Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/286,741

AEROSOL-GENERATING ARTICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 12, 2023
Examiner
DELACRUZ, MADELEINE PAULINA
Art Unit
1755
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Kt&G Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
31 granted / 49 resolved
-1.7% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
90
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
55.3%
+15.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 49 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Status of the Claims Claims 1-15 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims. 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) 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jin et al (WO-2020009454-A1, as cited in the IDS dated 05/28/2025 and hereinafter referring to the English Translation provided). In regards to claim 1, Jin directed to cigarette (i.e., aerosol-generating article) comprising: A tobacco rod (i.e., tobacco medium portion) ([0008]); A filter segment ([0008]); A first filter segment 221 and cooling structure 222 (i.e., both form the cooling portion) disposed between the tobacco medium portion 210 and the filter portion 223 (Figure 2 and [0029]-[0031]); and A first wrapper including aluminum foil (i.e., heat transfer portion) surrounding at least a portion of the cooling portion ([0033]). In regards to claim 2, Jin discloses the heat transfer portion, including an edge of the heat transfer portion, surrounds a portion of the aerosol-generating article corresponding to an inlet of the cooling portion in contact with the tobacco medium portion (Figure 2). In regards to claim 3, Jin discloses the cooling portion comprises: A first cooling segment 221 in contact with the tobacco medium portion 210; and A second cooling segment 222 disposed between the first cooling segment and the filter portion 223 (Figure 2 and [0037]-[0039]). In regards to claims 4-5, Jin discloses the heat transfer portion 231 surrounds at least a portion of the first cooling segment and the second cooling segment (Figure 2 and [0033]). In regards to claim 7, Jin discloses the cooling portion has a tubular shape (Figure 2 and [0049]). In regards to claims 8-9, Jin discloses the tobacco medium portion comprises an aerosol-generating substrate, flavoring agents, humectants, and reconstituted tobacco sheet (i.e., plurality of segments) comprising tobacco leaves (i.e., plurality of segments includes a tobacco medium) ([0040]-[0044]). In regards to claims 10-11, Jin discloses the heat transfer portion may include aluminum foil ([0033]). 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. Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al (WO-2020009454-A1, as cited in the IDS dated 05/28/2025 and hereinafter referring to the English Translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above. In regards to claim 6, Jin discloses the first cooling segment includes cellulose acetate filter (i.e., cellulose acetate tow) ([0049]) and the second cooling segment includes a compressed polymer sheet that can be made of a material such as cellulose acetate ([0057]). Jin does not explicitly disclose a paper material in the second cooling segment. However, since Jin discloses cellulose acetate in the second cooling segment, and cellulose acetate is a known wood material, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that cellulose acetate as a polymer sheet could include paper materials, and therefore it would be obvious to modify the second cooling segment to include a paper material because cellulose acetate comprises wood materials that are also used in paper. Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al (WO-2020009454-A1, as cited in the IDS dated 05/28/2025 and hereinafter referring to the English Translation provided) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hon et al. (US-20220218042-A1). In regards to claim 12, Jin discloses the heat transfer portion includes “metal flake paste” and the metal is ground into pieces ([0072]-[0076]). Jin does not explicitly disclose the metal flakes are metal strips. Hon directed to a smoking cartridge of a smoking article, discloses a smoking body for a heat-not-burn device, comprising thermal conductive metal foil ([0054]). Hon further discloses the metal foils are small narrow strips and can be mixed within the smoking body to conduct heat from the outside to the inside of the smoking body during heat ([0056]). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Jin by modifying the heat transfer portions metal flakes to be metal strips, as taught by Hon, because both are directed to smoking articles comprising metal foils, Hon teaches the use of metal foils can conduct heat from outside to the inside of the tobacco body during heating ([0056]), and this merely involves applying a known technique of using metal strips of a known metal material, like aluminum foil, instead of flakes or a singular sheet of metal, of a similar smoking article to yield predictable results. In regards to claim 13, Jin discloses the metal flakes are dispersed throughout the heat transfer portion ([0072]-[0076]). Modified Jin discloses the plurality of metal strips 1212 are spaced apart from each other (Hon Figure 3). In regards to claims 14-15, Modified Jin does not explicitly disclose the plurality of metal flakes/strips are arranged parallel to a lengthwise direction of the cooling portion or arranged obliquely with respect to a lengthwise direction of the cooling portion, however since the prior art teaches the metal strips are arranged within the heat transfer portion, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that at least a portion of the plurality of metal strips would be parallel to a lengthwise direction of the cooling portion and at least a portion of the plurality of metal strips would be arranged obliquely with respect to a lengthwise direction of the cooling portion. Further, while Modified Jin does not explicitly disclose the arrangement of metal strips claimed in claims 14 and 15, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the organization of the metal strips in a patten as claimed because the rearrangement would have no change in expected results of heating the aerosol-generating article, and would be an obvious matter of design choice. See MPEP (2144.04 VI.C.). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shinozaki et al. (US-20180317560-A1), directed to smokeless flavor aerosol-generating article discloses the aerosol generating article comprising a cooling segment with a plurality of metal layers ([0086]). Dittombée et al. (WO-2021063685-A1), directed to a method of providing metal strip sections for tobacco segments (abstract). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELEINE PAULINA DELACRUZ whose telephone number is (703)756-4544. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5. 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, Philip Louie can be reached at (571)270-1241. 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. /MADELEINE P DELACRUZ/Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599169
Aerosol Generating Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582154
Electrically Heated Smoking Article
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575605
Aerosol Generating Device with a Sealed Chamber for Accommodating a Battery
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12550947
An Aerosol Generating Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12532917
ATOMIZING CORE, ATOMIZER AND ELECTRONIC ATOMIZATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 49 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