Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/274,278

An Aerosol Generating System

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 26, 2023
Examiner
GRAY, LINDA LAMEY
Art Unit
1745
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Jt International SA
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
651 granted / 787 resolved
+17.7% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
810
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
§112
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 787 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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 13 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 13 is considered to be indefinite in that it is unclear if the limitation of “preferably polyether ether ketone (PEEK)” is actually required by the claim. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 13 recites the broad recitation of plastic material, and the claim also recites preferably polyether ether ketone which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Claims 1-12 and 14 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 1, the closest prior art of record to Courbat (WO 2019/030301 (A1)) teaches a heating apparatus for an aerosol generating device 100 comprising: a heating chamber 120 configured to receive at least part of an aerosol generating substrate 10 (pg18 Lns28-29; pg19 Lns12-21; Fig1), the heating chamber 120 comprising a chamber wall (Fig1); a plurality of inductively heatable susceptors 160 and 180 arranged circumferentially with respect to a longitudinal axis of the heating chamber 120 (pg20 Lns21-37). However, Courbat, alone or in combination with the other prior art of record, does not teach or fairly suggest that each susceptor has a substantially planar portion that defines a respective plane; and an inductive coil wrapped around the heating chamber, and shaped such that the coil is parallel to respective planes defined by the plurality of susceptors, wherein the chamber wall has a uniform thickness such that a spacing between the coil and each of the plurality of susceptors is substantially constant across the planar portion. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 14, the closest prior art of record to Courbat (WO 2019/030301 (A1)) teaches an aerosol generating system heating apparatus having an aerosol generating device 100 and an aerosol generating substrate 10 and a heating chamber 120 configured to receive at least part of the aerosol generating substrate 10 (pg18 Lns28-29; pg19 Lns12-21; Fig1), the heating chamber 120 comprising a chamber wall (Fig1); a plurality of inductively heatable susceptors 160 and 180 arranged circumferentially with respect to a longitudinal axis of the heating chamber 120 (pg20 Lns21-37). However, Courbat, alone or in combination with the other prior art of record, does not teach or fairly suggest that each susceptor has a substantially planar portion that defines a respective plane; and an inductive coil wrapped around the heating chamber, and shaped such that the coil is parallel to respective planes defined by the plurality of susceptors, wherein the chamber wall has a uniform thickness such that a spacing between the coil and each of the plurality of susceptors is substantially constant across the planar portion. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Prior Art of Record The following prior art is made of record: Rogan and Rojo-Calderon each teach a plurality of inductively heated susceptors in an aerosol generating device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA GRAY whose telephone number is (571) 272-5778. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9 AM to 5:30 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, Phil Tucker can be reached at (571) 272-1095. 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. /LINDA L GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594752
IN-LINE LAMINATION PROCESS FOR PRODUCING THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE PANELS WITH TEXTURED FILM LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588710
POWER LEVEL INDICATION IN A DEVICE FOR AN ELECTRONIC AEROSOL PROVISION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576626
Laminator for Manufacture of Unit Structural Bodies with Increased Force of Adhesion
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569006
ULTRASONIC-BASED AEROSOL GENERATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564215
PAPER SHEET FILTER ELEMENT FOR A SMOKING ARTICLE, AND ASSOCIATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 787 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