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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 04/21/2016 have been fully considered. The arguments are moot with respect to the prior rejection because Applicant amended independent claims 1 and 9 to include limitations not previously recited.
Specifically, independent claims 1 and 9 have been amended to require, inter alia, that the protrusion portion is arranged at a portion of the first region having a thickness greater than a thickness of a remaining portion of the first region, and that the portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is arranged is heated to a temperature different from a temperature of a portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is not arranged.
In view of the amended claim scope, the prior rejection has been withdrawn and a new rejection is set forth above based on Batista in view of Li. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments directed to the prior rejection do not overcome the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Batista et al. (US 2022/0295894 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0180839 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Batista teaches: aerosol generating device (aerosol-generating device) (Batista ¶ [0096]);
heater (susceptor arrangement 14) (Batista ¶ [0097]), comprising accommodating space (cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0097]) for accommodating aerosol generating article (aerosol-generating article 12 accommodated within susceptor arrangement 14 and cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0097]);
coil (induction coil 16) (Batista ¶ [0098]), configured to heat the heater by generating a magnetic field (alternating electric current supplied to the induction coil generates an alternating magnetic field) (Batista ¶ [0034]), thereby heating heater (susceptor arrangement that heats up when subjected to a changing magnetic field) (Batista ¶ [0047]);
wherein the heater comprises
first region (individual blade-like susceptors of susceptor arrangement 14 arranged inside cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0097]), arranged to contact aerosol generating article (aerosol-generating article 12 held by susceptor arrangement 14 having an inner diameter corresponding to or slightly smaller than an outer diameter of aerosol-generating article 12) (Batista ¶ [0097]);
second region (flared downstream ends 42 of the individual susceptors, shown in Fig. 3) (Batista ¶ [0109]), arranged at at least one of two ends of the first region (downstream ends 42 of the individual susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0109]), and extending in a direction away from a center of accommodating space (flared outward to facilitate insertion of aerosol-generating article 12 into cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0109]);
wherein the first region comprises protrusion portion (flexible portion 44 configured as a protrusion, shown in Fig. 4) (Batista ¶ [0110]), protruding in the direction away from the center of accommodating space (flexible portion 44 enabling radial movement of the susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0110]) at a portion of the first region (portion of each individual susceptor including flexible portion 44) (Batista ¶ [0110]), extending along a longitudinal direction of the first region (elongate susceptors extending in cavity 10 along aerosol-generating article 12) (Batista ¶ [0097]).
Batista does not expressly teach wherein the portion (portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is arranged) has a thickness greater than a thickness of remaining portion of the first region, and does not expressly teach wherein the portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is arranged is heated to a temperature different from a temperature of a portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is not arranged.
Li is in the same field of endeavor because Li relates to heat-not-burn cigarette technologies and, in particular, to a vapor generation device and susceptor (Li ¶ [0002]).
Li teaches: wherein the first region comprises protrusion portion (second part 312c formed by first part 311c protruding outward in the thickness direction, shown in Figs. 8 and 9) (Li ¶ [0067]), protruding in the direction away from the center of the accommodating space (protruding outward in the thickness direction) (Li ¶ [0067]) at a portion of the first region (first sheet-like object 310c including first part 311c and second part 312c) (Li ¶ [0067]), extending along a longitudinal direction of the first region (accommodation cavity 330c extending in an axial direction of susceptor 30c) (Li ¶ [0074]);
wherein the portion (second part 312c and fifth part 322c forming accommodation cavity 330c) (Li ¶ [0074]) has a thickness greater than a thickness of remaining portion of the first region (first part 311c/other portion of susceptor 30c) (Li ¶ [0074]).
Li further teaches that, where the size of the second part is greater than the thickness of the first part, the susceptor has a relatively larger surface area in contact with the inhalable material, thereby increasing heat-transfer efficiency (Li ¶ [0074]). Li also teaches that susceptor 30 is penetrated by a changing magnetic field and generates heat to heat the inhalable material (Li ¶ [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Batista’s protrusion portion (flexible portion 44) (Batista ¶ [0110]) to include Li’s thicker outwardly protruding susceptor structure in order to increase contact area with the aerosol-generating article/inhalable material and improve heat-transfer efficiency, as taught by Li (Li ¶ [0074]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected that increasing the thickness and contact area of the protruding susceptor portion would alter the thermal response and heat-transfer characteristic of that portion relative to the remaining thinner portion of the susceptor. Accordingly, as modified, the portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is arranged would have been heated to a temperature different from a portion of the first region in which the protrusion portion is not arranged.
Regarding claim 3, modified Batista as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 does not expressly teach temperature sensor arranged on protrusion portion and configured to detect a temperature of the heater.
Li teaches temperature sensor (temperature sensor 340c, shown in Fig. 9) (Li ¶ [0068]). Li further teaches that first sheet-like object 310c includes second part 312c protruding outward in the thickness direction and second sheet-like object 320c includes fifth part 322c protruding outward in the thickness direction (Li ¶ [0067]).
Li teaches that the protruding second part 312c and protruding fifth part 322c form accommodation cavity 330c (Li ¶ [0067]), and that temperature sensor 340c is accommodated and encapsulated in accommodation cavity 330c (Li ¶ [0068]). Thus, Li teaches temperature sensor (temperature sensor 340c) (Li ¶ [0068]) arranged on/in protrusion portion (accommodation cavity 330c formed by protruding second part 312c and protruding fifth part 322c, shown in Fig. 9) (Li ¶ [0067]), and configured to detect a temperature of heater (temperature sensor 340c detects a temperature of susceptor 30c) (Li ¶ [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide modified Batista with Li’s temperature sensor (temperature sensor 340c) (Li ¶ [0068]) arranged on/in the protrusion portion (accommodation cavity 330c formed by protruding second part 312c and protruding fifth part 322c, shown in Fig. 9) (Li ¶ [0067]) in order to accurately detect the temperature of the susceptor/heater, as taught by Li (Li ¶ [0068]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Batista as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 further teaches:
insulator (thermally insulating element 22) (Batista ¶ [0102]), coupled to at least a portion of second region (thermally insulating element 22 attached to base 28 at the downstream end 26 of cavity 10, adjacent the downstream/flared end region of susceptor arrangement 14) (Batista ¶ [0102]), and configured to prevent heat of the heater from being transferred to outside (thermally insulating element 22 arranged between susceptor arrangement 14 and induction coil 16 and surrounding cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0102]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Batista as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 further teaches: insulator (thermally insulating element 22 and suspension spring 46 arranged between thermally insulating element 22 and susceptor arrangement 14) (Batista ¶ [0111]), coupled to second region (suspension spring 46 attached adjacent the downstream ends 42 of the susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0111]), contacting a part of end portion of the second region (suspension spring 46 attached adjacent the downstream ends 42 of the susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0111]) without contacting a remaining part of the end portion of the second region (suspension spring 46 attached at discrete portions between thermally insulating element 22 and susceptor arrangement 14, as shown in Fig. 5) (Batista ¶ [0111]), and configured to prevent heat of the second region from being transferred to outside (thermally insulating element 22 arranged between susceptor arrangement 14 and induction coil 16 and surrounding cavity 10) (Batista ¶ [0102]).
Regarding claims 6 and 11, Modified Batista as set forth in the rejections of claims 1 and 9 teaches:
surface of the second region (surface of the flared downstream ends 42 of the individual susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0109]) comprising material preventing dissipation of heat of the heater (metal/alloy material of the susceptor arrangement, including stainless steel, aluminum, nickel, titanium, iron, and ferromagnetic materials) (Batista ¶ [0063]).
Applicant’s specification describes the claimed “material preventing dissipation of heat” as including “a high heat-resistance polymer material, and a metal material” (Applicant’s Spec. ¶ [0092]). Thus, under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, a metal material may correspond to the claimed material preventing dissipation of heat.
Therefore, Batista’s metal/alloy susceptor material corresponds to the claimed material preventing dissipation of heat of the heater.
Regarding claims 7 and 12, modified Batista as set forth in the rejections of claims 1 and 9 does not expressly teach second region separably coupled to first region.
Batista teaches:
second region (flared downstream ends 42 of the individual susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0109]) comprising material different from a material of the first region (first susceptor material and second susceptor material, where the first susceptor material may be stainless steel and the second susceptor material may be nickel) (Batista ¶ [0067]).
Li teaches separate fabrication and subsequent coupling of susceptor portions. Specifically, Li teaches that second part 312c of first sheet-like object 310c and/or fifth part 322c of second sheet-like object 320c may be formed by stamping, and that first sheet-like object 310c and second sheet-like object 320c may be integrated by soldering, such as laser soldering (Li ¶ [0070]).
Applicant’s specification explains that “separably coupled” includes the first and second regions being separately fabricated and then coupled together, and further states that the first and second regions may include different materials (Applicant’s Spec. ¶¶ [0094]-[0095]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure modified Batista’s second region (flared downstream ends 42) (Batista ¶ [0109]) and first region (main body portions of the individual susceptors) (Batista ¶ [0097]) as separately fabricated and then coupled, as taught by Li, to facilitate mass production and provide stable connection of susceptor portions (Li ¶ [0070]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected that separately fabricating and coupling the susceptor portions would allow different materials to be selected for different regions, consistent with Batista’s teaching that the susceptor arrangement may include different first and second susceptor materials (Batista ¶ [0067]).
Regarding claims 8 and 13, modified Batista as set forth in the rejections of claims 1 and 9 further teaches:
surface defined by an edge of an end portion of the second region (surface/edge of flared downstream ends 42 of the individual susceptors, shown in Figs. 3 and 4) (Batista ¶ [0109]), inclined with respect to a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the accommodating space extends (flared downstream ends 42 flaring outward relative to the longitudinal direction of cavity 10 to facilitate insertion of aerosol-generating article 12) (Batista ¶ [0109]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights