Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/111,945

Vaporizer

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Feb 21, 2023
Examiner
YAARY, ERIC
Art Unit
1755
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Vmr Products LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
627 granted / 850 resolved
+8.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+0.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
900
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.0%
+15.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 850 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment In view of the amendments to claim 10, the rejection of claim 10 over Egoyants and Jones has been withdrawn. The prior art does not teach the new limitations. In view of the amendments to claim 28, the rejection of claim 10 over Egoyants, Jones, and Kane has been withdrawn. The prior art does not teach the new limitations. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made as detailed below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 28-29 and 31-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 28 and 39 recite the limitation "the portion of the vaporizable material". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. For examination purposes, “the portion of the vaporizable material” will be interpreted as “a portion of the vaporizable material”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim 28, 29, 31, 32, 38, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egoyants (US 2014/0182608) in view of Liu (US 2014/0150783) and Kane (US 2014/0261490) Regarding claims 28, 31, 38, and 39, Egoyants teaches an apparatus 1 (vaporizer device) [0082] comprising a cartomizer, the cartomizer comprising: a housing 7 (cartomizer body); smokable (vaporizable) material 5 disposed within the cartomizer body [0047-0048], the vaporizable material comprising dried tobacco [0046]; a heating element 3 that is disposed within the cartomizer body and extends about a perimeter all of (a portion or majority) vaporizable material 5 such that the heating element 3 is positioned between the vaporizable material 5 and the cartomizer body 7 [0063], the heating element configured to heat the vaporizable material. Egoyants teaches the cartomizer further comprises a mouthpiece 6 coupled to the mouthpiece end of the cartomizer, Egoyants does not teach a battery portion having an outer shell and a chamber defined by the outer shell and the cartomizer body is configured for insertion into the chamber such that at least a part of the heating element is positioned in the chamber when the cartomizer body is inserted into the chamber. Liu teaches an electronic cigarette comprising a battery portion (combination of power rod 95 and connector 92) having an outer shell and a chamber (within casing 921) defined by the outer shell and the cartomizer body 91 is configured for insertion into the chamber such that at least a part of the heating element 21 is positioned in the chamber when the cartomizer body is inserted into the chamber and the mouthpiece end (end of main portion 11 adjacent mouthpiece/suction nozzle 4) and mouthpiece 4 are positioned outside the chamber when the cartomizer is connected to the battery portion, the cartomizer configured to be selectively inserted and removed from the chamber [Fig. 2, 3, 5, 7]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply this configuration to the apparatus of Egoyants to facilitate the installation, detachment and replacement of the cartomizer as suggested by Liu [0002]. The portion that ends just to the left of controller 12 in Fig. 3 is interpreted as being the opposite insertion end in modified Egoyants. The heating element 3 is positioned proximate to both ends. Modified Egoyants does not teach the heating element is positioned distal to the mouthpiece end. Kane teaches an electronic cigarette comprising a condensation chamber 150 at a downstream end to help formation of a smoke-like aerosol [0004; Fig. 1]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this condensation chamber within the cartomizer of Egoyants end to help formation of a smoke-like aerosol. Thus, the heating element would be further distanced away from the mouthpiece end and interpreted to be distal to the mouthpiece end. Regarding claim 29, Egoyants teaches the mouthpiece is in fluid communication with the dry vaporizable material [0051; Fig. 3]. Regarding claim 32, Egoyants teaches the cartomizer further comprises one or more holes configured to allow air from the environment to pass therethrough and into the cartomizer body [0082]. Claims 33-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egoyants, Liu, and Kane as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Alvarez (US 4,224,953). Regarding claims 33-36, Egoyants does not teach a screen to contain the vaporizable material. Alvarez teaches a smoking pipe including 2 screens to keep the tobacco being smoked within the proper compartment and at the same time allow the smoke and air to go through [col. 2, l. 61-65]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such screens in the device of Egoyants, proximate both ends of the cartomizer, for the above reasons suggested by Alvarez. Regarding claim 37, regarding the one screen being integral with the mouthpiece, the Courts have held that the use of a one-piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice."), see In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-12 and 14-19 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Egoyants teaches an apparatus 1 (vaporizer device) [0082] comprising a cartomizer, the cartomizer comprising: a housing 7 (cartomizer body); smokable (vaporizable) material 5 disposed within the cartomizer body [0047-0048], the vaporizable material comprising dried tobacco [0046]; a heating element 3 that is disposed within the cartomizer body and extends about a perimeter of a portion of the vaporizable material 5 such that the heating element 3 is positioned between a portion of the vaporizable material 5 and the cartomizer body 7 [0063], the heating element configured to heat the vaporizable material. Jones [Fig. 6] teaches a vaporizer device a battery portion (lower portion of Fig. 6 including power supply 86) having an outer shell 72 and a chamber 76 defined by the outer shell and cartomizer body 38 is configured for insertion into the chamber 76 the entire cartomizer (i.e. including the heating element therein) is positioned in the chamber when the cartomizer body is inserted into the chamber [0030-0032]. There is no teaching or reasonable suggestion in the prior art to modify the device of Egoyants to include the configuration suggested by Jones further in combination with a bushing at an insertion end of the chamber, wherein the bushing is configured to stabilize and retain the cartomizer within the chamber. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC YAARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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. /ERIC YAARY/Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 25, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 26, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 26, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 28, 2025
Response Filed
May 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 05, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 05, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 10, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 19, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588707
ELECTRONIC SMOKING ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582151
METHOD AND PLANT FOR TREATING TOBACCO LEAVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575599
SMOKING CAPSULE WITH ELECTRICAL CONTACT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575612
SMOKING DEVICE WITH FLATTENING FUNCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575007
ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE AND ATOMIZING ASSEMBLY AND ATOMIZING ELEMENT THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+0.9%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 850 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month