Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/210,627

ATOMIZATION TUBE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Examiner
YAARY, ERIC
Art Unit
1700
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Aspire North America LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
649 granted / 879 resolved
+8.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
931
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.8%
+16.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 879 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 11/13/2025 with respect to the 102 and 103 rejections. have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is 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. Claims 12-14 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 12-13 recite the limitation "the exhaust portion". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, claim 12 will be interpreted to depend from claim 7. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-11 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (US 2022/0378104). Regarding claim 1, Liu [Fig. 1-3; 0025] teaches atomization tube 6 configured to be disposed within a liquid storage cavity 5 of an electronic cigarette device, comprising: a tubular first portion (portion surrounding cylindrical ring 7 and heating element 8) configured to receive a heating element 8 (heating core); and a tubular second portion (upper portion of tube 6 above cylindrical ring 7); wherein the tubular first portion includes an inlet hole 6-2 and an exhaust hole 6-1; and wherein liquid enters the tubular first portion from the liquid storage cavity through the inlet hole to contact the heating core. As hole 6-1 is described for allowing air flow, it is interpreted as capable of allowing for air exhaust as well. Regarding claim 2, Liu teaches the exhaust hole 6-1 is disposed on the tubular first portion adjacent an upper portion of the heating core 8 [Fig. 3]. Regarding claim 3, Liu teaches the inlet hole 6-2 is disposed on the tubular first portion towards a bottom of the liquid storage cavity [Fig. 2-3]. Regarding claim 4, Liu teaches tubular first portion includes cotton wrapped around the heating core 8 [0025]. Regarding claim 5, Liu teaches a cylindrical ring 7 (blocking member) disposed in the tubular first portion between the heating core 8 and the tubular second portion [Fig. 3]. Regarding claim 6, Liu teaches the exhaust hole 6-1 is disposed on the tubular first portion adjacent a portion of the blocking member 7 [Fig. 3]. Regarding claims 7-10 and 16-18, Liu teaches the blocking member 7 includes a bottom flange and a tubular portion [Fig. 3]. The bottom flange corresponds to the claimed abutment portion configured to abut against an inner wall of the atomization tube. Liu teaches an air passage is defined by the inner wall of the atomization tube 6 and the outer wall of the blocking member 7 (tubular portion) [0025], i.e. a gap is formed therebetween for air passage. Thus, the tubular portion is an exhaust portion, an outer diameter of the abutment portion is greater than an outer diameter of the exhaust portion, a distance between an outer diameter of the exhaust portion and the inner wall of the atomization tube surrounding the exhaust portion defines a gap between the exhaust portion and a portion of the atomization tube surrounding the exhaust portion, and abutment of the abutment portion against the inner wall of the atomization tube aligns the exhaust portion with the exhaust hole 6-1, and whereby gas flows between the exhaust portion and the exhaust hole. The exhaust portion is arranged at the end of the abutment portion which is away from the heating core 8 and the gap allows for communication between the exhaust hole 6-1 and atmosphere. Regarding claim 11, Liu teaches the blocking member 7 includes a central channel extends through which gas passes from the heating core 8 into the tubular second portion [Fig. 3-4]. Regarding claim 15, Liu teaches the heating core is configured to vaporize liquid, and the tubular second portion is configured to guide vaporized liquid upwards [0016]. Regarding claim 19, Liu [Fig. 1-3; 0025] teaches atomization tube 6 configured to be disposed within a liquid storage cavity 5 of an electronic cigarette device, comprising: a tubular first portion (portion surrounding cylindrical ring 7 and heating element 8) having a first outer diameter and configured to receive a heating element 8 (heating core); and a tubular second portion (upper portion of tube 6 above cylindrical ring 7) having a second diameter, the second diameter less than the first diameter; wherein the tubular first portion includes an inlet hole 6-2 and an exhaust hole 6-1, the exhaust hole extending radially through the tubular first portion; and wherein liquid enters the tubular first portion from the liquid storage cavity through the inlet hole 6-2 to contact the heating core 8. As hole 6-1 is described for allowing air flow, it is interpreted as capable of allowing for air exhaust as well. Regarding claim 20, Liu [Fig. 1-3; 0025] teaches atomization tube 6 configured to be disposed within a liquid storage cavity 5 of an electronic cigarette device, comprising: a tubular first portion (portion surrounding cylindrical ring 7 and heating element 8) having a first outer diameter and configured to receive a heating element 8 (heating core); a tubular second portion (upper portion of tube 6 above cylindrical ring 7) having a second diameter, the second diameter less than the first diameter; and a cylindrical ring 7 (blocking member) arranged in the tubular first portion, wherein the tubular first portion includes an inlet hole 6-2 and an exhaust hole 6-1, the exhaust hole 6-1 extending radially through the tubular first portion; wherein liquid enters the tubular first portion from the liquid storage cavity through the inlet hole to contact the heating core 8. Liu teaches an air passage is defined by the inner wall of the atomization tube 6 and the outer wall of the blocking member 7 [0025], i.e. such that a gap is formed between an outer diameter of the blocking member and an inner diameter of the tubular first portion. 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. Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Althorpe (US 2017/0360092). Liu as shown in Fig. 3-4 teaches the blocking member 7 includes at its upper tip end a chamfer portion. Liu does not teach a protruding portion. Althorpe teaches an electronic cigarette wherein a vapor conduit comprising a chamfer portion together with a reduced diameter protruding portion extending therefrom may reduce the likelihood of condensation [Fig. 8; 0072]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this protruding portion at the end of the blocking member of Liu to reduce the likelihood of condensation Thus, the chamfer portion is disposed between the protruding portion and the exhaust portion and the protruding portion has a smaller outer diameter than the outer diameter of the exhaust portion. Claim 14 does not recite any required structure of the atomizing tube to distinguish the claimed atomization tube from that of modified Liu. The atomization tube of modified Liu thereby reads on the present limitations. 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

Jun 15, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112
Nov 13, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12765592
AEROSOL DELIVERY DEVICE
4y 7m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12765587
Nicotine-Free Formulations, Devices and Methods Thereof for Cessation of Smoking or Nicotine Replacement
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12757938
AEROSOL-GENERATING DEVICE HAVING MULTI-LAYER INSULATION
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12757932
Aerosol Generating System and Method of Using Same
3y 0m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12757937
ELECTRONIC VAPOR PROVISION DEVICE
1y 3m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+2.5%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 879 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month