DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 and 21-24 have been presented for examination.
Claim 20 has been canceled by the Applicant.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 25, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Examiner has considered the IDS as to the merits.
Drawings
The drawings filed on July 25, 2023 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-16, 18-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-18 are directed to a method, which is a process, which is a statutory category of invention. Claim 19 is directed to a non-combustible active substance delivery system, which is a machine, which is a statutory category of invention. Claims 21-22 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, which is a manufacture, which is a statutory category of invention. Claims 23-24 are directed to a system, which is a machine, which is a statutory category of invention. Therefore, claims 1-24 are directed to patent eligible categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claims 1, 19, 21, 23 and 24 recite the abstract idea of designing a target vaping article, constituting an abstract idea based on Mathematical Concepts including mathematical formulas or equations as well as calculations or alternatively Mental Processes based on concepts performed in the human mind, or with the aid of pencil and paper. The limitation of “calculating respective values for a plurality of design parameters for a liquid formulation for the target vaping article based on the received values for the plurality of input parameters” covers mathematical concepts including performing mathematical calculations resulting in design parameter values for a liquid formulation for the target vaping article. Alternatively, this limitation covers mental processes including performing mathematical calculations resulting in design parameter values for a liquid formulation for the target vaping article, which can be performed with the use of a pencil and paper. Additionally, the limitation of “the plurality of design parameters comprising at least two parameters selected from: a proportion of a component of the liquid formulation for the target vaping article, nicotine or another and/or other active substance deliveries, a sensory attribute, a number of puffs associated with the target vaping article, a heating profile, a flavor composition, physical properties of the target vaping article, and composition of the target vaping article” covers mental processes including having a list of possible design parameters and choosing at least two of these parameters. Thus, the claims recite the abstract idea of a mental process performed in the human mind, or with the aid of pencil and paper.
Dependent claims 2-16, 18 and 22 further narrow the abstract ideas, identified in the independent claims.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements of “non-combustible active substance delivery system” of claim 19, “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” of claims 21 and 23, “processor” in claim 23, “vaping article manufacturing apparatus” in claim 23, and “vaping article manufactured” in claim 24 merely uses a computer device as a tool to perform the abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.05(f)) The limitations of “receiving respective values for a plurality of input parameters” and “providing the calculated values of the plurality of design parameters as an output” in claim 1 can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to mere data gathering/output necessary to perform the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in an electro-mechanical product design environment, for collection, analysis and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Dependent claims 2-16, 18-19 and 22 further narrow the abstract ideas, identified in the independent claims, and do not introduce further additional elements for consideration beyond those addressed above.
Step 2B: Claims 1, 21, 23 and 24 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements of “non-combustible active substance delivery system” of claim 19, “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” of claims 21 and 23, “processor” in claim 23, “vaping article manufacturing apparatus” in claim 23, and “vaping article manufactured” in claim 24 merely uses a computer device as a tool to perform the abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.05(f)) The limitations of “receiving respective values for a plurality of input parameters” and “providing the calculated values of the plurality of design parameters as an output” in claim 1 can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to mere data gathering/output necessary to perform the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in an electro-mechanical product design environment, for collection, analysis and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the claim as a whole does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered alone or in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As stated in Section I.B. of the December 16, 2014 101 Examination Guidelines, “[t]o be patent-eligible, a claim that is directed to a judicial exception must include additional features to ensure that the claim describes a process or product that applies the exception in a meaningful way, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.”
The dependent claims include the same abstract ideas recited as recited in the independent claims, and merely incorporate additional details that narrow the abstract ideas and fail to add significantly more to the claims.
Dependent claim 2 is directed to further defining the method of calculating the values for the plurality of design parameters, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claims 3 and 15 are directed to further defining the derivation of the target vaping article descriptor, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claims 4 and 5 are directed to further defining a fitness of a given target article descriptor, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claims 6-13 are directed to further defining the optimization procedure, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claim 14 is directed to further defining the plurality of design parameter values, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claim 16 is directed to further defining the plurality of input parameters, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” or alternatively “Mathematical Concepts.”
Dependent claim 18 is directed to further defining the target vaping article, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Dependent claim 22 is directed to further defining the data processing apparatus, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes” and “Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception.” (MPEP 2106.05(f))
Accordingly, claims 1-16, 18-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 19 is written in dependent form, but it is trying to claim entirely new, independent subject matter without narrowing the parent claim. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 19 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.
Claim 19 purports to be an apparatus claim (“A non-combustible active substance delivery system”) but incorporates the method steps of Claim 1 by reference. This creates ambiguity as to whether infringement occurs upon manufacture of the physical system or upon execution of the design method of Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 14 and 16-19, 21-24 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L.
Regarding Claim 1: L discloses a method of designing a target vaping article, the method comprising:
receiving respective values for a plurality of input parameters;
L [Page 31: Lines 6-16] “Information about the contents of the cartridge 140 may be displayed to the user via a display of the electronic cigarette 100 and/or, via the optional interface described in the foregoing, by a mobile device of the user, e.g. in an app of a smartphone. The user is thus able to compose a personalized flavour program, making selections from the aerosol-generating liquids available from a certain type of cartridge 140 which is, e.g., automatically determined or which the user has input into the electronic cigarette 100 by the user interface. Instead of a single cartridge 140, the electronic cigarette 100 may be configured to receive a plurality of cartridges 140, each providing information about its contents to the controller 136 in one of the ways discussed in the foregoing.”
calculating respective values for a plurality of design parameters for a liquid formulation for the target vaping article based on the received values for the plurality of input parameters, the plurality of design parameters comprising at least two parameters selected from:
a proportion of a component of the liquid formulation for the target vaping article,
nicotine or another and/or other active substance deliveries,
L [Page 6: Lines 21-31] “In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise an active ingredient such as nicotine. In some advantageous embodiments, the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids of different strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. different nicotine strength. In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids with identical composition with the exception of their respective strength or concentration of the same active ingredient, e.g. nicotine. Preferably, the variation in vapour composition over time includes, or consists of, a variation in strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. in nicotine strength. In this way, the electronic cigarette may be used to precisely dose a drug, or an active ingredient of a drug, according to a predetermined dosage regime.”
a sensory attribute,
L [Page 31: Lines 26-30] “The flavour program may also be set partially, or completely, automatically. The electronic cigarette 100 may comprise at least one sensor that is configured to sense an environment condition and/or a property or a state of the user, and to determine, or adjust, the program of the electronic cigarette 100 accordingly.”
a number of puffs associated with the target vaping article,
L [Page 4: 1-2] “The timer may be configured to measure an amount of time in seconds (or milliseconds or the like) and/or in a number of puffs.
a heating profile,
L [Page 8: Lines 24-29] “In some advantageous embodiments, the program comprises a set of different heating profiles. Each heating profile may be linked to a specific composition and/or flavor. As has been discussed in the foregoing, specific vapour compositions may require specific heating profiles to optimize taste and/or delivery of an active ingredient.”
a flavor composition,
L [Page 7: Lines 1-4] “In some advantageous embodiments, the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids of at least two different flavours. Preferably, the variation in vapour composition (e.g. according to at least one program stored in the memory) includes, or consists of, a variation in flavour.”
physical properties of the target vaping article,
L [Page 27: Lines 1-7] “Fig. 2a shows a cartridge 140 with three different liquid reservoirs 122, each of the same size, that are sealed so that no aerosol-generating liquid may spill. The three different liquid reservoirs 122 are arranged next to each other, separated by a respective divider wall, and are rectangular in shape. Preferably, each liquid reservoir 122 comprises an aerosol-generating liquid different from the other liquid reservoirs 122 such that the cartridge 140 carries, in this example, three different aerosol-generating liquids.
and composition of the target vaping article;
L [Page 8: Lines 24-29] “In some advantageous embodiments, the program comprises a set of different heating profiles. Each heating profile may be linked to a specific composition and/or flavor. As has been discussed in the foregoing, specific vapour compositions may require specific heating profiles to optimize taste and/or delivery of an active ingredient.”
and providing the calculated values of the plurality of design parameters as an output.
L [Page 8: Lines 19-23] “The sensor may also be a sensor configured to detect a user's circadian rhythm, and the controller may be configured to adapt and/or choose a program based on the detected circadian rhythm, preferably based in addition on a current time and/or current date.
L [Page 25: Lines 1-4] “The control circuitry 130 further comprises a controller 136 configured to selectively control the activation of each heater according to the at least one program on the memory 132 and/or according to at least one heating profile. The timer 134 may also be integrated into the controller 136.”
Regarding Claim 2: L discloses the method of claim 1, wherein calculating values for the plurality of design parameters comprises deriving a target vaping article descriptor, wherein the target vaping article descriptor comprises values for the plurality of design parameters and values for the plurality of input parameters for the target vaping article.
L [Pages 29-30: Lines 24-32, 1-2] “The cartridge 140 may be provided with a data storage that comprises information about which kind of aerosol-generating liquid is contained in each of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In other words, the information may indicate which aerosol-generating liquid of the cartridge 140 is deposited in which liquid reservoir 122 and/or which composition it has. The information may also indicate an optimal vaping temperature of each aerosol-generating liquid, or information that allows the controller 136 to determine the vaping temperature for each aerosol-generating liquid via a database, a look-up table, an internet link or the like. The controller 136 may then control each heater to function at the respective vaping temperature. The information may be transmitted from the data storage of the cartridge 140 to the electronic cigarette 100, e.g. to the controller 136 or the memory 132 so that the controller 136 knows which heater is to be activated in order to produce vapour from a certain aerosol-generating liquid contained in one of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In this way, when two types of cartridge 140 e.g. comprise, among others, the same aerosol-generating liquid but have arranged the liquid reservoir 122 containing said aerosol-generating liquid at different positions of the cartridge 140, the controller 136 will be aware of the true position of the aerosol-generating liquid and control the heaters accordingly, based on at least one program and/or heating profile.”
Regarding Claim 14: L discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the values for the plurality of design parameters are calculated based on a plurality of stored vaping article descriptors, wherein each of the stored vaping article descriptors comprises values for the plurality of design parameters and values for the plurality of input parameters for a corresponding vaping article.
L [Pages 29-30: Lines 24-32, 1-2] “The cartridge 140 may be provided with a data storage that comprises information about which kind of aerosol-generating liquid is contained in each of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In other words, the information may indicate which aerosol-generating liquid of the cartridge 140 is deposited in which liquid reservoir 122 and/or which composition it has. The information may also indicate an optimal vaping temperature of each aerosol-generating liquid, or information that allows the controller 136 to determine the vaping temperature for each aerosol-generating liquid via a database, a look-up table, an internet link or the like. The controller 136 may then control each heater to function at the respective vaping temperature. The information may be transmitted from the data storage of the cartridge 140 to the electronic cigarette 100, e.g. to the controller 136 or the memory 132 so that the controller 136 knows which heater is to be activated in order to produce vapour from a certain aerosol-generating liquid contained in one of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In this way, when two types of cartridge 140 e.g. comprise, among others, the same aerosol-generating liquid but have arranged the liquid reservoir 122 containing said aerosol-generating liquid at different positions of the cartridge 140, the controller 136 will be aware of the true position of the aerosol-generating liquid and control the heaters accordingly, based on at least one program and/or heating profile.”
Regarding Claim 16: L discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of input parameters comprise at least two parameters selected from:
a proportion of a component of the liquid formulation for the target vaping article,
nicotine or another and/or other active substance deliveries,
L [Page 6: Lines 21-31] “In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise an active ingredient such as nicotine. In some advantageous embodiments, the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids of different strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. different nicotine strength. In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids with identical composition with the exception of their respective strength or concentration of the same active ingredient, e.g. nicotine. Preferably, the variation in vapour composition over time includes, or consists of, a variation in strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. in nicotine strength. In this way, the electronic cigarette may be used to precisely dose a drug, or an active ingredient of a drug, according to a predetermined dosage regime.”
a sensory attribute,
L [Page 31: Lines 26-30] “The flavour program may also be set partially, or completely, automatically. The electronic cigarette 100 may comprise at least one sensor that is configured to sense an environment condition and/or a property or a state of the user, and to determine, or adjust, the program of the electronic cigarette 100 accordingly.”
a number of puffs associated with the target vaping article,
L [Page 4: 1-2] “The timer may be configured to measure an amount of time in seconds (or milliseconds or the like) and/or in a number of puffs.
a heating profile,
L [Page 8: Lines 24-29] “In some advantageous embodiments, the program comprises a set of different heating profiles. Each heating profile may be linked to a specific composition and/or flavor. As has been discussed in the foregoing, specific vapour compositions may require specific heating profiles to optimize taste and/or delivery of an active ingredient.”
a flavor composition,
L [Page 7: Lines 1-4] “In some advantageous embodiments, the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids of at least two different flavours. Preferably, the variation in vapour composition (e.g. according to at least one program stored in the memory) includes, or consists of, a variation in flavour.”
physical properties of the target vaping article,
L [Page 27: Lines 1-7] “Fig. 2a shows a cartridge 140 with three different liquid reservoirs 122, each of the same size, that are sealed so that no aerosol-generating liquid may spill. The three different liquid reservoirs 122 are arranged next to each other, separated by a respective divider wall, and are rectangular in shape. Preferably, each liquid reservoir 122 comprises an aerosol-generating liquid different from the other liquid reservoirs 122 such that the cartridge 140 carries, in this example, three different aerosol-generating liquids.
and composition of the target vaping article;
L [Page 8: Lines 24-29] “In some advantageous embodiments, the program comprises a set of different heating profiles. Each heating profile may be linked to a specific composition and/or flavor. As has been discussed in the foregoing, specific vapour compositions may require specific heating profiles to optimize taste and/or delivery of an active ingredient.”
Regarding Claim 17: L discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising manufacturing the target vaping article based on the calculated values for the design parameter.
L [Page 13-14: Lines 24-32, 1-14] “The electronic cigarette 100 comprises a main body 110, and a mouthpiece portion 111. The mouthpiece portion 11 may form a mouthpiece itself or comprise a connector structure for connecting a mouthpiece ("mouthpiece connector"). Through the mouthpiece portion 111, an aerosol, or vapor, generated by the electronic cigarette 100 can be inhaled. The aerosol is generated by heating at least one aerosol-generating liquid as will be described in the following. Electrical energy for the heating is provided by a power source 112 of the electronic cigarette 100, for example a battery, preferably a rechargeable battery. As illustrated in Fig. 1 b, the electronic cigarette 100 comprises a plurality of liquid reservoirs 122, a regulating arrangement 160, at least one heater 180 (not shown in Fig. 1 b), a controller 136 and a timer 134. The liquid reservoirs 122 are configured to store different liquids. The liquids may comprise different flavours or different active ingredients, such as different nicotine strengths, acids or other. Hence, the aerosol-generating liquids may be different in flavour (e.g. one aerosol-generating liquid may be flavourless or flavour-neutral and the other one may comprise a menthol aroma), different in physical properties 1 o (e.g. a vaporisation temperature) and/or different in strength or concentration of the active ingredient. The liquid reservoirs 122 may be configured as replaceable/disposable cartridges 122. The electronic cigarette 100 may also have at least one integrated liquid reservoir in addition to the liquid reservoirs 122 that are provided when the cartridges 122 are inserted into the electronic cigarette 100.”
Regarding Claim 18: L discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the target vaping article comprises the liquid formulation.
L [Page 6: Lines 21-31] “In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise an active ingredient such as nicotine. In some advantageous embodiments, the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids of different strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. different nicotine strength. In some advantageous embodiments, at least two of the liquid reservoirs comprise liquids with identical composition with the exception of their respective strength or concentration of the same active ingredient, e.g. nicotine. Preferably, the variation in vapour composition over time includes, or consists of, a variation in strength or concentration of the active ingredient, e.g. in nicotine strength. In this way, the electronic cigarette may be used to precisely dose a drug, or an active ingredient of a drug, according to a predetermined dosage regime.”
Regarding Claim 19: L discloses a non-combustible active substance delivery system, comprising the target vaping article of any preceding claim 1.
L [Page 13: Lines 24-29] “The electronic cigarette 100 comprises a main body 110, and a mouthpiece portion 111. The mouthpiece portion 11 may form a mouthpiece itself or comprise a connector structure for connecting a mouthpiece ("mouthpiece connector"). Through the mouthpiece portion 111, an aerosol, or vapor, generated by the electronic cigarette 100 can be inhaled.”
Regarding Claim 21: L discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 1.
L [Page 30: Lines 10-14] “The information for the cartridge 140 may also be printed as a code segment on a part of the cartridge 140 such as on a surface of the cartridge 140. That code segment may thus act as a data storage of the cartridge 140. The code segment may be read by the electronic cigarette 100 electrically and/or optically, i.e. by an electric and/or optic reading device of the electronic cigarette 100.”
Regarding Claim 22: L discloses a data processing apparatus comprising a processor and the computer-readable storage medium as claimed in claim 21.
L [Page 30: Lines 24-26] “Hence, the data storage of the cartridge 140 may also comprise a complete program for the controller 136 to follow. Thus, the controller 136 may be configured to automatically select and follow a program from the data storage.”
L [Page 30: Lines 10-14] “The information for the cartridge 140 may also be printed as a code segment on a part of the cartridge 140 such as on a surface of the cartridge 140. That code segment may thus act as a data storage of the cartridge 140. The code segment may be read by the electronic cigarette 100 electrically and/or optically, i.e. by an electric and/or optic reading device of the electronic cigarette 100.”
Regarding Claim 23: L discloses a system comprising:
a data processing apparatus comprising a processor and a computer-readable storage medium of claim 22;
L [Page 30: Lines 24-26] “Hence, the data storage of the cartridge 140 may also comprise a complete program for the controller 136 to follow. Thus, the controller 136 may be configured to automatically select and follow a program from the data storage.”
L [Page 30: Lines 10-14] “The information for the cartridge 140 may also be printed as a code segment on a part of the cartridge 140 such as on a surface of the cartridge 140. That code segment may thus act as a data storage of the cartridge 140. The code segment may be read by the electronic cigarette 100 electrically and/or optically, i.e. by an electric and/or optic reading device of the electronic cigarette 100.”
and a vaping article manufacturing apparatus configured to carry out the method of claim 17.
L [Page 13: Lines 24-29] “The electronic cigarette 100 comprises a main body 110, and a mouthpiece portion 111. The mouthpiece portion 11 may form a mouthpiece itself or comprise a connector structure for connecting a mouthpiece ("mouthpiece connector"). Through the mouthpiece portion 111, an aerosol, or vapor, generated by the electronic cigarette 100 can be inhaled.”
Regarding Claim 24: L discloses a system comprising: a vaping article manufactured according to the calculated values for the design parameters output by the method of claim 1.
L [Page 20: Lines 10-12] “As illustrated in the following Fig. 8a, Fig. 8b, Fig. 9, and Fig. 10, the electronic cigarette 100 may further comprise user controls 170 configured to enable a user of the electronic cigarette 100 to control the mixing of liquids.”
L [Page 30: Lines 10-14] “The information for the cartridge 140 may also be printed as a code segment on a part of the cartridge 140 such as on a surface of the cartridge 140. That code segment may thus act as a data storage of the cartridge 140. The code segment may be read by the electronic cigarette 100 electrically and/or optically, i.e. by an electric and/or optic reading device of the electronic cigarette 100.”
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 3, 6-7, 9-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L, in view of CN 109919688 A, hereafter Z.
Regarding Claim 3: L discloses the method of claim 3, wherein deriving the target vaping article descriptor.
L [Pages 29-30: Lines 24-32, 1-2] “The cartridge 140 may be provided with a data storage that comprises information about which kind of aerosol-generating liquid is contained in each of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In other words, the information may indicate which aerosol-generating liquid of the cartridge 140 is deposited in which liquid reservoir 122 and/or which composition it has. The information may also indicate an optimal vaping temperature of each aerosol-generating liquid, or information that allows the controller 136 to determine the vaping temperature for each aerosol-generating liquid via a database, a look-up table, an internet link or the like. The controller 136 may then control each heater to function at the respective vaping temperature. The information may be transmitted from the data storage of the cartridge 140 to the electronic cigarette 100, e.g. to the controller 136 or the memory 132 so that the controller 136 knows which heater is to be activated in order to produce vapour from a certain aerosol-generating liquid contained in one of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In this way, when two types of cartridge 140 e.g. comprise, among others, the same aerosol-generating liquid but have arranged the liquid reservoir 122 containing said aerosol-generating liquid at different positions of the cartridge 140, the controller 136 will be aware of the true position of the aerosol-generating liquid and control the heaters accordingly, based on at least one program and/or heating profile.”
L does not disclose performing an optimization procedure directed to deriving a target vaping article descriptor having a maximal fitness.
However, Z discloses performing an optimization procedure directed to deriving a target vaping article descriptor having a maximal fitness.
Z [0010-0013] “Step 1: Determine the attributes of e-cigarette products considering market factors; The market factors mentioned include the type of e-cigarette and the attributes of e-cigarette products. Step 2: Establish an optimization model for the e-cigarette product line; Step 3: Design an intelligent optimization algorithm for solving the model.”
Z [0113-0115] “Step 2-4-1: Objective function; The optimization objective of this invention is to maximize product line profits. The fixed costs of the product line are unrelated to any decision variables and have no impact on the objective function, so they are ignored.”
Z [0149-0150] “Steps 3-4: Establish fitness functions and selection; Step 3-4-1: Fit function; In this invention, the objective function is used as the fitness function.
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 6: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 3.
L does not disclose wherein performing the optimization procedure comprises, repeating for each k between 1 and (n - 1), where n >= 2: receiving a kth generation of target vaping article descriptors; deriving corresponding fitnesses for each of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors; selecting one or more subsets of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors based on the corresponding fitnesses; and deriving a ( k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors based on the one or more subsets of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors, wherein the target vaping article descriptor is the vaping article descriptor of the nth generation having [[the]] a greatest fitness.
However, Z discloses wherein performing the optimization procedure comprises, repeating for each k between 1 and (n - 1), where n >= 2:
receiving a kth generation of target vaping article descriptors;
deriving corresponding fitnesses for each of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors;
selecting one or more subsets of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors based on the corresponding fitnesses;
and deriving a (k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors based on the one or more subsets of the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors, wherein the target vaping article descriptor is the vaping article descriptor of the nth generation having a greatest fitness.
Z [0134] “Each chromosome consists of J sub-partitions. The j-th sub-partition contains information related to the attribute configuration of the j-th product variant, and each sub-partition includes K+1 genes. The k-th gene contains information related to the k-th attribute of the product, indicating the attribute level selected for this attribute. The K+1-th gene represents the price of the product variant. Since the actual product price is usually an integer, encoding the price of the product variant as an integer can improve efficiency.” Examiner notes that the total number of genes n, is equal to K+1 in a single sub-partition, where K is the number of product attributes, which ranges from 1 to n-1. A product must have at least one attribute (K = 1) and one price gene, so the minimum total number of genes per sub-partition is 1 + 1 = 2.
[0148] “Step 3-3-3-4: Repeat the above operation until there are no duplicate attribute configurations, then stop the calculation.”
Z [0010-0013] “Step 1: Determine the attributes of e-cigarette products considering market factors; The market factors mentioned include the type of e-cigarette and the attributes of e-cigarette products. Step 2: Establish an optimization model for the e-cigarette product line; Step 3: Design an intelligent optimization algorithm for solving the model.”
Z [0113-0115] “Step 2-4-1: Objective function; The optimization objective of this invention is to maximize product line profits. The fixed costs of the product line are unrelated to any decision variables and have no impact on the objective function, so they are ignored.”
Z [0149-0154] “Steps 3-4: Establish fitness functions and selection; Step 3-4-1: Fit function; In this invention, the objective function is used as the fitness function. Step 3-4-2: Select; The method used in this invention is the Roulette Wheel Selection. The basic idea of this method is that the probability of a chromosome being selected to be passed on to the next generation is proportional to its fitness value; the higher the fitness value, the greater the likelihood of it being selected to be retained in the next generation. Assuming the population size is Popsize, and the fitness of an individual is fp, the probability Pp of an individual p being selected can be expressed by the formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
56
98
media_image1.png
Greyscale
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 7: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 6.
L does not disclose wherein deriving the (k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors comprises deriving one or more child vaping article descriptors, wherein each of the one or more child vaping article descriptors is based on a respective two or more of the subset of the kth generation of the target vaping article descriptors.
However, Z discloses wherein deriving the (k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors comprises deriving one or more child vaping article descriptors, wherein each of the one or more child vaping article descriptors is based on a respective two or more of the subset of the kth generation of the target vaping article descriptors.
Z [0139-0140] “Step 3-3-1: Design of the crossover operator; The present invention employs the Uniform Crossover Method (UCM). Figure 4 shows an example of chromosome crossing over. First, a binary crossover mask is randomly generated to select whether to perform a crossover operation at the corresponding position of the parent chromosome. If the value of a certain bit of the mask is 0, it means that the corresponding gene position of the parent chromosome and the mother chromosome is exchanged; if the value of the crossover mask is 1, then no exchange is performed. In this example, the mask is 10101110. According to the crossover rules introduced earlier, for the parent and mother individuals, the attribute level 17 and price index value of the second attribute of product 1 and the price index value of product 2 need to be swapped respectively. The values of other gene positions on these two chromosomes do not need to be swapped, resulting in child individual 1 and child individual 2 as shown in Figure 4.”
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 9: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 7.
L does not disclose wherein deriving the (k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors comprises mutating at least one of the one or more child vaping article descriptors.
However, Z discloses wherein deriving the (k + 1)th generation of target vaping article descriptors comprises mutating at least one of the one or more child vaping article descriptors.
Z [0139-0142] “Step 3-3-1: Design of the crossover operator; The present invention employs the Uniform Crossover Method (UCM). Figure 4 shows an example of chromosome crossing over. First, a binary crossover mask is randomly generated to select whether to perform a crossover operation at the corresponding position of the parent chromosome. If the value of a certain bit of the mask is 0, it means that the corresponding gene position of the parent chromosome and the mother chromosome is exchanged; if the value of the crossover mask is 1, then no exchange is performed. In this example, the mask is 10101110. According to the crossover rules introduced earlier, for the parent and mother individuals, the attribute level 17 and price index value of the second attribute of product 1 and the price index value of product 2 need to be swapped respectively. The values of other gene positions on these two chromosomes do not need to be swapped, resulting in child individual 1 and child individual 2 as shown in Figure 4. Step 3-3-2: Design of mutation operators; This invention uses a random mutation method. That is, if a chromosome needs to be mutated at a given mutation rate, some gene loci of this chromosome are selected, and the values of these gene loci are randomly generated within their range to create a new legal gene.
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 10: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 3.
L does not disclose wherein the optimization procedure is a stochastic optimization procedure.
However, Z discloses wherein the optimization procedure is a stochastic optimization procedure.
Z [0136-0137] “Step 3-2: Population initialization; To maintain population diversity, chromosomes in the initial population are generated randomly. The product's attribute configuration is represented by integer encoding in the gene. The random function generation ranges of the attribute level from the user demand perspective and the index value of the product price are [1,Lk] and [1,W], respectively. Examiner notes properties of a stochastic procedure are random generation, range limits, and variable outcomes.
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 11: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 10.
L does not disclose wherein the stochastic optimization procedure is a genetic algorithm.
However, Z discloses wherein the stochastic optimization is a genetic algorithm.
Z [0158-0159] “Steps 3-6: Construct a genetic algorithm that embeds the hill-climbing algorithm; Traditional genetic algorithms have relatively weak local search capabilities. Furthermore, due to the complexity of the optimization model for e-cigarette product lines, the time consumption of adding local search algorithms should be strictly controlled. This necessitates that the introduced local algorithms be simple and efficient. Based on this, the hill-climbing algorithm was adopted to improve the local search capability of the algorithm. The basic idea of this algorithm is to compare the search process to climbing a mountain, moving uphill in the direction of increasing altitude without any other information about the summit.”
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Regarding Claim 13: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 10.
L does not disclose wherein the optimization procedure comprises at least one selected from particle swarm optimization, ant colony optimization simulated annealing, a Monte Carlo algorithm, Runge-Kutte methods, a genetic algorithm, or any combination thereof.
However, Z discloses wherein the optimization procedure comprises at least one selected from particle swarm optimization, ant colony optimization simulated annealing, a Monte Carlo algorithm, Runge-Kutte methods, a genetic algorithm, or any combination thereof.
Z [0158-0159] “Steps 3-6: Construct a genetic algorithm that embeds the hill-climbing algorithm; Traditional genetic algorithms have relatively weak local search capabilities. Furthermore, due to the complexity of the optimization model for e-cigarette product lines, the time consumption of adding local search algorithms should be strictly controlled. This necessitates that the introduced local algorithms be simple and efficient. Based on this, the hill-climbing algorithm was adopted to improve the local search capability of the algorithm. The basic idea of this algorithm is to compare the search process to climbing a mountain, moving uphill in the direction of increasing altitude without any other information about the summit.”
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L, in view of CN109034388 A, hereafter P.
Regarding Claim 15: L discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising deriving one or more of the plurality of stored vaping article descriptors.
L [Page 20: Lines 10-20]: “As illustrated in the following Fig. 8a, Fig. 8b, Fig. 9, and Fig. 10, the electronic cigarette 100 may further comprise user controls 170 configured to enable a user of the electronic cigarette 100 to control the mixing of liquids. The liquids may as previously described contain different flavors or different concentrations of ingredients such as nicotine. For instance, the controls may enable to control the amount of liquid that is used from each liquid reservoir 122 to generate the aerosol. In Fig. Sa, Fig. Sb, Fig. 9 and Fig. 10, an embodiment is shown in which the electronic cigarette 100 comprises two different liquids, either by being configured to receive a single cartridge 140 with two different liquid reservoirs 122, by being configured to receive two separate cartridges 140, each of which may comprise a different liquid, and/or the like.”
L does not disclose using chemometric analysis.
However, P discloses using chemometric analysis.
P [0073] “The comparison of Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 illustrates that the accuracy of the predicted values of tar, nicotine, and CO obtained by the neural network model optimized by the genetic algorithm in this patent is significantly improved compared to the accuracy of the predicted values of tar, nicotine, and CO obtained by the neural network model without the genetic algorithm optimization. This demonstrates that the technical solution adopted in this patent can indeed achieve better practical results and will have a positive effect on assisting in the sourcing and production of tobacco materials.”
L and P are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to optimizing cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of P with L because the use of a genetic algorithm to optimize a neural network, which in doing so will achieve “better fitting results compared to traditional statistical modeling methods” in order to “optimize product design, accelerate production efficiency, and produce qualified and low-harm products”. (See P [0005-0006])
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L, in view of CN 109919688 A, hereafter Z, further in view of CN109034388 A, hereafter P.
Regarding Claim 4: L in view of C disclose the fitness of claim 3.
L and Z do not disclose wherein a fitness of a given target vaping article descriptor is based on differences between values of the given target vaping article descriptor for the plurality of input parameters and corresponding values based on the received values for the plurality of input parameters.
However, P discloses wherein a fitness of a given target vaping article descriptor is based on differences between values of the given target vaping article descriptor for the plurality of input parameters and corresponding values based on the received values for the plurality of input parameters.
P [057-059] “Step 2.6: Determine whether the optimization goal has been achieved. If the optimization goal has been achieved, select the best weights and thresholds and proceed to the next step; otherwise, proceed to step 2.4. The specific implementation process of the example is described below: Before using a genetic algorithm to obtain the optimal weights and thresholds, first determine a series of parameters required by the neural network, such as the number of input layer nodes (INPUT_NODE), the number of hidden layers and the number of hidden layer nodes (LAYER1_NODE), and the number of output layer nodes (OUTPUT_NODE), as well as parameters required by the genetic algorithm, such as the number of generations and the population size. Then, the initial weights and thresholds of the neurons are initialized and encoded with real numbers. The fitness of the population is calculated one by one, and the selection, crossover and mutation operations of neurons are performed in sequence. Each time a round of selection, crossover, and mutation is performed, the population is updated, and the fitness of the population needs to be recalculated. Population fitness is an indicator that describes how close a population is to the optimal solution to a problem. Here, we use the sum of the errors between all the data in the training set and the model's predictions to solve for the fitness of each individual. Based on the fitness of individuals, select a group of individuals with lower fitness values to form a new population. In the new population, selection, crossover, and mutation continue to be carried out, so that the population iterates continuously and keeps approaching the optimal solution. After each fitness calculation, the neurons that obtained the best fitness in all previous iterations are saved. The best neurons obtained in the end will be used as the initial weights and thresholds for the next step of training the final neural network model. Examiner notes that the target vaping article descriptor values would be the predicted values generated by the model and the received values would be the input data in the training set.
L, Z, and P are analogous to the claimed invention because they all pertain to optimizing a cigarette.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of P with L and Z because the use of a genetic algorithm to optimize a neural network, which in doing so will achieve “better fitting results compared to traditional statistical modeling methods” in order to “optimize product design, accelerate production efficiency, and produce qualified and low-harm products”. (See P [0005-0006])
Regarding Claim 12: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 11.
L and Z do not disclose wherein the genetic algorithm is a real coded genetic algorithm.
However, P discloses wherein the genetic algorithm is a real coded genetic algorithm.
P [0059] “Before using a genetic algorithm to obtain the optimal weights and thresholds, first determine a series of parameters required by the neural network, such as the number of input layer nodes (INPUT_NODE), the number of hidden layers and the number of hidden layer nodes (LAYER1_NODE), and the number of output layer nodes (OUTPUT_NODE), as well as parameters required by the genetic algorithm, such as the number of generations and the population size. Then, the initial weights and thresholds of the neurons are initialized and encoded with real numbers. The fitness of the population is calculated one by one, and the selection, crossover and mutation operations of neurons are performed in sequence.”
L, Z, and P are analogous to the claimed invention because they all pertain to optimizing a cigarette.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of P with L and Z because the use of a genetic algorithm to optimize a neural network, which in doing so will achieve “better fitting results compared to traditional statistical modeling methods” in order to “optimize product design, accelerate production efficiency, and produce qualified and low-harm products”. (See P [0005-0006])
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L, in view of CN 109919688 A, hereafter Z, further in view of CN109034388 A, hereafter P, further in view of NPL: Cheng HG, Largo EG, Gogova M. E-cigarette use and onset of first cigarette smoking among adolescents: An empirical test of the 'common liability' theory. F1000Res. 2019 Dec 13;8:2099, hereafter C.
Regarding Claim 5: L in view of Z, further in view of P disclose the method of claim 4 … the values of the the given target vaping article descriptor for the input parameters and corresponding values based on the received values for the plurality of input parameters.
L [Pages 29-30: Lines 24-32, 1-2] “The cartridge 140 may be provided with a data storage that comprises information about which kind of aerosol-generating liquid is contained in each of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In other words, the information may indicate which aerosol-generating liquid of the cartridge 140 is deposited in which liquid reservoir 122 and/or which composition it has. The information may also indicate an optimal vaping temperature of each aerosol-generating liquid, or information that allows the controller 136 to determine the vaping temperature for each aerosol-generating liquid via a database, a look-up table, an internet link or the like. The controller 136 may then control each heater to function at the respective vaping temperature. The information may be transmitted from the data storage of the cartridge 140 to the electronic cigarette 100, e.g. to the controller 136 or the memory 132 so that the controller 136 knows which heater is to be activated in order to produce vapour from a certain aerosol-generating liquid contained in one of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In this way, when two types of cartridge 140 e.g. comprise, among others, the same aerosol-generating liquid but have arranged the liquid reservoir 122 containing said aerosol-generating liquid at different positions of the cartridge 140, the controller 136 will be aware of the true position of the aerosol-generating liquid and control the heaters accordingly, based on at least one program and/or heating profile.”
L, Z and P do not disclose wherein the fitness of the given target vaping article is inversely related to a root mean square deviation.
However, C discloses wherein the fitness of the given target vaping article is inversely related to a root mean square deviation.
C [Page 5: Analysis Approach] “Several model fit indices were used to assess the goodness of fit of the measurement and the final structural models. These fit indices include root mean square of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI). A RMSEA<0.08 and CFI/TLI > 0.90 are considered as indications of reasonably good model fit”
L, Z, P and C are analogous to the claimed invention because they all pertain to the use of cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of C with L, Z and P because C uses structural equation modeling to determine the relationship on whether individuals will start smoking due to the use of e-cigarettes, guided by the “common liability theory”, which is the theory that the observed statistical relationship between e-cigarette use and subsequent smoking initiation is non-causal and instead entirely explained by shared underlying individual risk factors (such as impulsivity or genetic predisposition to tobacco use). (See C [Abstract])
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over CA 3117891 A1, hereafter L, in view of CN 109919688 A, hereafter Z, further in view of NPL: K.Y. Fung, C.K. Kwong, K.W.M. Siu, K.M. Yu, A multi-objective genetic algorithm approach to rule mining for affective product design, Expert Systems with Applications, Volume 39, Issue 8, 2012,Pages 7411-7419,ISSN 0957-4174, hereafter K.
Regarding Claim 8: L in view of Z disclose the method of claim 7 … vaping descriptors.
L [Pages 29-30: Lines 24-32, 1-2] “The cartridge 140 may be provided with a data storage that comprises information about which kind of aerosol-generating liquid is contained in each of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In other words, the information may indicate which aerosol-generating liquid of the cartridge 140 is deposited in which liquid reservoir 122 and/or which composition it has. The information may also indicate an optimal vaping temperature of each aerosol-generating liquid, or information that allows the controller 136 to determine the vaping temperature for each aerosol-generating liquid via a database, a look-up table, an internet link or the like. The controller 136 may then control each heater to function at the respective vaping temperature. The information may be transmitted from the data storage of the cartridge 140 to the electronic cigarette 100, e.g. to the controller 136 or the memory 132 so that the controller 136 knows which heater is to be activated in order to produce vapour from a certain aerosol-generating liquid contained in one of the liquid reservoirs 122 of the cartridge 140. In this way, when two types of cartridge 140 e.g. comprise, among others, the same aerosol-generating liquid but have arranged the liquid reservoir 122 containing said aerosol-generating liquid at different positions of the cartridge 140, the controller 136 will be aware of the true position of the aerosol-generating liquid and control the heaters accordingly, based on at least one program and/or heating profile.”
L does not disclose the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors.
However, Z discloses the kth generation of target vaping article descriptors.
Z [0134] “Each chromosome consists of J sub-partitions. The j-th sub-partition contains information related to the attribute configuration of the j-th product variant, and each sub-partition includes K+1 genes. The k-th gene contains information related to the k-th attribute of the product, indicating the attribute level selected for this attribute. The K+1-th gene represents the price of the product variant. Since the actual product price is usually an integer, encoding the price of the product variant as an integer can improve efficiency.”
L and Z are analogous to the claimed invention because they both pertain to electronic cigarettes.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Z with L because the method of “studying consumers’ selection strategies during the product purchase process is of great significance for optimizing the design” of electronic cigarettes. (See Z [0005])
L and Z do not disclose wherein each of the one or more child… is a linear combination of the respective two or more of the subsets.
However, K discloses wherein each of the one or more child… is a linear combination of the respective two or more of the subsets.
K [Page 7414: Section 3.4] “The chromosome design combined binary with real-coded genes. Binary bits are used to represent the activation flags and categorical attributes, while weights and quantitative attributes are encoded using real numbers in a chromosome. Two different genetic operators are therefore required for crossover and mutation of the two types of data. Two-point crossover operator (Fig. 3.7) and bitwise mutation operator (Fig. 3.8) were employed to deal with the binary-coded parts, fi, fj, and Gene Xi. Simulated binary crossover and polynomial mutation (Agrawal et al., 1994, Deb et al., 2002) were adopted for the genetic operation of the real-coded parts, Gene Xj, Gene Y, and wm. The simulated binary crossover performs an arithmetic crossover with a random distribution for dth real number and is given as:
PNG
media_image2.png
66
353
media_image2.png
Greyscale
L, Z, and K are analogous to the claimed invention because they pertain to the optimization of the design of a product.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of K with L and Z because the novel multi-object genetic algorithm of K “can generate approximate rules to consider the ambiguity of customer assessments”, which “the generated rules can be used to determine the lower and upper limits of the affective effect of design patterns”, and “simultaneously consider the accuracy, comprehensibility, and definability of approximate rules” in order to optimize the product design. (See K [Abstract])
Conclusion
All Claims are rejected.
The prior art made record of and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
WO 2021019225 A1
CN 107205476 B
EP 3229619 B1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott T. Tran whose telephone number is (571) 272-8533. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Thurs, 8:00-4:00.
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://uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Renee Chavez, can be reached at (571) 270-1104. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Informal or draft communication, please label PROPOSED or DRAFT, can be additionally sent to the Examiner’s fax phone number (571) 272-8533.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published a applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
STT
/SCOTT THANH BINH TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2186
/SAIF A ALHIJA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186
Prosecution Insights