DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendments and response filed April 23 2026. Claim 2 has been cancelled. Claims 1, 4-5, 8, and 13 have been amended. Claims 1 and 3-18 are pending and rejected.
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.
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 1 and 3-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020081849 A2 (hereinafter ATKINS).
Regarding claim 1, ATKINS discloses a vaporization device including a cartridge for a vaporizer device that improves management of leaks of vaporizable material (abstract). ATKINS discloses a vaporizer (cartridge 1320, Figs. 3A-3B, ¶265) , configured to vaporize a liquid substrate to generate an aerosol (¶265), comprising an outer housing (Fig. 4, combination of upper housing 1422 and lower housing 1424, ¶302 ATKINS discloses that the housing may be two pieces as shown or one), wherein the outer housing is internally provided: a liquid storage chamber (Fig. 3A-3B,storage chamber 1342, ¶275), configured to store a liquid substrate (Fig. 3B, vaporizable material 1302, ¶265).
ATKINS further discloses a smoke output tube (Fig. 3A, airflow passageway 1338, ¶266) for outputting an aerosol, constructed to extend in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing wherein the smoke output tube has an air inlet end being in airflow communication with the vaporization chamber. ATKINS discloses that the cartridge (i.e. vaporizer) includes a vaporization chamber in communication with the reservoir that may include a wicking element configured to draw vaporizable material from the reservoir to the heating element to be vaporized (¶45). ATKINS teaches broadly that the cartridge comprises a cannula 128 (Fig. 2D, ¶247). ATKINS teaches that the cannula defines the airflow path 134 and that the airflow path travels through the interior of the cartridge to the outlet. A person of ordinary skill in the art would immediately recognize that the air inlet end is at an end of the cannula that connects to the vaporization channel to provide a heated aerosol to the user.
ATKINS does not disclose, but teaches a capillary channel is defined between the air inlet end and the support, so as to transfer an aerosol condensate at the air inlet end out of the smoke output tube. As shown in Fig. 3B, the serpentine dotted lines form the capillary channel. In another embodiment shown in Fig. 10C, ATKINS teaches that smaller internal cartridge components may form a collector 1313 (¶317, ¶321). ATKINS teaches that there are challenges in the art associated with condensate collecting along the internal channels and a method is provided with this disclosure to capture the condensate within the device (¶43). ATKINS teaches that the capillary channels may be formed by a groove in the walls (¶46). ATKINS teaches that the collecting of the condensate may pass through multiple channels via capillary action to direct the condensate toward the vaporization chamber and a first location may be adjacent an end of the airflow passageway and a mouthpiece (i.e. the smoke output tube) (¶49-¶50).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of ATKINS to provide a capillary channel is defined between the air inlet end and the support, so as to transfer an aerosol condensate at the air inlet end out of the smoke output tube. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously provide capillary channels connecting the air inlet and smoke output to transfer condensate for vaporization. Doing so would overcome the challenges of condensate collecting along internal channels and capture the liquid to the vaporized (ATKINS ¶43). Further, courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C.
ATKINS further teaches through various embodiments a support, constructed to at least partially define a vaporization chamber (¶45). When the cartridge is assembled, the base of the cartridge, including the heater (for example Fig. 3B, heating element 1350) and the associated parts form a support to support the device. In another example, ATKINS teaches the inclusion of an overflow volume 1344 for containing some of the vaporizable material (¶275). As shown in the example embodiment of Fig. 10E there is a collector 1313 (broadly considered to be a support). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize the overfill volumes and collectors to be supports that at least partially define the vaporization chamber where the vaporization chamber has been defined to be a portion of the device exposed to heat through which liquid is drawn to be heated and vaporized.
ATKINS does not disclose, but teaches the air inlet end of the smoke output tube is provided with a first notch; the support is provided with a first convex edge located in the vaporization chamber; and the first convex edge at least partially extends into the first notch, and the capillary channel is defined between the first convex edge and the first notch.
ATKINS teaches an embodiment of a condensate recycler system 360 to be used with the vaporizer cartridge (Figs. 119A-119C, ¶584-¶590). ATKINS discloses that the air inlet end of the smoke outlet tube has grooves 364 (considered to be notches). The grooves create channels (i.e. capillary channels) that encourage fluid movement of the condensate toward the chamber groove 365. ATKINS teaches that the air tube second end 363 is disposed proximate to the vaporization chamber 342 (which is the support). As shown in detail in Figs. 119B-119C the air tube grooves 364 match the chamber grooves 365 to form a channel for the condensate to flow with capillary drive (¶590). ATKINS teaches that in some embodiments the geometry and number of grooves may vary for modifying the capillary drive (¶592). ATKINS further teaches that the features to create the capillary drive may be integral with the housing (¶593). In another embodiment, ATKINS teaches a gate provided at the opening of the single-channel collector 1313 (Figs. 11A-11B, ¶318). The gate is part of the support and causes vaporizable material to enter the overflow volume (¶319). As can be seen in at least Figs. 11A and 26A, the gate extends into the smoke output tube. As shown in embodiments throughout the gate has convex edges (See Figs. 11L-N, 25).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide the air inlet end of the smoke output tube is provided with a first notch; the support is provided with a first convex edge located in the vaporization chamber; and the first convex edge at least partially extends into the first notch, and the capillary channel is defined between the first convex edge and the first notch. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously provide for various capillary channels formed through grooves. ATKINS teaches that grooves of capillary channels may vary in number and geometry to improve performance of the capillary drive (¶592). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously arrange the air inlet end of the smoke output tube to drain into the collection tube through nesting the portions with predictable results. Further, the courts have held changes in proportion or shape to be prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that changes to the geometry would be made for fit and to direct flow of the liquid thereby achieving the stated purpose of the invention to address challenges with condensate collecting on internal channels (¶43).
Regarding claim 3, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 1 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the first convex edge and the first notch are not in contact and have a spacing distance maintained therebetween, and then the capillary channel is defined by the spacing distance.
ATKINS broadly teaches that capillary channels are configured to receive fluid and direct the fluid from a first location toward a second location vial capillary action (¶45). ATKINS teaches that the channels are formed by a groove defined between a pair of walls (considered to be a space) (¶46). The capillary channels collect a fluid condensate to be vaporized (¶49-¶50). ATKINS further teaches that the size and shape of the capillary feature (e.g., the bend, sharp point, curved surface, angled surface, protrusion, and the like) may be a function of a wetting angle formed between the materials (¶554).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide the first convex edge and the first notch are not in contact and have a spacing distance maintained therebetween, and then the capillary channel is defined by the spacing distance. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously provide a spacing distance to form a groove for condensate to flow. Doing so would achieve the stated purpose of the invention to address challenges with condensate collecting on internal channels (¶43).
Regarding claim 4, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 1 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the air inlet end of the smoke output tube has a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the outer housing and a thickness direction perpendicular to the width direction, and a dimension of the smoke output tube in the width direction is greater than a dimension of the same in the thickness direction; and the first notch is located on at least one side in the thickness direction of the smoke output tube.
As best shown in the embodiment of Figs. 30A-30F, below, there is a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the outer housing and a thickness perpendicular to the width direction. The width direction (horizontal to the page) is greater than a thickness direction (into to the page). This is analogous to instant application Fig.. 14. As can be seen, this geometric proportion extends the length of the tube.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide the air inlet end of the smoke output tube has a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the outer housing and a thickness direction perpendicular to the width direction, and a dimension of the smoke output tube in the width direction is greater than a dimension of the same in the thickness direction; and the first notch is located on at least one side in the thickness direction of the smoke output tube. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously arrange the tube to have a geometry wherein the width direction is greater than the thickness direction as shown in the embodiment of Fig. 22B and then use the grooved channels (notches) of the embodiment of Figs. 119A-119C, ¶584-¶590. Doing so would produce the capillary channels and grooves to direct the condensate (¶587). Further, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, courts have held changes in proportion or shape to be prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 5, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 4 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the smoke output tube is constructed to have an oval cross section. Further, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, courts have held changes in proportion or shape to be prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. ATKINS encourages change to the geometry of grooves for improving capillary drive. The smoke output tube is broadly considered to be a groove that directs capillary flow.
Regarding claim 6, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 4 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the air inlet end of the smoke output tube is further provided with a second notch located on at least one side of the smoke output tube in the width direction.
ATKINS teaches an embodiment of a condensate recycler system 360 to be used with the vaporizer cartridge (Figs. 119A-119C, ¶584-¶590). ATKINS discloses that the air inlet end of the smoke outlet tube has grooves 364 (considered to be notches). The grooves create channels (i.e. capillary channels) that encourage fluid movement of the condensate toward the chamber groove 365. ATKINS teaches that the air tube second end 363 is disposed proximate to the vaporization chamber 342 (which is the support). As shown in detail in Figs. 119B-119C the air tube grooves 364 match the chamber grooves 365 to form a channel for the condensate to flow with capillary drive (¶590). ATKINS teaches that in some embodiments the geometry and number of grooves may vary for modifying the capillary drive (¶592). ATKINS further teaches that the features to create the capillary drive may be integral with the housing (¶593). In another embodiment, ATKINS teaches a gate provided at the opening of the single-channel collector 1313 (Figs. 11A-11B, ¶318). The gate is part of the support and causes vaporizable material to enter the overflow volume (¶319). As can be seen in at least Figs. 11A and 26A, the gate extends into the smoke output tube. As shown in embodiments throughout the gate has convex edges (See Figs. 11L-N, 25).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide the air inlet end of the smoke output tube is further provided with a second notch located on at least one side of the smoke output tube in the width direction. ATKINS teaches that grooves (more than one) of capillary channels may vary in number and geometry to improve performance of the capillary drive (¶592). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously provide multiple grooves (i.e. notches) to direct the flow of condensate with predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 6 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches a width of the first notch is greater than a width of the second notch.
ATKINS teaches an embodiment of a condensate recycler system 360 to be used with the vaporizer cartridge (Figs. 119A-119C, ¶584-¶590). ATKINS discloses that the air inlet end of the smoke outlet tube has grooves 364 (considered to be notches). The grooves create channels (i.e. capillary channels) that encourage fluid movement of the condensate toward the chamber groove 365. ATKINS teaches that the air tube second end 363 is disposed proximate to the vaporization chamber 342 (which is the support). As shown in detail in Figs. 119B-119C the air tube grooves 364 match the chamber grooves 365 to form a channel for the condensate to flow with capillary drive (¶590). ATKINS teaches that in some embodiments the geometry and number of grooves may vary for modifying the capillary drive (¶592).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide a width of the first notch is greater than a width of the second notch. ATKINS teaches that grooves of capillary channels may vary in number and geometry to improve performance of the capillary drive (¶592). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously vary the width of grooves (i.e. notches) to direct the flow of condensate with predictable results. Further, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, courts have held changes in proportion or shape to be prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. ATKINS encourages change to the geometry of grooves for improving capillary drive.
Regarding claim 8, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 1 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the support is also provided with a plurality of second convex edges located in the vaporization chamber; and the second convex edges are constructed to extend in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and capillary grooves are defined among the second convex edges to suck and retain incoming aerosol condensate.
ATKINS teaches multiple embodiments with grooves and convex edges. The example discussed above in the rejection of claim 1 teaches that the grooves trap and drain the condensate to the wick due to capillary action (¶586). ATKINS teaches multiple grooves on the air tube (air tube grooves 364) and also chamber grooves 365 (¶587). These create capillary channels to pass the condensate to the wick to recycle it for vaporization (¶587).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the teachings of the various embodiments of ATKINS to provide the support is also provided with a plurality of second convex edges located in the vaporization chamber; and the second convex edges are constructed to extend in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and capillary grooves are defined among the second convex edges to suck and retain incoming aerosol condensate. ATKINS teaches that grooves of capillary channels may vary in number and geometry to improve performance of the capillary drive (¶592). A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously provide multiple channels (i.e. notches and grooves) to direct the flow of condensate with predictable results. Further, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, courts have held changes in proportion or shape to be prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. ATKINS encourages change to the geometry of grooves for improving capillary drive. Additionally, The court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Additional notches and grooves provide additional channels to direct condensate to recycle for vaporization.
Regarding claim 9, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 8 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches a projection height of the first convex edge is greater than a projection height of the second convex edge. This is considered to be a change in shape or proportion as discussed in the claims above and is prima facie obvious to direct flow of the condensate for recycle (¶587).
Regarding claim 10, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 4 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches a first liquid guide element, provided with a first surface close to the liquid storage chamber in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and a second surface facing away from the first surface, wherein the first surface is constructed to be in fluid communication with the liquid storage chamber to suck the liquid substrate. ATKINS teaches an embodiment with a wicking element (Fig. 3A, wicking element 1362, ¶266). The wicking element is in fluid communication with the reservoir (¶14). The wicking element is configured to draw the liquid vaporizable material from the storage chamber under capillary action (¶14). As best shown in Fig. 26B, the top surface of wick 1362 is a first surface closest to the reservoir and the second surface touches the bottom of the heating element to vaporize the liquid substrate (¶412). Courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously apply the teachings of ATKINS to result in a wick establishes fluid communication between the liquid reservoir and the atomizer because doing so would atomize the liquid (¶9, ¶15).
ATKINS further teaches a second liquid guide element arranged close to the second surface of the first liquid guide element in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and being at least partially in contact with the second surface to suck the liquid substrate. ATKINS teaches secondary wick feeds throughout the wick housing to absorb vaporizable material traveling through the first and second wick feeds to atomize the liquid material (¶17-¶18). ATKINS teaches another embodiment where the wick housing has ribs that are positioned to feed the first or second wick from the collector (¶19). ATKINS teaches embodiments where the second wick is implemented in the form of a channel (therefore the channels as defined by ATKINS are additional “wicks”) to allow for vaporizable material to flow toward the wick simultaneously as vaporizable material flows through the first wick (¶26). Courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously apply the teachings of ATKINS to result in a second wick because doing so would atomize the liquid (¶9, ¶15) and enable recycle of the condensate (¶455).
ATKINS further teaches a heating element at least partially surrounding the second liquid guide element, and being configured to heat at least part of the liquid substrate in the second liquid guide element to generate an aerosol; and the second liquid guide element comprises a first portion extending in a direction parallel to the width direction of the smoke output tube, and a second portion extending from the first portion to the first liquid guide element, wherein the second portion is configured to be in contact with the second surface to suck the liquid substrate, and the heating element at least partially surrounds the first portion.
ATKINS teaches many embodiments of heating elements (Figs. 49-109). These heating elements surround the liquid guiding elements (See for example Fig. 81, ¶481). The example of Fig. 81 is only one of many examples that show the heating element surrounding the wick. ATKINS teaches that the heating element is coupled to contact at least two surfaces of the wicking element to secure the wicking element (¶41, ¶273). ATKINS further teaches that a wicking housing may surround the heating element to create passageways to help route or deliver vaporizable material to one or both ends of a wicking element (¶273). ATKINS teaches another embodiment where the heating element has legs with retainer portions that are configured to be bent around at least a portion of the wick to secure the heating element and the wick (¶436). Courts have held that rearrangement of parts of the prior art is unpatentable. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and MPEP 2144.04, IV., part C. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously apply the teachings of ATKINS to result in the heating element surrounding the wicking element (¶41, ¶273) doing so would enable recycle of the condensate (¶455).
Regarding claim 11, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 1 as discussed above. ATKINS further discloses [A]n electronic vaporization device (Fig. 2B, vaporizer 100) , comprising a vaporizer (Fig. 2B, cartridge 120) configured to vaporize a liquid substrate to generate an aerosol (¶208), and a power supply assembly (Fig. 2B, vaporizer body 110 with power source 112, ¶208) supplying power to the vaporizer, wherein the vaporizer comprises the vaporizer according to claim 1 (As discussed in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 3 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the air inlet end of the smoke output tube has a width direction perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the outer housing and a thickness direction perpendicular to the width direction, and a dimension of the smoke output tube in the width direction is greater than a dimension of the same in the thickness direction; and the first notch is located on at least one side in the thickness direction of the smoke output tube for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 12 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches wherein the smoke output tube is constructed to have an oval cross section for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 12 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches the air inlet end of the smoke output tube is further provided with a second notch located on at least one side of the smoke output tube in the width direction for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 14 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches a width of the first notch is greater than a width of the second notch for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 3 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches wherein the support is also provided with a plurality of second convex edges located in the vaporization chamber; and the second convex edges are constructed to extend in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and capillary grooves are defined among the second convex edges to suck and retain incoming aerosol condensate for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 15 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches wherein a projection height of the first convex edge is greater than a projection height of the second convex edge for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 9.
Regarding claim 18, ATKINS teaches the vaporizer according to claim 12 as discussed above. ATKINS further teaches a first liquid guide element, provided with a first surface close to the liquid storage chamber in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and a second surface facing away from the first surface, wherein the first surface is constructed to be in fluid communication with the liquid storage chamber to suck the liquid substrate; a second liquid guide element arranged close to the second surface of the first liquid guide element in the longitudinal direction of the outer housing, and being at least partially in contact with the second surface to suck the liquid substrate; a heating element at least partially surrounding the second liquid guide element, and being configured to heat at least part of the liquid substrate in the second liquid guide element to generate an aerosol; and the second liquid guide element comprises a first portion extending in a direction parallel to the width direction of the smoke output tube, and a second portion extending from the first portion to the first liquid guide element, wherein the second portion is configured to be in contact with the second surface to suck the liquid substrate, and the heating element at least partially surrounds the first portion for the same reasons as discussed in the rejection of claim 10.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 23,2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended previously presented claim 1 to recite the limitations of previously presented claim 2. This does not overcome the rejection.
Applicant argues, “ATKINS discloses a general condensate management system, typically
relying on internal grooves or separate collector components (e.g., collector 1313). However, D1 fails to teach or suggest a capillary channel formed by the interlocking or nesting relationship between two separate components: a notch on the smoke tube and a convex edge on the support. As amended, Claim 1 requires the first convex edge to specifically "extend
into" the first notch. This specific mechanical interface creates a precisely controlled capillary gap at the very entrance of the smoke tube. D1 provides no motivation to modify its smoke tube or support to create such a nested structural cooperation.”
ATKINS clearly discloses management of liquid condensate through designing systems to overcome the challenges of condensate collecting along the internal channels and outlets (¶43). ATKINS recognizes that collection of condensate is a challenge and forms capillary channels throughout that may taper in size to collect condensate (¶46). The embodiment shown in Figs. 119A-119C and discussed in ¶584-¶590 illustrates capillary channels that are formed at the smoke tube. This embodiment is an air tube to be used with the vaporization chambers and supports already disclosed in the description such as shown in Figs. 3B, Fig. 4. For example, ATKINS discloses that the features may be removable or attachable and independently constructed (¶314). ATKINS interface also creates a precisely controlled capillary gap at the entrance of the smoke tube (See ¶586-¶588). ATKINS teaches that the grooves are purposefully sized to allow continually draining (¶587) and that the taper and
PNG
media_image1.png
266
443
media_image1.png
Greyscale
location is formed in a gradient to direct fluid migration.
[AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Notches)]
PNG
media_image2.png
453
444
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, as with the instant application, the system of Figs. 119A-119C as shown in ATKINS is a grooved airflow tube that directs material on the airflow tube back to the wick for reuse (¶584). ATKINS discloses that the features of the additional recyclers 117-119C illustrate embodiments of a vaporizer cartridge including one or more features for controlling, collecting, and/or recycling condensate in a vaporizer device are to be combined and included in the various embodiments already disclosed (¶571). Therefore the grooved condensate management air tube of Figs. 119A-119C is obviously combined with the embodiments of the disclosure to provide a mouthpiece 362 that actively manages condensate. When the features, which ATKINS discloses are removable and attachable (¶209, ¶223, ¶594), are combined they are “nested” insomuch as they fit one within another.
Applicant argues, “Furthermore, there is a fundamental functional difference between the present application and ATKINS. In ATKINS, the junction where the smoke tube meets the lower chambers is designed as an active airflow path (e.g., to allow air from collector 1313 to enter the tube). If a person of ordinary skill in the art were to implement the claimed nested capillary structure at the smoke tube's inlet in ATKINS, the resulting capillary-sized restriction-combined with the presence of liquid condensate-would create a "liquid seal" effect or significant pneumatic resistance. This would effectively obstruct the air inlet function of ATKINS, rendering the D1 device inoperable for its intended purpose of providing balanced airflow. Therefore, ATKINS teaches away from placing a capillary-sized nested restriction at the smoke tube's air inlet end. By placing the nested capillary channel at the source (the air inlet end), the present invention achieves the unexpected effect of "active source-management" of condensate. Instead of allowing condensate to accumulate and then "trapping" it (as in D1), the claimed structure utilizes the mechanical nesting to immediately transfer condensate away from the airflow path before it can be entrained by the aerosol. This prevents the "spitting" phenomenon more effectively than the remote collection taught in D1.”
This is a mischaracterization of ATKINS. As with the instant application, the capillary action in ATKINS recognizes that there is condensate forming within the air path and that condensate needs to be directed back to the vaporization chamber. This is happening within the air path of ATKINS as observed by applicant, however, there is nothing to suggest a liquid seal is formed that would obstruct the air when the embodiment of Figs. 119A-119C is combined with the cartridges. To the contrary, ATKINS designs the capillary system to direct the flow of the condensate to the wick thereby preventing liquid seal within the air tube (¶585). There is nothing that suggests that by “nesting” or connecting the air flow tube designed for condensate management within the air tube (Figs. 119A-119C and discussed in ¶584-¶590) to direct condensate back to the wick would create a liquid seal. ATKINS does not advocate “trapping” the condensate, rather ATKINS explicitly discloses directing the condensate in the capillary pathways back to the wick and storage chamber (¶297, ¶455). ATKINS discloses that avoiding liquid formed in the mouthpiece from being deposited to the user’s mouth is a problem to be avoided (¶455).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action insomuch as the independent claim was amended to include recitations from a previously dependent claim and the statement of rejection was modified to reject this combination. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE L MOORE whose telephone number is (313)446-6537. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 9 am to 5 pm.
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.
/STEPHANIE LYNN MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights