Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/272,248

SMOKING ARTICLE AND AEROSOL-GENERATING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 13, 2023
Examiner
MOORE, STEPHANIE LYNN
Art Unit
1747
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kt&G Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
117 granted / 196 resolved
-5.3% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
235
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
58.4%
+18.4% vs TC avg
§102
17.1%
-22.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 196 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 election of group I, claims 1-11 filed February 27, 2026. Claims 12-14 are withdrawn. Claims 1-11 are rejected. Election/Restrictions Claims 12-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected aerosol generating system, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on February 27, 2026. 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 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160295914 A1 (hereinafter JORDIL). Regarding claim 1, JORDIL teaches a smoking article having an aerosol generating substrate with a liquid flavorants surrounded by particulate material (abstract). JORDIL teaches a multi-segmented smoking article (Fig. 1, smoking article 100, ¶53). The article has a tobacco rod 101, and a filter with a breakable capsule 120 containing liquid flavorants surrounded by particulate material 125 (¶53). JORDIL teaches smoking article (Fig. 1, smoking article 100, ¶53) comprising: a plurality of medium granules (Fig. 1, particulate material 125, ¶53); and a medium receiver (a cavity of the filter as disclosed in ¶53) filled with the plurality of medium granules (as shown in Fig. 1). JORDIL further discloses the plurality of medium granules have an atypical shape (¶20). JORDIL discloses that the particulate material preferably has an irregular or non-spherical shape. Atypical shape is constructed to mean, as indicated in applicant’s specification, “ basically in a spherical shape but also in a shape atypical enough to maintain the granule dispersibility”. Regarding claims 5 and 6, JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 1 as discussed above. JORDIL discloses plurality of medium granules have a roundness of 30% or more and 90% or less or wherein the roundness is 60% or more and 90% or less. JORDIL discloses that the particulate may have irregular shaped including a sphericity of less than 0.8 or less than 0.6 (¶20). Sphericity is considered to be how round the particles are relative to perfect spheres (sphericity of 1 (Jordil ¶20-¶21) in terms of the claims of the instant application is a roundness of 100%). JORDIL teaches that this irregular shape will more readily break the capsule (¶22). Regarding claims 7-8, JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 1 as discussed above. Regarding the limitation that the plurality of medium granules are manufactured by a fluidized bed granulation process and the fluidized bed granulation process is a process in which a spraying direction of a liquid binder and a flow direction of fluidized air face each other. This recitation a product by process recitation. Product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps (See MPEP 2113, I.). The structure imparted by the process is reasonably suggested to be one in which the particle shape is not circular in nature (i.e. atypical). JORDIL discloses atypical particles. Therefore, the atypical particles are reasonably suggested to have the same or substantially similar “atypical-ness” imparted by the fluidized bed granulation process. The fluidized bed processes recited impart no specific structure on the granules that cannot be found in the particles of JORDIL. There is no evidence that the direction of spray as recited imparts any additional structure on the particles of Jin that is not already present in JORDIL. 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 2 and 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JORDIL as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20110277781 A1 (hereinafter CLARK). Regarding claim 2, JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 1 as discussed above. JORDIL further discloses, a filter located on the other side of the medium receiver. JORDIL discloses that the filter is multi-segmented as shown in Fig. 1 and discussed in ¶38 and ¶53 with a downstream mouth end filter. JORDIL does not disclose a humectant receiver located on one side of the medium receiver and configured to generate an aerosol. CLARK teaches a multicomponent smoking article filter adapted to be disposed at the non-burning end of a rod of smokable material with a cavity disposed between a first and send plug (abstract). CLARK teaches that a first cavity comprises cellulosic granules containing and flavor and optionally a humectant (¶7) and a second cavity also containing a humectant like glycerin (¶10). CLARK teaches that the inclusion of the humectant provides subjectively pleasing flavors and other sensory characteristics to the mainstream smoke and minimizes dryness (¶13). As best taught in Fig. 3, is an embodiment with multiple segments containing either or both of cellulosic granules containing humectant and water (¶44-¶45). CLARK further encourages one of ordinary skill in the art to vary levels of the granules and cavities and the lengths of the cavities to promote desired sensorial attributes such as dwell time (¶45). 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 modified JORDIL to provide a humectant receiver located on one side of the medium receiver and configured to generate an aerosol as taught in CLARK. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously include multiple segments to promote desired sensorial attributes (CLARK ¶45). As encouraged by CLARK, a person of ordinary skill in the art would add segments to achieve the desired attributes with predictable results.. Regarding 11, modified JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 2 as discussed above. JORDIL further discloses the filter comprises: a first filter having a cavity therein; and a second filter fully filled with a filtration material. JORDIL discloses that filter cigarettes with multi-component filters comprise two or more segments of filter material (¶2) JORDIL further discloses that the mouthpiece (part of the filter) includes a cavity that is partially filled (¶9-¶10). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JORDIL as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20030159703 A1 (hereinafter YANG). Regarding claim 3, JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 1 as discussed above. JORDIL does not disclose the medium receiver is configured by folding a flat sheet, to which the plurality of medium granules are applied, a plurality of times. YANG teaches a liquid flavorant to activated carbon particles that are placed in a cigarette (abstract). YANG teaches that the flavored particles are loaded onto a support such as lightly or tightly folded paper that is inserted into a hollow portion of the cigarette (¶45). 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 modified JORDIL to provide the medium receiver is configured by folding a flat sheet, to which the plurality of medium granules are applied, a plurality of times as taught in YANG. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously use a folded sheet as a carrier for particles to be added to a cigarette. Doing so would provide a support for the particles within the cavity of the cigarette. Regarding the limitation of a plurality of times, this is considered to be a product by process recitation. Since YANG teaches that the paper carries the particles, the structure of the instant application is met. See MPEP 2113, I. . Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JORDIL and YANG as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US 20220022526 A1 (hereinafter JOYEUX). Regarding claim 4, modified JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 3 as discussed above. Neither JORDIL nor YANG disclose a humectant is applied to one surface of the flat sheet. JOYEUX teaches an aerosol generating article comprising a substrate and a filter that is formed of one or more sheets of a fibrous paper material (abstract). JOYEUX teaches that the paper material has a humectant such as polyether, glycol, glycerin, etc. (¶65). JOYEUX teaches that any suitable technique can be used to apply the humectant including press spraying etc (¶79) and an embodiment where the humectant is applied to one or both sides of the sheet by a printer (¶80). JOYEUX teaches that applying humectant coats the paper while still retaining benefits (¶80). 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 modified JORDIL to provide a humectant is applied to one surface of the flat sheet as taught in JOYEUX. Doing so would coat the papers while retaining benefits that are realized by the sheet (JOYEUX ¶80). Regarding claim 9, modified JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 1 as discussed above. JORDIL does not disclose the medium receiver is formed by a method comprising applying a humectant to one surface of a flat sheet, disposing the plurality of medium granules on the one surface of the flat sheet, to which the humectant is applied, folding the one surface of the flat sheet to face each other, additionally folding the flat sheet a plurality of times, and wrapping, with a wrapper, the flat sheet folded a plurality of times. JOYEUX teaches an aerosol generating article comprising a substrate and a filter that is formed of one or more sheets of a fibrous paper material (abstract). JOYEUX teaches that the paper material has a humectant such as polyether, glycol, glycerin, etc. (¶65). JOYEUX teaches that any suitable technique can be used to apply the humectant including press spraying etc (¶79) and an embodiment where the humectant is applied to one or both sides of the sheet by a printer (¶80). JOYEUX teaches that applying humectant coats the paper while still retaining benefits (¶80). YANG teaches a liquid flavorant to activated carbon particles that are placed in a cigarette (abstract). YANG teaches that the flavored particles are loaded onto a support such as lightly or tightly folded paper that is inserted into a hollow portion of the cigarette (¶45). As shown in Figs. 3-4, the folded section is then wrapped with an outside wrapper (Figs. 3-4, tipping paper 14, ¶47). 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 modified JORDIL to provide the medium receiver is formed by a method comprising applying a humectant to one surface of a flat sheet, disposing the plurality of medium granules on the one surface of the flat sheet, to which the humectant is applied, folding the one surface of the flat sheet to face each other, additionally folding the flat sheet a plurality of times, and wrapping, with a wrapper, the flat sheet folded a plurality of times as taught in JOYEUX and YANG. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously apply both humectant as a coating and use a folded paper support to contain the granule. Doing so would provide a location for the granules within the cigarette and a humectant for reducing dryness. As discussed above in the rejection of claim 3, this claim is considered to be a product by process recitation. Since YANG and JOYEUX teaches that the paper carries the particles, the humectant is applied to paper, and the folded paper is then wrapped by an outer wrapper, the structure of the instant application is met. See MPEP 2113, I. Claims 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JORDIL, YANG, and JOYEUX as applied to claim 9 above and in further view of US 20050098187 A1 (hereinafter GRIERSON). Regarding claim 10, modified JORDIL discloses the smoking article of claim 9 as discussed above. JORDIL does not disclose the plurality of medium granules not applied to the one surface of the flat sheet are reused in a process of manufacturing the smoking article. GRIERSON teaches smokable filler materials comprising tobacco dust and a binder (abstract). GRIERSON teaches that the tobacco is agglomerated tobacco waste made from tobacco dust that does not have commercial value (¶10). GRIERSON teaches that the tobacco having varying granules sizes can be reused in subsequent steps (¶42). 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 modified JORDIL to reuse medium granules in the process of manufacturing a smoking article as taught in GRIERSON. A person of ordinary skill in the art would obviously reuse granules. Doing so would reduce waste and create commercial value (GRIERSON ¶42). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 20100170522 A1 (hereinafter SUN). Fluidized bed granulation is well-known in the art as well as spraying binders and other additives onto the granules (¶15, ¶51) 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 /Christopher M Rodd/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 13, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599164
AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLE COMPRISING AN AEROSOL-COOLING ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599178
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR UNLOCKING AEROSOL GENERATING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599163
CANNABIS PRODUCTS AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593864
METHOD OF MAKING A TOBACCO EXTRACT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593875
POWER SUPPLY FOR AEROSOL GENERATOR AND AEROSOL GENERATOR HAVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.1%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 196 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month