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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 25 and 29-31 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12-2-2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, corresponding to claims 1-5, 7, 11-12, 14-19, 21, and 23 in the reply filed on 12-2-2025 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “1” has been used to designate both “cap 1” and “delivery system 1”, (e.g., see page 13 line 6,). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "1", "2", “6”, and “13” have been used to designate delivery system (e.g., see page 13 line 7 and page 13 line 19, and page 9 line 20). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "17", "35”, “8” (e.g., see page 11 lines 7, 26, and 29) have all been used to designate “first end”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "4" and "5" have both been used to designate internal cavity (see page 21, lines 8-9). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "18", "9", and “36”, have all been used to designate “second end” (see e.g., page 8 line 8, page 8 line 30, page 11 line 27). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "13" and "37" have both been used to designate base (see page 9 line 12, and page 14 line 26). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “and the or at least one of the inner walls” which includes the extra words without meaning. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the claim is being interpreted to read “and the at least one inner wall”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 11 and 21 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.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the entrance opening of the cap" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation is interpreted to be “an entrance opening of the cap”.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the aperture(s)" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation is interpreted to be “an aperture”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-5, 7, 11-12, 14-16, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mckeon (US 20190276204 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Mckeon discloses a cap (520, see FIG 7B and 7C) for use with a delivery system, the cap (mouthpiece cap 520) comprising
an outer wall (outer wall of cap 520) defining an internal cavity configured to receive a mouthpiece (mouthpiece 250, see FIG 7C, [0067]) and of the delivery system (the internal cavity of the cap receives the mouthpiece, see nested cap-mouthpiece in FIG 7C, see also [0067]), and
a sealing element (plug 524, see [0067] and FIG 7C) within the cavity configured to engage with the delivery system mouthpiece and to seal an outlet of the delivery system mouthpiece (see FIG 7C), when the cap is fitted to a delivery system (see FIG 7C and [0067]), wherein
the cap comprises at least one inner wall (fin 531A, see FIG 7B) configured so as to be disposed between the outer wall and a mouthpiece of the delivery system when the cap is fitted to the delivery system (See FIG 7C, the inner wall of the cap is between the outer wall of the cap and the mouthpiece), wherein
an airflow passage is defined at least by the outer wall and the at least one inner wall (the airflow space between portions of the outer wall of 520 and fin 531A that have an airflow space therebetween).
Regarding Claim 2, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a formation extending into the internal cavity configured to be received within an outlet of a delivery system mouthpiece so as to seal the outlet when the cap is fitted to a delivery system (See FIG 7C, tip of plug 524 is received into the top of the mouthpiece thereby sealing the mouthpiece, see also [0067]).
Regarding Claim 3, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a formation extending into the internal cavity which surrounds, or extends across an outlet of a delivery system mouthpiece so as to seal the outlet when the cap is fitted to a delivery system. (plug 524 seals the outlet when the cap is fitted, see FIG 7C and [0067]).
Regarding Claim 4, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element is integrally formed with the outer wall (e.g., the outer wall of cap 520 includes the plug 524, see [0061] and FIG 7C, an ordinary artisan would appreciate the plug is integral to the cap).
Regarding Claim 5, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element is a separate component to the outer wall which is secured thereto (e.g., the sealing element 524 is a separate component to the outer wall of cap 520 which is evidenced by having a separate component ref number, see FIG 7C and [0067).
Regarding Claim 7, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a portion of resilient material configured to be compressed against at least a part of a delivery system mouthpiece when the cap is fitted to a delivery system (sealing element 524 is seating into the mouthpiece sufficiently well to prevent liquid from escaping and spiling out from the cartomizer [0062], evidencing the sealing element is resilient, although Mckeon is silent specifically to the material of the sealing element being compressed, Mckeon teaches when the case is assembled and resiliently latched the latch mechanism of the cap is resiliently deformed and configured to hold the cap to the case, which is further evidenced by the pressure being released when the cap is released [0075], therefore an ordinary artisan would appreciate the tip of the sealing element is resiliently compressed or pushed into the hole at the top of the mouthpiece 250, see also end of [0067].
Regarding Claim 11, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a first end which extends towards the entrance opening of the cap (the apex of the sealing element 524 is the first end of the sealing element and extends towards and into the entrance opening of the cap, the entrance opening of the cap is interpreted to be the opening that connects to, and receives, the mouthpiece) and a second end which is coupled to the outer wall (the part that is connected to the cap 520, the cap is coupled to both the inner and outer walls) (See FIG 7C).
Regarding Claim 12, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the cap comprises a first end proximate the entrance opening (portion of cap close to the rim, see FIG 7C) and a second end (portion of cap close to where the sealing element 524 is attached, see annotated FIG 7C below) opposite to the first end, see annotated FIG 7C). The first end and second end of the cap are interpreted to not be the same first end and second end of the sealing element.
PNG
media_image1.png
516
492
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the outer wall (520) comprises an end wall (side of sealing element 524, which is extends from 520 as illustrated in annotated FIG 7C) at the second end (e.g., the sealing element end wall is connected to the cap 520 at the second end, see annotated FIG 7C) and
a sidewall (531B, see FIG 7B and annotated 7C above) extending from the end wall to the entrance opening, wherein
the end wall comprises the sealing element (the end wall is the sides of the sealing element 524 which surfaces forms a seal with surfaces of the outlet when received by the outlet of the mouthpiece 250, see coupled parts in FIG 7C and [0067]).
Regarding Claim 15, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a sealing wall surrounding a sealing cavity (e.g., see FIG 7C, the sealing element 524 surrounds the sealing cavity in the mouthpiece when received into the mouthpiece, the sealing wall (outside surface of 524) surrounds the sealing cavity (cavity in the mouthpiece in which the sealing wall surface comes into contact to form the seal to keep the liquid from leaking out [0062]),
the sealing wall is configured to engage a mouthpiece of the delivery system so as to seal an outlet of the mouthpiece when the cap is fitted to a delivery system, wherein the sealing cavity remains in fluid communication with the outlet (see FIG 7C, see also [0062], the sealing wall (outside surface) of the sealing element 524 forms a seal with the mouthpiece outlet when coupled with the mouthpiece [0067], see also FIG 7C).
Regarding Claim 16, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a first end which extends toward the entrance opening of the cap (e.g., apex of 524 is the first end of the sealing element) and a second end which is coupled to the outer wall (base of 524 that connects to 520 is the second end of the sealing element, see FIG 7C), wherein
the sealing element comprises a well (space around the sealing element 524 that is between 524 and 520 that is occupied by the mouthpiece when the sealing element and mouthpiece are coupled) to receive a tip of a mouthpiece of a delivery system when the cap is fitted to a delivery system (e.g., the well is the space in the cap between the sealing element and the sidewall 531B and the where the upper mouthpiece 250 portion is coupled with the sealing element, see FIG 7C), wherein
the well is formed as a pocket in the first end of the sealing element (see FIG 7C, the mouthpiece surrounds the first end of the sealing element and the occupied by the mouthpiece is the well).
Regarding Claim 21, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses an airflow passage is defined through the internal cavity (inside of cap) between an aperture (position of the opening of the mouthpiece when the cap is coupled to the device see FIG 7C) and the entrance opening (entrance of cap) (e.g., as explained in claim 1, an airflow passage is defined at least by the outer wall and the inner wall (the airflow space between portions of the outer wall of 520 and fin 531A that have an airflow space therebetween).
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.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mckeon (US 20190276204 A1) in view of Jain (US20190216129A1)
Regarding Claim 17, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above.
Additionally, Mckeon discloses the sealing element comprises a sealing layer (surface of sealing element 524 involved in the seal) which extends substantially flat across the internal cavity before the cap is fitted with a delivery system, (the edge of the sealing element extends substantially flat or straight across the internal cavity)
Mckeon teaches the mouthpiece is pushed into the sealing layer of the sealing element when the cap is fitted with a delivery system ([0076], cap is compressed to the cartomizer, see also [0067] and FIG 7C)
However, Mckeon is silent to the sealing layer comprises a compressible material to which a mouthpiece of a delivery system can be pushed into so as to seal an outlet of the mouthpiece when the cap is fitted with a delivery system, thus Mckeon fails to teach suitable materials for the outside surface sealing layer of a sealing element.
Jain teaches a similar cap for a similar vapor provisioning device with a similar sealing element and teaches the sealing layer of the sealing element comprises a compressible material to which a mouthpiece of a delivery system can be pushed into so as to seal an outlet of the mouthpiece when the cap is fitted with a delivery system, and teaches that the seal with these resilient materials provides a close friction fit with a deformable property that makes leakage of fluid out of the device unlikely (see [0060], the sealing element can be a compressible material such as foam or rubber and is configured to be friction fit when coupled to form an effective seal when the cap is coupled with the mouthpiece, see FIG 16).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the claimed invention would be motivated to modify the sealing element of Mckeon with the resilient sealing layer materials of Jain to give the sealing element a resilient deformable property that makes leakage out of the device unlikely.
Regarding Claim 18, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above.
Mckeon fails to explicitly disclose the sealing element comprises a sealing ring.
However, Jain teaches a similar cap for a similar vapor provisioning device with a similar sealing element and teaches that when the case is coupled to the cap the cap and the device can be joined together and the joining can be configured to achieve a leak proof seal when joined by including a rubber flange or washer or similar sealing member which is not shown [0057]. Although Jain does not explicitly disclose the sealing element comprises a sealing ring, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the sealing element of Jain to include a sealing ring to achieve a leak proof seal when coupling the cap to the device.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify the sealing element of Mckeon to include the rubber flange or washer of Jain in order to achieve a leak proof seal when coupling the cap to the device as taught by Jain.
Regarding Claim 19, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses the cap comprises a central longitudinal plane extending through a first end of the cap, the internal cavity and a second end of the cap and the sealing element is arranged symmetrically about the central longitudinal plane (see FIG 7C, claimed components are arranged symmetrically around the central longitudinal plane).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mckeon (US 20190276204 A1).
Regarding Claim 23, Mckeon discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Mckeon discloses a receiving portion configured to engage with a delivery system to secure the cap to the delivery system (e.g., see FIG 8A, and [0073], the receiving portion is the edge portion of the cap that engages with the delivery system) optionally wherein
the receiving portion comprises at least one formation extending into the internal cavity, configured to provide a friction fit attachment with a delivery system. (see FIG 8A and [0073], the portion of the delivery system extends into the internal cavity and is configured to provide increased friction [0073]), Mckeon teaches this configuration taught in FIG 8A and [0073]-[0074] allows the two faces to slide together with increased friction which allows the two faces to have more secure engagement.
It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the embodiment of FIG 7C with the friction fit enhancement of the receiving portion as taught in [0073] and FIG 8A so the latch mechanism can have a more secure engagement [0074].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael T Fulton whose telephone number is (703)756-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Michael H Wilson can be reached at 571-270-3882. 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.
/M.T.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747