media_image1.png
639
946
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wei further discloses that the sliding block (Transfer shaft 26) pivotably engaged with the cover (12) via hinge protrusion (22) and a crankshaft (24) attached to the sliding block such that when the lid rotates, the sliding block triggers the rotating lever (18) to push pistons (30) upwards, and eject the substrate (Figs. 2A-B; [0092-0094]). Wei does not disclose the sliding block is slidingly engaged with the cover.
However, Shibuya, directed to a cigarette dispenser for dispensing cigarettes (i.e., aerosol-forming substrate), discloses a movable transport unit (i.e., ejection mechanism) comprising a sliding piece (40) that slides left and right, serving as a lid (i.e., cover) that closes the opening of the dispenser box body (Figs. 2-4, [0013-0014]).
The sliding piece/cover further comprises protruding pieces (42a/b) on the bottom surface, which sandwiches an engaging protrusion (38) (i.e., sliding block) of a rotating portion (36) (i.e., lever) such that when the sliding cover slides horizontally, the engaging protrusion/sliding block also slides in the same direction (i.e., slidably engaged) as the cover and subsequently causes the rotation portion/lever to rotate and lift a strip (32) and carry out (i.e., eject) a cigarette (i.e., aerosol-forming substrate) (see Figs. 1-5; [0013-0015]; the transport unit is shown to push out the cigarette from the opening, which is considered equivalent to an ejection mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cover’s hinge and sliding block disclosed by Wei with the cover bottom protrusions and sliding block as disclosed by Shibuya, as both are directed to an ejection mechanism for ejecting/pushing a cigarette/aerosol-forming substrate out, where one ordinarily skilled in the art could reasonably substitute the known pivotal movement disclosed by Wei with another known sliding movement disclosed by Shibuya, and predictably yield a device with a cover and sliding block that are slidably engaged via the cover bottom protrusions, such that said sliding block rotates a lever to push/eject a cigarette/aerosol-forming substrate upwards from said device.
Regarding Claim 6, Modified Wei further discloses a fixing mechanism is configured to cause the lever (Wei, 28; Shibuya 36) to mechanically engage with the sliding block (Shibuya, 38) so that the lever (28) rotates when the sliding block (26) slides and vice versa (see Wei, Figs. 2A-B; [0093] and Shibuya, Figs. 2-4; [0013-0015]; Both Wei and Shibuya discloses a pivotal/rotating lever that is attached to a sliding block; implies that the fixing mechanism that connects the two components together creates a rotatable/pivotable engagement between said components).
Regarding Claim 7, Modified Wei further discloses a protrusion (Shibuya, 44a/b) of the cover (Wei, 12) is slidingly engaged with an end of the sliding block (Shibuya, 38) (see Claim 5 rejection for cover and sliding block modification; Modified Wei’s lever is connected to the cover via the sliding block, which moves the lever in response to the cover’s movement);
so that when the cover (Wei, 12) is moved from the first (i.e., closed) position to the second (i.e., open) position or vice versa, the lever (Wei, 28) is pressed down or lifted up, respectively (see Claim 5 rejection for cover and sliding block modification; see Wei Figs. 2A-B and Shibuya Figs. 2-4; Modified Wei’s sliding block is attached to one end of the lever such that the opposite end is lifted up when the sliding block moves).
Regarding Claim 9, Wei further discloses the aerosol generation device has an elongated shape, wherein the cover is located on a non-longitudinal side of said device (see Figs. 1A-2B; [0012]; the device is shown to have an elongate shape that matches the aerosol-forming article).
Wei also discloses a sliding block (Transfer shaft 26) pivotably engaged with the cover (12) via hinge protrusion (22) and a crankshaft (24) attached to the sliding block such that when the lid rotates, the sliding block triggers the rotating lever (18) to push pistons (30) upwards, and eject the substrate (Figs. 2A-B; [0092-0094]). Wei does not disclose the following:
the cover is a sliding cover
the cover is arranged to slide in a longitudinal direction of the aerosol generation device
Regarding (I), Shibuya, directed to a cigarette dispenser for dispensing cigarettes (i.e., aerosol-forming substrate), discloses a movable transport unit (i.e., ejection mechanism) comprising a sliding piece (40) that slides left and right, serving as a lid (i.e., cover) that closes the opening of the dispenser box body (Figs. 2-4, [0013-0014]).
The sliding piece/cover further comprises protruding pieces (42a/b) on the bottom surface, which sandwiches an engaging protrusion (38) (i.e., sliding block) of a rotating portion (36) (i.e., lever) such that when the sliding cover slides horizontally, the engaging protrusion/sliding block also slides in the same direction (i.e., slidably engaged) as the cover and subsequently causes the rotation portion/lever to rotate and lift a strip (32) and carry out (i.e., eject) a cigarette (i.e., aerosol-forming substrate) (see Figs. 1-5; [0013-0015]; the transport unit is shown to push out the cigarette from the opening, which is considered equivalent to an ejection mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cover and sliding block disclosed by Wei with the cover and sliding block as disclosed by Shibuya, as both are directed to an ejection mechanism for ejecting/pushing a cigarette/aerosol-forming substrate out, where one ordinarily skilled in the art could reasonably substitute the pivotal cover disclosed by Wei with the sliding cover disclosed by Shibuya, and predictably yield a device with a sliding cover that is slidably engaged with a sliding block to rotate a lever and push/eject a cigarette/aerosol-forming substrate upwards from said device.
Regarding (II), it should be noted that the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design choice (see MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B). In this case, Wei shows that the device has an elongate shape matching an elongate article such that said article is fully contained when inserted into the device. Though Wei shows the device’s longitudinal surface extending in the same direction as the aerosol-generating article, Wei does not specify explicit dimensions for the device.
Therefore, one ordinarily skilled in the art could make the obvious engineering design choice to extend the device such that the longitudinal surface is the surface wherein the sliding cover is disposed to slide on, without causing any changes to the devices ability to fully contain the aerosol-generating article, or the sliding cover’s ability to slide across a surface.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (Publication No. US20220202072A1) and Guan (Publication No. CN105292788A cited in IDS dated 20 February 2026, see provided English translated copy) in view of Shibuya (Publication No. JP2000197472A cited in IDS dated 25 July 2025, see IDS provided translated copy) as applied to Claims 5 and 7 above, and further in view of Hanyu (Publication No. US6234813B1).
Regarding Claim 8, Wei does not explicitly disclose parts of the ejection mechanism comprises metal material. However, it should be noted that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports prima facie obviousness (see MPEP § 2144.07). For example, Hanyu, directed to an ejection mechanism, discloses the mechanism comprises a sliding ejection rod (i.e., sliding block) that comprises a metal piece.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to select a metal material to construct parts of an ejection mechanism, and reasonably expect that the ejection mechanism will be capable of operating its ejecting components to eject a product.
Regarding Claim 11, Wei does not explicitly disclose the ejection mechanism’s sliding block comprises metal material. However, it should be noted that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports prima facie obviousness (see MPEP § 2144.07). For example, Hanyu, directed to an ejection mechanism, discloses the mechanism comprises a sliding ejection rod (i.e., sliding block) that comprises a metal piece.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to select a metal material to construct parts of an ejection mechanism such as the sliding block, and reasonably expect that the ejection mechanism will be capable of operating its ejecting components to eject a product.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (Publication No. US20220202072A1) and Guan (Publication No. CN105292788A cited in IDS dated 20 February 2026, see provided English translated copy)in view of Shibuya (Publication No. JP2000197472A cited in IDS dated 25 July 2025, see IDS provided translated copy) as applied to Claim 5 above, and further in view of An (Publication No. US20200245681A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Wei does not disclose the cover or its protrusions to be made of metal material. However, it should be noted that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports prima facie obviousness (see MPEP § 2144.07). For example, An, directed to an aerosol-generating device, discloses that metal material can be incorporated into a cover [0060].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to select a metal material to construct a cover and its subsequent protrusion parts and reasonably expect that the cover and its protrusions will still be able to operate as a cover for an aerosol-generating device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Olivaux (Publication No. US1758168A) – Cigarette distributing device comprising a hinged cover and engaged with the bottom of a cigarette holder such that when the cover is opened, the bottom is movable so that the held cigarettes/cigars will project.
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 Vu P Pham whose telephone number is (703)756-4515. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th (7:30AM-4:00PM 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.
/V.P./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights