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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant claims that the connection portion (123) does not form a heating circuit with the heating portion. The written description discloses that the heating body 12 is integrally formed (¶84) from a heat sheet (¶24). This sheet is then bent to form a connecting portion (¶24). It is not clear how an electrically heat conductive material that is integrally formed can be fashioned such that it “does not” form a heating circuit.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 7-21 are 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.
The term “high” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, any atomization assembly that supports a heating element is considered to be high strength.
The term “soft” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “soft” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For purposes of examination, liquid guide body that is able to transmit liquid is considered to be soft to the flow of liquid and air and therefore "soft" insomuch as it is unable to resist the flow of material through it is considered to read upon the claimed limitation.
Claims 2-21 are rejected insomuch as they either depend directly from or reference claim 1.
Claim 21 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 21 recites, “a liquid storage compartment (21)”, however in the specifications and the drawings the liquid storage compartment is reference number 22. Applicant may remove all reference numbers from all the claims or correct this error. For purposes of examination it is assumed that the liquid storage compartment is number 22 as supported by the drawings and specification.
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 1-5 and 7-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190246692 A1 (hereinafter LI).
Regarding claim 1, LI discloses an electronic cigarette atomizer, including an atomization assembly and a liquid reservoir engaging with the atomization assembly (abstract). LI discloses a high strength atomization assembly (1) (Figs. 24-25 and 31, ¶95, ¶98) comprising: a support housing (11) (Fig. 25, heating assembly 12v, ¶95) comprising a first side (111a) and a second side (111b), wherein the first side (111a) is provided with a first opening (112a), and the second side (111b) is provided with a second opening (112b) in communication with the first opening (112a). The limitations are shown in the side by side figures annotated below comparing the instant application Fig. 5 to LI Fig. 25.
LI further discloses a heating body (12) (Figs. 1-2 and 25, heating assembly 12, ¶63, ¶95) provided at the second opening (112b) of the support housing (11), wherein at least part of the heating body (12) is inset in the support housing (11) and combined with the support housing (11) (¶18, ¶63-¶64). LI discloses that the heating unit is inbuilt in the porous body (¶18, ¶64).
LI further discloses and a cover body (14) (Fig. 29, seal cartridge 13, ¶98) provided at the first opening (112a) to limit the liquid guide body (13) in the accommodation compartment (113). LI discloses that the seal cartridge on atop the heating assembly and tightly clamped to prevent leakage of the e-liquid and fasten the heating assembly (¶98).
LI teaches the heating body (12) and the support housing (11) define an accommodation compartment (113) open from the first opening (112a); a liquid guide body (13) arranged in the accommodation compartment (113). LI teaches that the heating assembly 12v (i.e. the support body) includes a porous body 121v (¶95). This porous body is made integral with the heating assembly 12v (¶95). The porous body as shown in the side by drawings above inhabits the space that is the accommodation compartment in the same way that the liquid guide body is show arranged in the accommodation compartment. Further the porous body of LI (the portion between the heater and the outlet) and the liquid guide body of the instant application serve the same function to absorb liquid on the absorption side and create a vapor (LI ¶95 analogous to instant application PG Pub US-20240306714-A1, ¶75). The courts have held that making components integral to be a mere obvious engineering choice. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965) (A claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, "that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.", see Schenck v. Nortron Corp., 713 F.2d 782, 218 USPQ 698 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (Claims were directed to a vibratory testing machine (a hard-bearing wheel balancer) comprising a holding structure, a base structure, and a supporting means which form "a single integral and gaplessly continuous piece." Nortron argued that the invention is just making integral what had been made in four bolted pieces. The court found this argument unpersuasive and held that the claims were patentable because the prior art perceived a need for mechanisms to dampen resonance, whereas the inventor eliminated the need for dampening via the one-piece gapless support structure, showing insight that was contrary to the understandings and expectations of the art.).
Regarding claim 2, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the liquid guide body (13) is soft. LI teaches that the porous body absorbs the e-liquid (¶63). LI teaches in another embodiment that the porous body may have a different shape (¶67) and that the different sides of the body may have an absorption side with different surfaces and conduction sides to improve the atomized efficiency (¶68). A person of ordinary skill in the art would provide for a soft liquid body of a rectangular shape with different surfaces to improve atomization efficiency (¶68).
Regarding claim 3, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further discloses wherein the cover body (14) is provided with a liquid inlet hole (141) in communication with the liquid guide body (13). (See annotated Fig. 29 below). As shown in Fig. 32, when assembled the liquid inlet hole is in communication with the liquid guide body.
[AltContent: textbox (Liquid inlet hole)]
PNG
media_image5.png
70
171
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow]
Regarding claim 4, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the cover body (14) is inserted into the first opening (112a), and wherein an inner side of the first opening (112a) is provided with a first step (114), and the cover body (14) is abutted against the first step (114). As shown in Figs. 29-32 the portions of the atomization assembly are arranged building on upon another. The seal cartridge is sleeved on the heating assembly (¶98). To be sleeved on something the object must encompass with touching both an inner and outer side of the object it is sleeved on. Therefore, LI discloses that the seal cartridge abuts an inner side of the first opening. As shown in Fig. 31 when the seal comes in contact with the heating assembly, it will abut an inner side. Regarding the limitation of a step, LI does not disclose a step. However, LI does teach a sloped wall that the seal cartridge abuts against. This positions the seal on the heating assembly. Although it is not taught that that an inner side of the first opening is provided with a step, 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 when assembled, the seal would rest upon the sloped wall for positioning with predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 4 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the cover body (14) is tightly fitted with an inner wall of the first opening (112a). As explained above in the rejection of claim 4, LI teaches that the seal is tightly fitted through a sleeved connection with the heating assembly (¶98).
Regarding claim 7, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further discloses wherein an outer side of the support housing (11) is provided with a second step (115) facing the second side (111b). This can clearly be seen in Fig. 25 of LI.
Regarding claim 8, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further discloses at least part of the heating body (12) is inset in the support housing (11) at the second side (111b) of the support housing (11) (¶63).
Regarding claim 9, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 1 as discussed above. LI further teaches the heating body (12) comprises a heating portion (121) (Fig. 1, spaced flat parts 1221 and bending sections 1222, ¶72), at least one electrode portion (122) and at least one connecting portion (123), wherein the heating portion (121) is connected with the at least one electrode portion (122), wherein the at least one connecting portion (123) is arranged on at least one edge of the heating portion (121) and/or the at least one electrode portion (122), and embedded in the support housing (11), and wherein the position of the heating portion (121) corresponds to the second opening (112b). As taught in the figures there are several embodiments of the heating portion (Figs. 1-23, ¶116). These portions necessarily have electrode portions to provide power to heat the heater. LI teaches an embodiment where the heater has two electrical connecting unit (Fig. 18, electrical connecting units 1223p and 1224p, ¶89). LI teaches that these connection portions protrude from the lower edge of the heating sheet to engage with the with wires (¶89). These are considered to be electrode portions and connecting portions. One can be considered the electrode portion and the other can be considered the connecting portion. LI further teaches other embodiments where electrode columns connect to the heater (¶100, ¶110). 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 and all the embodiments of LI to provide connecting portions and electrode portions. Doing so would both connect the portions for security and electrical connection (¶89, ¶100). This is considered a rearrangement of parts. 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.
Regarding claim 10, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further discloses wherein the at least one electrode portion (122) is embedded in the support housing (11). LI discloses that the heater is embedded in the porous body (¶63). This would include the electrode portion where present, as discussed in the rejection of claim 9, being embedded in the porous body.
Regarding claim 11, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the at least one electrode portion (122) comprises at least two electrode portions (122), and the heating portion (121) is connected with the at least two electrode portions (122) to form a heating circuit. This is precisely the embodiment taught in Fig. 18 to provide electricity to the heating sheet for connecting the heater to the lead wires (¶89).
Regarding claim 12, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further discloses the heating portion (121) includes at least one heating strip (1211) (¶72).
Regarding claim 13, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 12 as discussed above. LI further teaches a sectional dimension of each of the at least one heating strip (1211) is smaller than a sectional dimension of the electrode portion (122). It can be seen visually in Fig. 31 that the vertical to the page connecting electrodes are longer than the horizontal to the page length of the heating strip. 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 the electrode portion is longer than the heating portion because doing so would elongate the electrical lead to establish a firm connection (¶89).
Regarding claim 14, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 12 as discussed above. LI further discloses the at least one heating strip (1211) is curved or bent (¶72).
Regarding claim 15, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further discloses wherein the at least one connecting portion (123) comprises at least two connecting portions (123). This claim is another rearrangement of parts and duplication of parts. Rearrangement of parts is not patentable when predictable results are obtained in the prior art. Further 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). See MPEP 2144.04, VI, Part B. In this case, LI establishes that it is desirable to provide a deep engagement to avoid the loosing of the sheet (¶89). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide additional connecting portions with predictable results.
Regarding claim 16, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further teaches each of the at least one connecting portion (123) comprises a first portion (1231) extending from the heating portion (121) and/or the at least one electrode portion (122) and a second portion (1232) connected with the first portion (1231), and wherein, in a direction not parallel to the extending direction of the first portion (1231), a size of the second portion (1232) is larger than a size of the first portion (1231). See annotated Fig. 18 below. This is considered to be a rearrangement and duplication of parts that would result in predictable results to secure, position, and provide electricity from a battery to the heating portion. As with the instant application, the first extending portion and second extending portion are portions of an integral part that are arbitrarily chosen to be larger.
PNG
media_image6.png
220
425
media_image6.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Second extending portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: rect]
[AltContent: rect]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First extending portion)]
Regarding claim 17, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the heating body (12) is in a sheet shape, and the at least one connecting portion (123) is bent in a thickness direction of the heating body (12). This is the embodiment disclosed in Fig. 18 and would have been applied to any atomization assembly of the disclosure to connect the heater to the device with predictable results.
Regarding claim 18, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further teaches wherein the at least one connection portion (123) does not form a heating circuit with the heating portion (121) and the at least one electrode portion (122).
LI teaches many connecting methods including sleeving (¶12). The sleeving cover is not part of the heating circuit and it connects the pieces. Further in the example shown in Fig. 18, there are portions of the connection portion that do not extend down to the connection columns. These are considered to be not forming a heating circuit with the heating portion in the same way that the instant application has portions that do not form the circuit insomuch as they are not part of the connection.
Regarding claim 19, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further discloses wherein the heating body (12) is integrally formed (¶89).
Regarding claim 20, LI discloses the atomization assembly (1) of claim 9 as discussed above. LI further discloses the at least one electrode portion (122) protrudes out of the support housing (11). See Fig. 31.
Regarding claim 21, LI discloses an electronic cigarette atomizer, including an atomization assembly and a liquid reservoir engaging with the atomization assembly (abstract). LI discloses the atomization assembly of claim 1 as discussed above. LI discloses [A]n atomization apparatus, comprising: a shell (2) (Fig. 32, shell 21, ¶105); wherein the atomization assembly (1) is connected with the shell (2). When assembled the all portions are connected one to another. LI further discloses wherein a liquid storage compartment (21) (liquid storage cavity 23, ¶105) in communication with the first opening (112a) of the atomization assembly (1) is provided in the shell (2). LI discloses that the liquid cavity is in communication with the heating assembly through a liquid outlet 230 (¶105). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the source of the liquid is in communication with the first opening of the atomization assembly because in order to atomize the liquid there must be a path that connects the liquid to the heater.
Conclusion
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