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 with traverse of the Restriction Requirement in the reply filed on 11-4-2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that (page 2 paragraph 1):
PNG
media_image1.png
92
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Although Examiner respectfully agrees the claims in the two groups share a single general inventive concept under US practice, this argument is not found persuasive because under PCT Rules 13.1 and 13.2 the shared feature is not a special technical feature because it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Matsumoto as set forth in the requirement for restriction.
Applicant argues on page 2:
PNG
media_image2.png
341
597
media_image2.png
Greyscale
This is not found persuasive because Matsumoto teaches the heating element extends down into the reservoir of free-flowing liquid as set forth in the claim rejection. (e.g., see annotated FIG 15, the heating element extends down below the liquid fill line “Lv” and into the reservoir of free-flowing liquid)
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 25-26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 11-4-2025.
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 14-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsumoto (US20190124993A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Matsumoto teaches a heater assembly for an aerosol-generating system, the heater assembly (FIG 15, 3D, see below) comprising:
a liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (see annotated FIG 15 below, annotated as liquid storage);
a reservoir of free-flowing liquid aerosol-forming substrate (see annotated FIG 15, annotated as reservoir, reservoir extends up to where it says “lv” in the drawing when full, see also [0044] e.g., the free flowing liquid extends up to the “lv” line when the reservoir is filled with free flowing liquid),
the reservoir being in fluid communication with the liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (see annotated FIG 15); and
a heating element (7D, see annotated FIG 15 for annotated components of heating element, see also [0075], the heating element of Matsumoto is a planar serpentine element with grooves (8) separating the serpentine body path parts of the element, arrows and annotations are used to show parts of this heating element) comprising
a first portion (annotated as 1st in annotated FIG 15, which is the part of the heater between the liquid lv and below the lid),
a second portion (annotated as 2nd in annotated FIG 15, which is the part of the heater 71 above the lid 31b near the electrode 9A), and
a further portion (annotated as 3rd in annotated FIG 15 which extends into the reservoir below the fill line lv), wherein
the first portion of the heating element is embedded in the liquid aerosol- forming substrate storage component (see 1st in annotated FIG 15),
the second portion of the heating element is not embedded in the liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (See 2nd portion above liquid aerosol forming substrate near positive electrode 9A in annotated FIG 15), and
the further portion of the heating element is located in the reservoir (see further in annotated FIG 15).
PNG
media_image3.png
605
509
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses a third portion and a fourth portion, and wherein
the third portion of the heating element is embedded in the liquid aerosol- forming substrate storage component (see annotated FIG 15 annotated as 3rd) and
the fourth portion is not embedded in the liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (see annotated FIG 15, portion of serpentine path above liquid near negative electrode 9B annotated as 4th).
Regarding Claim 16, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses the second portion of the heating element extends between the first portion and the third portion (as shown in FIG 15, also see horizontal slits built into the heating element extending the 2nd portion to the 1st and the 3rd portions), and
the third portion of the heating element extends between the second portion and the fourth portion (see FIG 15, the 3rd part of the heating element is the part of the serpentine track that extends between the 2nd and 4th as claimed down into the liquid reservoir as shown in annotated FIG 15).
Regarding Claim 17, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally Matsumoto discloses the heating element further comprises a strip of material having a length, a width perpendicular to the length, and a thickness perpendicular to the length and the width, the length being greater than the width and greater than the thickness (see FIG 15, the length is from the top of the heating element to the bottom, the width is from the left to the right as shown, and the thickness is illustrated from above in FIG 15, a person of ordinary skill would appreciate the heater is a sheet and that a sheet has a length and width greater than the thickness as shown, see also [0048]).
Regarding Claim 18, Matsumoto disclose the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses a cross-section of the heating element varies along a length of the heating element (e.g., the cross section of the heating element has slits in it, see FIG 15 and [0051], therefore the heating elements cross section would vary along a length of the heating element).
Regarding Claim 19, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses the heating element extends between a first end and a second end (see annotated FIG 15 part 2 below), and
the heating element has a first cross- sectional area at a first point between the first end and the second end (see annotated FIG 15 part 2 below),
a second cross- sectional area at a second point between the first point and the second end, (see annotated FIG 15 part 2 below), and
a third cross- sectional area at a third point between the second point and the second end, each of the first cross-sectional area and the third cross-sectional area being less than, the second cross-sectional area (see annotated FIG 15 part 2 below, first and third cross sectional areas at the first and third points are geometrically less than the second cross sectional area).
PNG
media_image4.png
318
450
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses the heating element weaves into and out of the liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (see annotated FIG 15 above, see path of heating element weaving in and out of the liquid storage).
Regarding Claim 21, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto discloses the heating element further comprises one or more of curves, undulations, folds, and corrugations (see annotated FIG 15 above, the heating element path comprises one or more curves and undulations, see also FIG 11).
Regarding Claim 23, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Matsumoto teaches the second heating element comprises a first part and a second part, and wherein the first part of the second heating element is embedded in the liquid aerosol- forming substrate storage component and the second part of the second heating element is not embedded in the liquid aerosol-forming substrate storage component (e.g., the first part is the part that is emersed in the liquid storage (See annotated FIG 15 above, and the part of the heating element that is outside the liquid storage is the second part, which meets the claim).
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.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (US20190124993A1).
Regarding Claim 22, Matsumoto discloses the claim limitations as set forth above.
Matsumoto fails to explicitly disclose a second heating element. However, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the heating element of Matsumoto so that Matsumoto includes a second heating element next to the first heating element see FIG 15. The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 VI B.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto (US20190124993A1) in view of Mironov (US 20180228217A1).
Regarding Claim 24, Matsumoto disclose the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Matsumoto fails to explicitly disclose suitable temperatures for which heating elements are heated and is accordingly silent to both the first portion and the second portion (of the heating element) are heated to at least 50 degrees Celsius.
However, Mironov teaches heating elements for aerosol generating devices and teaches suitable temperatures for heating heating elements and teaches they may be heated to a temperature of at least 50 degrees Celsius [0015].
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heating element temperature of Matsumoto to have a temperature of at least 50 degrees Celsius as taught by Mironov because both Matsumoto and Mironov are directed to aerosol generating devices comprising heating elements, Matsumoto is silent in regards to suitable temperatures for use in heating elements and one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to look to a similar reference to find suitable temperatures for a similar article. Mironov teaches known suitable temperatures for a similar heating element and this merely involves applying suitable characteristics to a similar product with a reasonable expectation of success.
Additionally, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges (such as temperatures) by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
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