DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 7/6/2026 with respect to the rejections under 103 over Akai and Luo have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-17, and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akai (WO 2019/244323; Equivalent US 2021/0106064 used for citation) in view of Reevell (US 20170245551).
Regarding claims 1-2, 5, 8, 10-11, and 23, Akai teaches an aerosol provision system comprising: a retention unit or wick (aerosolizable material transport element) [0111, 0203]; a storage unit (reservoir) for aerosolizable material [0112], wherein the aerosolizable material transport element comprises a load or heater (vaporizer) for vaporizing the aerosolizable material in the aerosolizable material transport element [0115]; and control circuitry which is configured to monitor at least one temperature parameter relating to a temperature of the aerosolizable material transport element over a predetermined period of time after the vaporizer has been heated as part of a first heating operation [0203-0205; 0245-0252], and determine if the temperature parameter decreases by a predetermined amount in a predetermined time interval after the vaporizer has been heated, wherein which is indicative of depletion of the aerosol source [0253-0255], i.e. failure state of the aerosolizable material transport element comprises at least one of the aerosolizable material transport element or the vaporizer experiencing a dry-out state.
Akai teaches notifying unit for performing a notification to the user according to necessity [0115]. The control circuit being configured to generate a notification (signal) is considered implicit in Akai upon determination of the failure state. In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the control circuitry to configure the control circuitry of Akai to generate a signal upon determination of the failure state for in order to notify the user of the issue. The method of operating the device thereby reads on the claimed method.
Akai does not specifically teach the predetermined period of time or the predetermined time interval begins no more than 0.5 seconds after an end of the first heating operation. However, Akai does teach a waiting time period after an end of the first heating operation of the vaporizer before the predetermined time interval commences to prevent the cooling process from being observed in a state in which the residual current and the surge current are superimposed on the output value of the sensor, whereby the observation accuracy is improved [0158-0159]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the duration of this time period through routine experimentation to achieve the desired effects.
Akai does not specifically teach he predetermined period of time or the predetermined time interval is no more than a second. Reevell teaches an aerosol-generating system wherein a cooling time period that takes place after heating is between 0.2 and 2 seconds [0008, 0017]. The predetermined period of time in Akai is a cooling time period [0152]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply this known technique of a cooling time of 0.2 and 2 seconds to the predetermined period of time of Akai to yield predictable results. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). Alternatively, Reevell teaches a temperature measurement is made within a 0.5 second window after heating [0044]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply this known technique of a temperature measuring time period after heating of 0.5 seconds to the predetermined period of time of Akai to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 3, Akai teaches the predetermined period of time ends before a start of a second heating operation of the vaporizer occurring after the first heating operation of the vaporizer [Fig. 26].
Regarding claim 6-7, Akai teaches a time-series change embodiment for determining the cooling rate [0045], i.e. predetermined time interval is within, and less than, the predetermined period of time. In other embodiments without the time-series change as described, the predetermined period of time would be the same as the predetermined time interval.
Regarding claims 12-14 and 22, Akai teaches a first temperature sensor comprising a resistor, wherein the resistor is configured to output an electrical resistance value related to the temperature of the aerosolizable material transport element; and wherein the control circuitry is further configured to measure the electrical resistance value of the resistor, and process the electrical resistance value to determine the at least one temperature parameter, wherein the first temperature sensor is located in an electrical series circuit with the vaporizer [0128-0133; 0147]. The sensor is located in the cartridge 104A, and is configured to be powered by the power supply 110 from the control unit 102 [Fig. 1A].
Regarding claim 15, the resistor load 132 of Akai [0128] is located on a surface of the aerosolizable material transport element 130 [Fig. 1A].
Regarding claims 16-17, Akai teaches the at least one temperature parameter is related to a temperature of the vaporizer and the control circuitry is further configured to monitor an electrical resistance of the vaporizer to determine an electrical resistance value of the vaporizer, and process the electrical resistance value to determine the at least one temperature parameter [0256].
Regarding claim 20, Akai teaches the signal comprises light emission (optical signal), sound production (acoustic signal), or vibration (haptic signal) [0117].
Regarding claim 21, Akai teaches a cartridge 104A and a main body 102 (control unit), wherein the reservoir 116A, the aerosolizable material transport element 130, and the vaporizer 132 are located in the cartridge, wherein the control unit further comprises a power supply 110 and the control circuitry [Fig. 1A; 0111]. Akai teaches the cartridge configured to be detachably attached to the control unit [0111], i.e. the control unit comprises a cartridge receiving section that includes an interface arranged to cooperatively engage with the cartridge so as to releasably couple the cartridge to the control unit.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Popplewell (US 2019/0272359).
Akai does not teach the signal comprises a command to disable operation of the aerosol provision system or the vaporizer. Popplewell teaches a vaporization device wherein operation of the vape device is prevented upon determination that the reservoir is depleted [0130], i.e. there is a command to disable operation of the device and the vaporizer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply this configuration to the system of Akai such that the signal comprises a command to disable operation of the aerosol provision system and the vaporizer to prevent continued use during a failure state.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akai and Reevell as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Novak (US 2014/0253144).
Akai teaches the aerosol provision system comprises a cartridge 104A and a main body 102 (control unit) [0111]. Akai does not teach the control circuitry is configured to disable the operation of the aerosol provision system until the control circuitry determines that a different cartridge has been coupled to the control unit. Novak teaches an electronic smoking article configured to temporarily disable the control body until a different cartridge is engaged [0067], i.e. disable the operation of the aerosol provision system until the control circuitry determines that a different cartridge has been coupled to the control unit. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply this configuration to the system of modified Akai to prevent continued use during a failure state until a different cartridge has been coupled.
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
Prosecution Insights