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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-14 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/15/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-10 in the reply filed on 01/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jang et al. (US 2020/0359688).
Regarding claim 1, Jang teaches a smoking article (cigarette) comprising the claimed structural components, as follows:
a tobacco medium accommodation portion containing a solid tobacco material including cut tobacco leaves, wherein the cut tobacco may be formed by finely cutting a reconstituted tobacco sheet and arranged as a column within the cigarette (¶¶ [0038]–[0039]);
a paper wrapper/paper tube structure enclosing the tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0016], [0018], [0032], [0036], [0063]; FIGS. 1A–1B, 3);
a moisturizer accommodation portion disposed on one side of the tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0032]–[0035]; FIGS. 1A–1B), the moisturizer accommodation portion comprising an aerosol generating material including glycerin and propylene glycol (¶¶ [0033]–[0035]);
and a filter portion disposed on the opposite side of the tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0041]–[0043]; FIGS. 1A–1B).
Claim 1 further recites “wherein the entire cigarette column portion is heated by a heater.” However, because the heater is not a component of the claimed smoking article, this limitation merely describes a condition of use involving an external aerosol generation device and does not impose a structural limitation on the smoking article itself. Jang nonetheless teaches use of the cigarette with an aerosol generation device including a heater configured to heat the tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0046]–[0049], [0052]–[0055]).
Regarding claim 4, Claim 4 depends from claim 1 and further recites that the cut tobacco leaves are prepared by finely cutting a slurry-type reconstituted tobacco sheet. Claim 4 recites product-by-process language and, under MPEP § 2113, is evaluated based on the product itself rather than the recited process.
Jang teaches cut tobacco strands formed by finely cutting a reconstituted tobacco sheet, including slurry-type reconstituted tobacco sheets, for use in a tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0038]–[0039]). Because Jang teaches the same cut tobacco product, regardless of the process by which it is made, claim 4 is anticipated by Jang under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
Regarding claim 5, Claim 5 recites that the cut tobacco leaves are arranged in the same direction. Jang teaches forming the tobacco medium accommodation portion by combining a plurality of tobacco strands in parallel, thereby arranging the strands in the same direction (¶ [0038]). Accordingly, claim 5 is anticipated by Jang under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
Regarding claim 6, Claim 6 recites that the aerosol generating material comprises glycerin and propylene glycol, and optionally nicotine. Jang teaches that the moisturizer accommodation portion contains glycerin and propylene glycol, and may further include nicotine (¶¶ [0033]–[0035], [0039]).
Regarding claim 7, Claim 7 recites that the filter portion comprises a first filter portion having a cavity and a second filter portion filled with a filtration material. Jang teaches a filter portion composed of one or more segments, including a tube filter having a hollow cavity and additional filter segments formed of filtration material (¶ [0090]; FIGS. 5A–5B).
Regarding claim 8, Claim 8 recites that at least one segment is wrapped with a segment wrapper. Jang teaches that individual segments of the cigarette are wrapped by wrappers, and further teaches segment-level wrapping around the moisturizer accommodation portion (¶¶ [0032]–[0034]).
Regarding claim 9, Claim 9 recites that a plurality of segments is wrapped with a total wrapper. Jang teaches that the cigarette is wrapped by at least one wrapper enclosing the plurality of segments constituting the cigarette (¶¶ [0032], [0070]; FIGS. 1A–1B). Accordingly, claim 9 is anticipated by Jang under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al. (US 2020/0359688) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Minzoni (US 2018/0177235).
Regarding claim 2, Claim 2 recites that a length of the cigarette column portion is one-half of a length of the medium accommodation portion.
Jang teaches a smoking article including a tobacco medium accommodation portion comprising multiple segments arranged along a longitudinal direction (¶¶ [0032]–[0036]; FIGS. 1A–1B). However, Jang does not teach a specific length ratio between the cigarette column portion and the overall medium accommodation portion.
Minzoni discloses aerosol-generating smoking articles in which relative lengths of individual segments are selected and adjusted to achieve desired aerosol delivery, draw characteristics, and compatibility with aerosol-generating devices (¶¶ [0048]–[0053], [0060]–[0064]). Minzoni further discloses that segment lengths may be proportioned relative to one another while maintaining a desired overall article length (¶¶ [0056]–[0059]).
Jang and Minzoni are in the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol-generating smoking articles configured for use with electronic heating devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a length of the cigarette column portion that is one-half of the length of the medium accommodation portion in the smoking article taught by Jang, in view of Minzoni’s disclosure of proportioning segment lengths to achieve predictable aerosol delivery and draw characteristics.
Regarding claim 3, Claim 3 recites that the cigarette column portion has a length of 4 to 8 mm and that the paper tube portion has a length of 4 to 8 mm.
Jang teaches a smoking article having a tobacco medium accommodation portion and a paper tube structure arranged along the longitudinal axis of the article (¶¶ [0032], [0036]–[0039]). However, Jang does not teach specific numerical length ranges for the cigarette column portion or the paper tube portion.
Minzoni discloses selecting specific segment lengths within defined millimeter-scale ranges for aerosol-generating articles to tune aerosol formation, cooling, and draw performance (¶¶ [0050]–[0055], [0061]–[0064]). Minzoni further discloses that such dimensional selections represent routine design choices made to optimize performance while maintaining overall article compatibility (¶¶ [0056]–[0059]).
Jang and Minzoni are in the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol-generating smoking articles for use with electrically heated aerosol-generating devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select cigarette column and paper tube lengths within the claimed ranges of 4 to 8 mm in the smoking article taught by Jang, in view of Minzoni’s disclosure of selecting specific segment dimensions as a matter of routine optimization.
Regarding claim 10, Claim 10 recites that the medium accommodation portion has a resistance to draw of 50 to 70 mmH₂O.
Jang teaches a smoking article configured for aerosol generation and inhalation by a user, including airflow through the tobacco medium accommodation portion (¶¶ [0032]–[0036], [0046]–[0049]). However, Jang does not teach a specific numerical resistance-to-draw range for the smoking article.
Minzoni discloses designing aerosol-generating smoking articles to achieve desired draw resistance characteristics, including adjusting airflow paths, hollow segments, and internal structures to provide an acceptable resistance to draw for user inhalation (¶¶ [0065]–[0071]). Minzoni further discloses that resistance to draw is a design parameter routinely selected and tuned to achieve predictable user experience and aerosol delivery (¶¶ [0072]–[0074]).
Jang and Minzoni are in the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol-generating smoking articles intended for use with electronic aerosol-generating devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the medium accommodation portion of the smoking article taught by Jang to have a resistance to draw within the range of 50 to 70 mmH₂O, in view of Minzoni’s disclosure of tuning draw resistance as a routine design consideration.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER KESSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-7739. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/JENNIFER A KESSIE/Examiner, Art Unit 1747