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
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-2, 4, 6-14 and 22 in the reply filed on 10/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 15-21 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/10/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190200677).
Regarding claim 1, Chong discloses a vapor generation device, configured to heat a vapor generation product to generate an aerosol for inhalation, and comprising:
a susceptor, configured to be penetrated by a changing magnetic field to generate heat, to heat the vapor generation product [0039]; an oscillator, comprising an inductance coil and a capacitor, and configured to guide a changing current to flow through the inductance coil to drive the inductance coil to generate the changing magnetic field [0079]; a peak detection unit, configured to detect a peak voltage of the oscillator [0088]; and a controller, configured to control the oscillator to guide the changing current [0079. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the controller of Chong can control the oscillator based on the peak voltage to control a desired temperature [0088]
Regarding claim 2, since Chong discloses peak voltage monitoring [0088]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the peak detection unit comprises: a hold capacitor, configured to hold the peak voltage of the oscillator; an operational amplifier, located between the hold capacitor and the oscillator, and further configured to output a voltage of the oscillator to the hold capacitor; and a voltage follower, configured to output the peak voltage of the oscillator held by the hold capacitor.
Regarding claim 4, since Chong discloses peak voltage monitoring [0088]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the peak detection unit further comprises: a discharge switch, configured to discharge the hold capacitor in an on state.
Regarding claim 6, Chong discloses wherein the oscillator is a parallel LC oscillator comprising the inductance coil and the capacitor connected in parallel [0079]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the controller is configured to drive, using a pulse with a changing frequency, the parallel LC oscillator to oscillate, determine an optimal frequency of the parallel LC oscillator according to the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit, and control the parallel LC oscillator to guide the changing current according to the optimal frequency [0086-0088].
Regarding claim 7, Chong suggests wherein the controller is configured to determine the optimal frequency of the parallel LC oscillator in a case that the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit is the same as or basically close to a preset threshold voltage [0086-0088].
Claim(s) 8-14 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190200677) in view of Beidelman (WO 2020182760).
Regarding claim 22, Chong discloses a vapor generation device, configured to heat a vapor generation product to generate an aerosol for inhalation, and comprising:
a parallel LC oscillator, comprising an inductance coil and a capacitor connected in parallel, and configured to guide a changing current to flow through the inductance coil to drive the inductance coil to generate a changing magnetic field [0079];
a susceptor, configured to be penetrated by the changing magnetic field to generate heat, to heat a vapor generation product received in a cavity [0039] and
a transistor switch; and a controller, configured to control on and off of the transistor switch by using a pulse, so as to drive the parallel LC oscillator to oscillate, to guide the changing current to flow through the inductance coil [0079],
Chong does not expressly disclose the duty ratio. Beidelman discloses a vapor generation device with a controller to control the duty cycle wherein the duty cycle can be 0% to 100% (see document and fig.12). In case of overlapping ranges, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to pick the claimed range wherein a duty ratio of the pulse is greater than 50%.
Regarding claim 8, Beidelman suggests wherein in the pulse with a changing frequency, the frequency gradually changes in descending order (pages 40-41).
Regarding claim 9, Chong discloses wherein the oscillator is a parallel LC oscillator comprising the inductance coil and the capacitor connected in parallel but does not expressly discloses about controlling the duty ratio. Beidelman discloses a vapor generation device with a controller to control the duty cycle wherein the duty cycle can be 0% to 100% (see document and fig. 12); therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the controller of Chong to drive, using a pulse with a changing duty ratio, the parallel LC oscillator to oscillate, determine an optimal duty ratio of the parallel LC oscillator according to the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit, and control the parallel LC oscillator to guide the changing current according to the optimal duty ratio.
Regarding claim 10, Beidelman discloses a vapor generation device with a controller to control the duty cycle wherein the duty cycle can be 0% to 100% (pages 54-55 and fig. 12); therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the controller to determine the optimal duty ratio of the parallel LC oscillator in a case that the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit is the same as or basically close to a preset threshold voltage.
Regarding claim 11, Beidelman suggests wherein in the pulse with a changing duty ratio, the duty ratio gradually changes in ascending order (pages 54-55 and fig. 12).
Regarding claim 12, Beidelman suggests wherein the oscillator is a serial LC oscillator or a serial LCC oscillator comprising the inductance coil and the capacitor connected in series; and the controller is configured to drive, using a pulse with a changing frequency, the oscillator to oscillate, and determine a resonance frequency of the oscillator according to the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit (pages 16 and 40-41).
Regarding claim 13, Beidelman suggests wherein the pulse with a changing frequency, the duty ratio is 50%, and the frequency gradually changes in descending order (pages 54-55).
Regarding claim 14, Beidelman discloses the controller is configured to determine the resonance frequency of the oscillator in a case that the peak voltage detected by the peak detection unit is maximum (pages 40-41).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5931. 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, Michael H Wilson can be reached at 5712703882. 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.
/PHU H NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1747