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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/13/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1 and 3-21 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. Claims 1, 3, 7-8, and 15 are amended. Claims 18-21 are newly added.
Response to Amendment
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s response filed on 1/13/2026 containing
amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 3-21 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.
The following is a modified rejection made based on amendments made to the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 3 recites “the heating body” when it should instead recite “a heating body”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 11, 15-18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US2020/0054075) in view of Zhou (CN110876494A, cited in IDS dated 2/28/2023; references will refer to the English equivalent US2022/0312844).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches:
A porous body for an electronic vaporization device (porous body 11, figures 1-2, [0037]) comprising:
A first surface (atomizing surface 113) configured to install a heating body (heating element 12, figure 2, [0043]).
A second surface (absorbing surface 114) opposite the first surface (figure 2), the second surface being configured for contact with a liquid aerosol-generation substrate ([0043], figure 2).
At least one unit layer comprising a liquid storage advantage layer (inner first layer 111) and a liquid locking advantage layer (outer second layer 112) combined with the liquid storage advantage layer (figure 2, [0038]).
Wherein the liquid storage advantage layer has a first porosity, the liquid locking advantage layer has a second porosity, and the first porosity is greater than the second porosity (where part of the porous body that is near the atomizing surface has a greater porosity than part of the porous body that is near the absorbing surface, [0017]).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose the at least one unit layer comprises at least two unit layers sequentially arranged along a direction from the first surface to the second surface, wherein each unit layer of the at least two unit layers comprises a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer stacked together, wherein the liquid storage advantage layers and the liquid locking advantage layers of the at least two unit layers are alternately stacked together along the direction from the first surface to the second surface to facilitate transport of liquid from the second surface toward the first surface and vapor from the first surface away from the second surface.
Zhou, directed to a ceramic vaporization core, teaches:
A vaporization core (1) comprising a porous body (10) that has a liquid storage advantage layer (porous ceramic layer 11) and a liquid locking advantage layer (microporous ceramic layer 12) ([0045]-[0046], figure 2).
There may be a plurality of porous ceramic layers 11 and a plurality of microporous ceramic layers 12, and they may be sequentially and alternately disposed in the flow direction of the e-liquid ([0046]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhang to have a plurality of liquid storage advantage layers and a plurality of liquid locking advantage layers that are sequentially and alternatively disposed in the flow direction of the e-liquid as taught by Zhou, because both Zhang and Zhou are directed to vaporization cores with a porous body that has a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer, and this merely involves configuring similar layers of a porous body a known way (i.e. plurality of layers sequentially and alternatively disposed) to a similar vaporization core to yield predictable results.
As Zhang teaches the inner first layer 11 attached with the heating body and the outer second layer 112 in contact with the tobacco liquid, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to maintain this configuration but merely have a plurality of layers sequentially and alternatively disposed in between as taught by Zhou. Therefore, there would be a plurality of layers comprising a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer combined with the liquid storage advantage layer, and thus at least two unit layers sequentially arranged along a direction from the first surface to the second surface, wherein each unit layer of the at least two unit layers comprises a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer stacked together, wherein the liquid storage advantage layers and the liquid locking advantage layers of the at least two unit layers are alternately stacked together along the direction from the first surface to the second surface to facilitate transport of liquid from the second surface toward the first surface and vapor from the first surface away from the second surface.
Regarding claims 3, 6, and 18 modified Zhang has the porous body comprising a plurality of liquid storage advantage layers and a plurality of liquid locking advantage layers that are sequentially and alternatively disposed in the flow direction of the e-liquid. However, modified Zhang does not specify the amount of the plurality of layers that are sequentially and alternatively disposed. As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the porous body to have a certain number of layers, such as four unit layers, and thus four liquid locking advantage layers and four liquid locking storage advantage layer that are sequentially and alternatively disposed, as there merely involves choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation for success. This reads on the claim 18 limitation wherein the porous body comprises unit layers equal to or greater than 2 and less than or equal to 30.
It would be further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the total thickness of the porous body would need to have the same thickness as disclosed in Zhang for the porous body to be appropriately sized for the vaporization device of Zhang. Therefore as Zhang teaches where a thickness of the outer second layer 112 is 0.8 to 5 mm [0039], a thickness of each liquid locking advantage layer would be 0.2 to 1.25 mm. The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claim 3 range of from 10 um to 200 um (0.01 to 0.2 mm) and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Further, as Zhang teaches where a thickness of the inner first layer 111 is between 0 and 0.8 mm [0039], a thickness of each liquid storage advantage layer would be between 0 and 0.2 mm, and thus a thickness of each unit layer would be between 0.2 and 1.45 mm, which overlaps the claim 6 range of between 0.1 mm and 1.5 mm and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 4, Zhang further teaches wherein a thickness of the porous body ranges from 0.8 mm to 5 mm ([0039] where the thickness of the first layer 111 is 0-0.8 mm and the thickness of the second layer 112 is 0.8-5 mm). The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claimed range of 0.8 mm to 3.0 mm and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 11, Zhang further teaches wherein the porous body comprises porous alumina ceramic, porous silicon oxide, porous silicon carbide, porous silicon nitride or composite porous ceramic formed integrally [0040].
Regarding claim 15, Zhang further teaches a vaporization core (heater 1) for an electronic vaporization device (electronic cigarette 4) comprising a heating body (heating element 12) and the porous body of claim 1 (porous body 11, figures 1-2, [0037]-[0038]). Wherein the heating body is arranged on a surface of the liquid storage advantage layer or a surface of the liquid locking advantage layer of one of the at least two unit layers (heating element 12 arranged on first layer 111, figure 2, [0038]).
Regarding claim 16, Zhang further teaches wherein the heating body comprises a metal heating sheet (heating element 12 may be an electrically resistance strip [0044]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Zhang further teaches:
An electronic vaporizing device (electronic cigarette 4) comprising a liquid storage cavity (liquid storage chamber 310); a vaporization cavity (supporter 21) and the vaporization core of claim 15 (heater 1, figure 4, [0051]).
Wherein the surface of the porous body on which the heating body is arranged is in communication with the vaporization cavity in an air guiding manner (as the heating element 12 is located on inner first layer 111 which is of the atomizing surface 113, figure 2, [0043]).
Another surface of the porous body opposite the surface on which the heating body is arranged is in communication with the liquid storage cavity in a liquid guiding manner (as the other surface of the porous body is outer second layer 112, and the liquid from reservoir 310 is conveyed to the porous body through liquid absorbing cotton 22 [0053]).
Regarding claim 21, Zhang teaches wherein the heating body infiltrates into an adjacent liquid locking advantage layer (the heating element may be integrated with the first layer and the second layer [0016]).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose the infiltration ratio of the heating body. However, as the thickness of inner first layer ranges form 0 to 50% of the porous body ([0039]), the infiltration ratio of the heating body would therefore be greater than 50%, which overlaps the claimed range of less than 60% and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Claim(s) 5, 7-10, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US2020/0054075) in view of Zhou (CN110876494A, cited in IDS dated 2/28/2023; references will refer to the English equivalent US2022/0312844) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huang (CN215422802, cited in IDS dated 2/28/2023; references will refer to the English translation provided).
Regarding claims 5, and 9-10, Zhang is silent to the porosity of the porous body.
However, Huang, directed to an atomizing core, teaches:
A vaporization core for an electronic vaporization device comprising: a porous body (the atomizer core 50 that includes a ceramic substrate, [0027]) comprising a liquid storage advantage layer (third porous ceramic body 503) and a liquid locking advantage layer combined with the liquid storage advantage layer (second porous ceramic body 502) and the heating body is combined with a surface of the liquid storage advantage layer (as shown in figure 2).
The porosity of the liquid storage advantage layer is 30% to 80% ([00012]) and the porosity of the liquid locking advantage layer is 10% to 50% ([0009]).
Therefore, as Zhang is silent to the porosity of the porous body, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to look to other known teachings of porosities of porous bodies that one of ordinary skill could apply to Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success in the porous body having a suitably porosity for use in the vaporization device.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to make the liquid locking advantage layer and the liquid storage advantage layer of the porous body of Zhang have a porosity of 10% to 50% and 30% to 80%, respectively, as taught by Huang, because both Zhang and Huang are directed to porous bodies for vaporization devices comprising a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid storage locking layer, and this merely involves the discovery of optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 5, as the thickness of the liquid locking advantage layer of Zhang is 0.8 to 5 mm and the thickness of the liquid storage advantage layer of Zhang is 0 to 0.8 mm ([0039]), an average porosity of the porous body is therefore between 10% and 54.14%. The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claimed range of between 50% and 75% and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 9, the porosity of the liquid storage advantage layer is 0.6 to 8 times the porosity of the liquid locking advantage layer, which overlaps the claimed range of wherein the first porosity is 1.2 to 2 times the second porosity and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 10, the porosity of the liquid locking advantage layer being between 10% to 50% is merely close to the claimed range of between 45% to 70%. The Courts have held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. See MPEP § 2144.05 (I). Further, the range taught by the prior art of between 10% and 50% overlaps the range of wherein the second porosity ranges from 45% to 70% and is therefore prima facie obvious. The porosity of the liquid storage advantage layer being between 30% to 80% overlaps the claimed range of wherein the first porosity ranges from 55% to 90% and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claims 19-20, Zhang further teaches:
A thickness of the porous body is 0.8 mm to 5 mm ([0039] where the thickness of the first layer 111 is 0-0.8 mm and the thickness of the second layer 112 is 0.8-5 mm). The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claimed range of 0.8 mm to 3.0 mm and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Modified Zhang does not explicitly disclose (I) the amount of unit layers and (II) the porosity of the porous body.
In regard to (I), modified Zhang has the porous body comprising a plurality of liquid storage advantage layers and a plurality of liquid locking advantage layers that are sequentially and alternatively disposed in the flow direction of the e-liquid. However, modified Zhang does not specify the amount of the plurality of layers that are sequentially and alternatively disposed. As such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the porous body to have a certain number of layers, such as four unit layers, and thus four liquid locking advantage layers and four liquid locking storage advantage layer that are sequentially and alternatively disposed, as there merely involves choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation for success.
It would be further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the total thickness of the porous body would need to have the same thickness as disclosed in Zhang for the porous body to be appropriately sized for the vaporization device of Zhang. Therefore as Zhang teaches where a thickness of the outer second layer 112 is 0.8 to 5 mm [0039], a thickness of each liquid locking advantage layer would be 0.2 to 1.25 mm. The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claimed range of from 10 um to 200 um (0.01 to 0.2 mm) and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Further, as Zhang teaches where a thickness of the inner first layer 111 is between 0 and 0.8 mm [0039], a thickness of each liquid storage advantage layer would be between 0 and 0.2 mm, and thus a thickness of each unit layer would be between 0.2 and 1.45 mm, which overlaps the claimed range of between 0.1 mm and 1.5 mm and is therefore prima facie obvious.
In regard to (II), Zhang is silent to the porosity of the porous body.
However, Huang, directed to an atomizing core, teaches:
A vaporization core for an electronic vaporization device comprising: a porous body (the atomizer core 50 that includes a ceramic substrate, [0027]) comprising a liquid storage advantage layer (third porous ceramic body 503) and a liquid locking advantage layer combined with the liquid storage advantage layer (second porous ceramic body 502) and the heating body is combined with a surface of the liquid storage advantage layer (as shown in figure 2).
The porosity of the liquid storage advantage layer is 30% to 80% ([00012]) and the porosity of the liquid locking advantage layer is 10% to 50% ([0009]).
Therefore, as Zhang is silent to the porosity of the porous body, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to look to other known teachings of porosities of porous bodies that one of ordinary skill could apply to Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success in the porous body having a suitably porosity for use in the vaporization device.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to make the liquid locking advantage layer and the liquid storage advantage layer of the porous body of Zhang have a porosity of 10% to 50% and 30% to 80%, respectively, as taught by Huang, because both Zhang and Huang are directed to porous bodies for vaporization devices comprising a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid storage locking layer, and this merely involves the discovery of optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. The liquid storage advantage layer having a porosity of 30% to 80% overlaps the claim 20 range of between 55% and 90% and is therefore prima facie obvious. The liquid locking advantage layer having porosity of 10% to 50% overlaps the claim 20 range of between 45% and 70% and is therefore prima facie obvious. The porosity of the liquid storage advantage layer is thus 0.6 to 8 times the porosity of the liquid locking advantage layer, which overlaps the claimed range of wherein the first porosity is 1.2 to 2 times the second porosity and is therefore prima facie obvious.
As the thickness of the liquid locking advantage layer of Zhang is 0.8 to 5 mm and the thickness of the liquid storage advantage layer of Zhang is 0 to 0.8 mm ([0039]), an average porosity of the porous body is therefore between 10% and 54.14%. The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claimed range of between 50% and 75% and is therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claims 7-8, Zhang further teaches wherein each liquid storage advantage layer comprises a first-pore-size structure layer (part of porous body near the atomizing surface [0017]) and wherein each liquid locking advantage layer comprises a second pore-size structure layer (part of the porous body that is near the absorbing surface [0017]).
Zhang is silent to the pore size of the liquid storage advantage layer and the liquid locking advantage layer.
However, Huang, directed to an atomizing core, teaches:
A vaporization core for an electronic vaporization device comprising: a porous body (the atomizer core 50 that includes a ceramic substrate, [0027]) comprising a liquid storage advantage layer (third porous ceramic body 503) and a liquid locking advantage layer combined with the liquid storage advantage layer (second porous ceramic body 502) and the heating body is combined with a surface of the liquid storage advantage layer (as shown in figure 2).
Wherein the liquid storage advantage layer comprises a large-pore-size structure layer and wherein the liquid locking advantage layer comprises a small-pore-size structure layer (as shown in figure 2 the pores C of the third porous ceramic body 503 are larger than the pores B of the second porous ceramic body 502).
The pore size of the liquid storage advantage layer is 10 um to 50 um ([00013]) and the pore size of the liquid locking advantage layer is 10 um to 50 um ([0009]).
Therefore, as Zhang is silent to the pore size of the liquid storage advantage layer and the liquid locking advantage layer, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to look to other known teachings of pore sizes of porous bodies with liquid storage advantage layers and the liquid locking advantage layers that one of ordinary skill could apply to Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success in the liquid storage advantage layer and the liquid locking advantage layer having suitable pore sizes for use in the vaporization device.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to make the liquid locking advantage layer and the liquid storage advantage layer of the porous body of Zhang have a pore size of 10 um to 50 um as taught by Huang, because both Zhang and Huang are directed to porous bodies for vaporization devices comprising a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid storage locking layer, and this merely involves the discovery of optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
As such, an average pore size of the large-pore-size structure layer may be 1 to 5 times an average pore size of the small-pore size structure. The range taught by the prior art overlaps the claim 7 range of 1.5 to 2.5 times and is therefore prima facie obvious.
The liquid storage advantage layer having a pore size of 10 um to 50 um overlaps the claim 8 range of from 50 um to 150 um and is therefore prima facie obvious. The liquid locking advantage layer having a pore size of from 10 um to 50 um overlaps the claim 8 range of 20 um to 100 um and is therefore prima facie obvious
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US2020/0054075) in view of Zhou (CN110876494A, cited in IDS dated 2/28/2023; references will refer to the English equivalent US2022/0312844) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhou-Liu (US2022/0225679, cited previously).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang further teaches the first layer 111 and the second layer 112 may be lap formed, integrated or injection-molded either [0040], but is otherwise silent to the manufacturing method of the porous body.
Zhou-Liu, directed to a vaporization core and method for manufacturing, teaches:
A porous body comprising an inner tube (101), associated with a first slurry ([0037]: porous lamellar green compact formed from the first slurry is formed into the inner tube), and an outer tube (102), associated with a second slurry ([0039]: porous lamellar green compact formed from second slurry is formed into the outer tube), wherein the pore size of the inner tube is less than a pore size of the outer tube ([0064]). The method of manufacturing the porous body comprises:
Providing at least two pairs of green compacts with different porosities or different pore sizes ([0045, 0054], see also S21 and S25 in Fig. 3).
Stacking the at least two pairs of green compacts alternately to form a green compact assembly ([0059], see also S26 in Fig. 3).
Co-firing the green compact assembly to form an integrated porous body ([0061], see also S27 in Fig. 3).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Zhang by manufacturing the porous body according to Zhou-Liu because both Zhang and Zhou-Liu are directed to a porous body in a vaporization core, Zhou-Liu teaches a method that resolves the problems of a complex manufacturing process and high costs of a vaporization core in existing technologies ([0004]), and this merely involves use of a known manufacturing method to improve similar porous bodies in the same way (see MPEP 2143 I(C)). Zhang is also silent regarding the method of manufacturing its porous body, so one would naturally look to a method for fabricating a similar porous body.
Regarding claim 13, Zhou-Liu further teaches wherein the at least two pairs of green compacts are formed by flow casting or extrusion ([0035]: a casting process is sued to form the green compacts).
Regarding claim 14, Zhou-Liu further teaches wherein at least some of the at least two pairs of green compacts are formed by flow casting ([0035]), and at least some of the at least two pairs of the green compacts are formed by extrusion or injection molding ([0039]: the outer tube is formed through injection molding).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11, 15-16 and 18-21 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-13, and 15 of copending Application No. 18/175,871 (reference application).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because copending Application teaches:
A porous body for an electronic vaporization device, comprising (claim 1, lines 1-3).
A first surface configured to install a heating body (Claim 1, line 5, a heating film arranged on a first surface of the porous body).
A second surface opposite the first surface (Claim 1, lines 3-4).
The second surface being configured for contact with a liquid aerosol-generation substrate (Claim 1, lines 24-25, liquid enters the porous body through the outermost liquid locking advantage layer. As the heating film is on the first surface (line 5) and a surface of the liquid storage advantage (line 12), it is evident that the liquid locking advantage layer is the second surface).
At least two unit layers sequentially arranged along a direction from the first surface to the second surface (Claim 1, lines 14-15).
Wherein each unit layer of the at least two unit layers comprises a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer stacked together (Claim 1, lines 16-17).
Wherein the liquid storage advantage laver and the liquid locking advantage layer are alternately arranged along the direction from the first surface to the second surface to facilitate transport of liquid from the second surface toward the first surface and vapor from the first surface away from the second surface (lines 20-25).
Wherein each liquid storage advantage layer has a first porosity, each liquid locking advantage layer has a second porosity, and the first porosity is greater than the second porosity (Claim 1, lines 9-11).
Claim 3 is rejected by claim 4 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 4 is rejected by claim 5 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 5 is rejected by claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 6 is rejected by claim 7 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 7 is rejected by claim 8 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 8 is rejected by claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 9 is rejected by claim 10 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 11 is rejected by claim 12 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 15 is rejected by claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 16 is rejected by claim 13 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 18 is rejected by claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 19 is rejected by claims 4-7 and 10 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 20 is rejected by claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claim 21 is rejected by claim 15 of copending Application No. 18/175,871.
Claims 1, 4-9, 11-18, and 20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-11, and 13-18 of copending Application No. 18/463,573 (reference application).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because copending Application teaches:
A porous body for an electronic vaporization device, comprising (claim 1, line 1).
A first surface (Claim 1, line 2) configured to install a heating body (Claim 18, lines 5-6).
A second surface opposite the first surface (Claim 1, line 3).
The second surface being configured for contact with a liquid aerosol-generation substrate (Claim 18, lines 7-8).
At least two unit layers sequentially arranged along a direction from the first surface to the second surface (Claim 1, lines 4-5).
Wherein each unit layer of the at least two unit layers comprises a liquid storage advantage layer and a liquid locking advantage layer stacked together (Claim 1, lines 5-6).
Wherein the liquid storage advantage laver and the liquid locking advantage layer are alternately arranged along the direction from the first surface to the second surface (Claim 2, lines 4-6) to facilitate transport of liquid from the second surface toward the first surface and vapor from the first surface away from the second surface (Claim 18, 5-8).
Wherein each liquid storage advantage layer has a first porosity, each liquid locking advantage layer has a second porosity, and the first porosity is greater than the second porosity (claim 7).
Claim 4 is rejected by claim 4 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 5 is rejected by claim 5 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 6 is rejected by claim 6 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 7 is rejected by claim 7 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 8 is rejected by claim 8 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 9 is rejected by claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 11 is rejected by claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 12 is rejected by claim 13 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 13 is rejected by claim 14 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 14 is rejected by claim 15 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 15 is rejected by claim 16 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 16 is rejected by claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 17 is rejected by claim 18 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 18 is rejected by claim 11 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
Claim 20 is rejected by claim 10 of copending Application No. 18/463,573.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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