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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the Applicants’ arguments/remarks filed 3-16-2026.
Claim 16 is amended.
Claims 16-30 are currently examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "12" and "13" have both been used to designate reservoir chamber (See last paragraph on page 29)
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "170" and "117" have both been used to designate cartridge sleeve (See page 35, top of page and 2nd new paragraph on the same page)
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "266" and "260" have both been used to designate proximal insertion socket (See page 36, top of page)
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “191” has been used to designate both “central passage” (see end of first paragraph on page 31) and “aerosol forming liquid” (see middle of page 32).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “140” has been used to designate both “vapor-conveying conduit” (see top of page 34) and “liquid-conveying susceptor arrangement” (first new paragraph on page 34).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 30, 60, 215, 216, 236, 250, 257 (See instant FIG 1, FIG 8, and FIG 9)
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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 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 21 is 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.
Regarding Claim 21, The phrase “may be larger or smaller” is indefinite and does not positively recite a required structural limitation. It is unclear whether claim 21 further limits claim 16, to which it depends.
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 16, 20, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Cadieux (US 20150245669 A1), filed by Applicant via IDS on 5-31-2023.
Regarding Claim 16, Cadieux discloses a cartridge for a stick-shaped aerosol-generating article, the stick-shaped aerosol-generating article being for an inductively heating aerosol-generating device (see FIG 3 and [0133] and [0115]), the cartridge comprising:
a vaporization chamber at a distal end portion of the cartridge and being configured for vaporizing aerosol-forming liquid therein (vapor is formed around the annotated section as illustrated in annotated FIG 3 below);
a reservoir chamber (22) proximal the vaporization chamber (see annotated FIG 3) and being configured to store aerosol-forming liquid (see [0051], reservoir configured to store liquid, see also annotated FIG 3, see also [0116]);
a liquid-conveying susceptor arrangement (e.g., susceptor 14 and wick combination, hereinafter 14/28, see FIG 3) configured and arranged to convey aerosol- forming liquid from the reservoir chamber into the vaporization chamber and to be inductively heated in use with the inductively heating aerosol-generating device in order to vaporize aerosol-forming liquid within the vaporization chamber (see [0118] the liquid conveying susceptor arrangement which includes wick 28 and the susceptor 14, which is arranged in communication with the reservoir chamber, as the susceptor 14 is heated by the induction source 35 the arrangement causes liquid material to be heated to a temperature sufficient to vaporize the liquid in the arrangement, see also FIG 3);
PNG
media_image1.png
384
728
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a vapor-conveying conduit (area in the axial center of the device around central air passage 20, see annotated FIG 3 and [0118]) providing a fluid communication for vaporized aerosol- forming liquid from the vaporization chamber to a region proximal the reservoir chamber (the central passage 20 (see Figs 1-8) is proximal to the reservoir chamber); and
a proximal end cap forming at last a proximal end wall member of the reservoir chamber (gasket 10 as annotated in FIG 3 above), wherein
the proximal end cap comprises a through hole in which a proximal end portion of the vapor-conveying conduit is supported (see FIG 3 and [0133] Cadieux discloses the gasket 10 is fitted into a downstream end portion of the inner wall of the reservoir 22, which is a proximal end portion of the vapor conveying conduit, see annotated FIG 3 above), and wherein
the proximal end cap further comprises:
a distal recess forming a distal portion of the through hole in which the proximal end portion of the vapor-conveying conduit is supported (see annotated FIG 3, the downstream gasket 10 of Cadieux is shown in FIG 3 as having a recessed portion that receives the wall of the air passage) wherein
an inner cross-section of the distal recess (distal recess is the annular recess that receives the vapor conveying conduit in the distal end of the proximal end cap) is larger than an inner cross-section of a proximal portion of the through hole other than the distal portion (see annotated FIG 3, the recess that receives the vapor conveying conduit is larger than the cross section of the through hole/outlet).
Regarding Claim 20, Cadieux discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux discloses the inner cross-section of the proximal portion of the through hole of the proximal end cap corresponds to an inner cross-section of the vapor-conveying conduit (e.g., see annotated FIG 3, they are nested together as the end cap distal recess receives and supports the inner cross section of the vapor conveying conduit).
Regarding Claim 30, Cadieux discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux discloses a stick-shaped aerosol-generating article for an inductively heating ([0023]) aerosol-generating device (see FIG 3), the stick-shaped aerosol-generating article comprising a cartridge according to claim 16 (see claim 16) and
a mouthpiece at a proximal end portion of the article, wherein the vaporization chamber is arranged at a distal end portion of the article (see annotated FIG 3).
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 and 21-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cadieux (US 20150245669 A1) filed by Applicant via IDS on 5-31-2023.
Regarding Claim 17, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap is non- integral with any other wall member of the reservoir chamber (see annotated FIG 3, [0133] the upstream gasket 10 of the proximal end cap is fitted into the downstream end of the inner tube of the reservoir 22. The fact that the two parts are fitted together shows they are clearly non integral and that the proximal end cap is an “insert” shows they are non integral [0115]).
Regarding Claim 18, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap as set forth above. Cadieux illustrates the proximal end cap mounted to the device (see annotated FIG 3 above), however Cadieux is silent to suitable ways that a proximal end cap can be mounted.
However, at [0156] Cadieux teaches suitable ways of affixing the susceptor to the flange and this includes suitable affixing means such as snap fit or adhesive. Cadieux teaches “fitted” in [0133]. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the proximal end cap to be mounted in the cartridge by snap-fit or by an adhesive bond as taught at [0156] by Cadieux regarding affixing the susceptor, because Cadieux is silent in regards to suitable methods for affixing the end cap to the cartridge for use and one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to review Cadieux for suitable affixation methods for use in other parts of Cadieux. Cadieux teaches known methods for affixation as explained above and this merely involves applying suitable characteristics to a similar product with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 19, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap is non- integral with any wall member of the vaporization chamber, e.g., the proximal end cap includes the structure described by Cadieux as mouth end insert 8 [0128]. Thus, being a mouth end insert (emphasis added), the proximal end cap would inherently be non-integral to any wall member.
Additionally, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify a mouthpiece described as a mouth end insert, to be non-integral with any wall member of the vaporization chamber with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 21, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the inner cross-section of the proximal portion of the through hole is smaller than an inner cross-section of the vapor-conveying conduit, (e.g., see FIG 3, the through hole such as the through hole (one of the outlets 24) that allows fluid access out the end of the proximal end cap as illustrated in annotated FIG 3 above is illustrated as being smaller than the vapor conveying conduit.
Additionally, Although Cadieux does not explicitly disclose that the through holes have a smaller inner cross section than the vapor conveying conduit, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the through holes to have a smaller inner cross section than the vapor conveying conduit. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art absent evidence that the change in size results in a difference in performance. See MPEP § 2144.04 IV A.
Regarding Claim 26, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap is plug-shaped (see e.g., FIG 3 and FIG 1, the proximal end cap is plug shaped).
Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap further comprises a proximal recess in which the proximal plug member is received, e.g., see FIG 3 seal 10, in [0133] Cadieux teaches this seal can be a gasket that is fitted into the downstream end of the inner tube which allows the proximal end cap plug member to be received.
Regarding Claim 27, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap is cup-shaped (see FIG 3, the proximal end cap portion including gasket 10 has a void that is cup shaped);
the cup-shaped proximal end cap comprises a bottom portion forming the proximal end wall member of the reservoir chamber (e.g., see FIG 3, the proximal end wall member is the gasket portion of the end cap that is fitted into the proximal end wall of the reservoir chamber tube, e.g., the surface portion of gasket 10 that is the proximal wall of the reservoir chamber) and
a sleeve portion forming a circumferential outer side wall member of the reservoir chamber (e.g., the gasket portion of the end cap 10 that is fitted into the proximal end wall of outer edge of the reservoir chamber)
Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap further comprises a proximal recess in which the proximal plug member is received, e.g., see FIG 3 seal gasket 10, in [0133] Cadieux teaches this seal can be a gasket that is fitted into the downstream end of the inner tube which allows the proximal end cap plug member to be received.
Regarding Claim 28, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap is part of a one-piece main body which comprises a proximal end portion (the proximal end portion corresponds to the proximal end cap forming a proximal end wall member of the reservoir chamber, see FIG 3) and an outer sleeve portion (the outer sleeve portion forms the circumferential side wall member of the reservoir chamber, see FIG 3, the aerosol generating article has a one-piece design), wherein
the outer sleeve portion forms a circumferential outer side wall member of the reservoir chamber (see annotated FIG 3 below, inner wall of 22 is not labeled in FIG 3 but in FIG 1 is 62), and wherein
the proximal end portion corresponds to the proximal end cap forming a proximal end wall member of the reservoir chamber (see annotated FIG 3 below, the proximal end portion includes the end wall of the reservoir chamber).
PNG
media_image2.png
384
728
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 29, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the outer sleeve portion also forms a circumferential outer side wall member of the vaporization chamber or at least a portion thereof (see annotated FIG 1 above, at least the end portion of the outer sleeve portion forms a circumferential outer side wall member of the vaporization chamber of Cadieux).
Claim 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cadieux (US 20150245669 A1) filed by Applicant via IDS on 5-31-2023 in view of Christensen (US 20170233114A1).
Regarding Claim 22, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Cadieux is silent to the proximal end cap further comprises at least one filling hole for filling aerosol-forming liquid into the reservoir chamber.
However Christensen also teaches a similar vaporizer with a cartridge and a cartridge reservoir and teaches the proximal end cap further comprises at least one filling hole for filling aerosol-forming liquid into the reservoir chamber (e.g., a plug 888 seals the proximal end of the reservoir chamber and is conveniently used for filling the chamber (tank), see [0064] and FIG 11B.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cadieux’ proximal reservoir chamber to include at least one filling hole as taught by Christensen in order to provide a convenient access path for filing liquid into the reservoir chamber while allowing the reservoir to be sealed after filling.
Regarding Claim 23, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches a proximal plug member sealingly closing the at least one filling hole of the proximal end cap (See seal or stopper 10 in [0116] and [0133] a proximal plug described as a seal or stopper would be understood by the ordinary artisan to cause the proximal plug member to be sealingly closed, see also FIG 3).
Regarding Claim 24, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap further comprises a proximal recess in which the proximal plug member is received, e.g., see FIG 3 seal 10, in [0133] Cadieux teaches this seal can be a gasket that is fitted into the downstream end of the inner tube which allows the proximal end cap plug member to be received in the proximal recess [0133].
Regarding Claim 25, Cadieux teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Cadieux teaches the proximal plug member comprises a through hole congruent with the through hole of the proximal end cap, e.g., the proximal plug member has a through hole that aligns congruency of the plug (the shape of the surfaces of the two parts are congruent or line up with each other) with the congruency of the of the proximal end cap (e.g., the proximal plug member is the portion of the proximal end cap that fits into the proximal recess as explained in the rejection of claim 24 and repeated as follows for clarity.)
Cadieux teaches the proximal end cap further comprises a proximal recess in which the proximal plug member is received, e.g., see FIG 3 seal 10, in [0133] Cadieux teaches this seal can be a gasket that is fitted into the downstream end of the inner tube which allows the proximal end cap plug member to be received.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, see Amendments/Remarks and amendment to the Specification, filed 3-16-2026, with respect to the objection of the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Objection to the drawings has been withdrawn. However a new objection to the drawings has been made as set forth above.
Applicant's arguments filed 3-16-2026 regarding the Rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered and the arguments are partially persuasive. Accordingly, clarifications to the rejections have been made and a new rejection is made as set forth above.
Applicant argues point 1 and point 2 on page 8 of the remarks:
PNG
media_image3.png
227
518
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding point 1. As set forth above the proximal end wall member includes the end wall portion of the edge of the proximal end cap (the side of the proximal end cap 10 facing the cartridge), the central portion of the proximal end cap is the part of the proximal end cap that serves as the proximal end wall member. See annotated FIG 3 with proximal end wall member annotated for clarity.
Applicant argues on the top of page 9
PNG
media_image4.png
176
517
media_image4.png
Greyscale
This is not found persuasive because the instant claims do not require the mouthpiece/proximal end cap does not include a gasket or seal between the proximal end wall member and the reservoir chamber.
PNG
media_image1.png
384
728
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding point 2
Applicant more specifically argues
PNG
media_image5.png
238
513
media_image5.png
Greyscale
This is not found persuasive because as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, FIG 3 of Cadieux illustrates the inner wall of the air passage is resting on the downstream gasket as claimed.
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
/RUSSELL E SPARKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights