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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
reference characters "14" and "15" have both been used to designate “heater part,” see [0057]-[0058] of the published application.
reference characters "40" and "140" have both been used to designate “side wall” in Fig. 1, see [0059] of the published application.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “cleaning means,” “guiding means” and “unique air permeable opening” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “89” appears twice in Fig. 6 pointing to different parts of the drawing. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0029] of the published application, the word “bare” should be amended to read “bar.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitations in this application that are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph are as follows:
Claim 5 recites the limitation “cleaning means configured to clean the through-hole of the mouthpiece and/or the heating chamber” without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. The specification recites a brush as a suitable structure for perform the recited function (p 14, lines 29-30).
Claim 10 recites the limitation “guiding means configured to cause the pushing bar to follow the winding pathway” without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. The specification recites slots or rollers as suitable structures for perform the recited function (p 15, lines 15-17).
International Search Report
No “X” or “Y” references were cited in the International Search Report for International Application PCT/EP2022/062497 to which the instant application claims priority.
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.
.
Claims 1-16 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a device body extending along a device axis and defining at least one side wall extending along the device axis”. It is not clear how the device body and at least one sidewall defined by the body extend along the same axis. Amending the claim to recite “at least one side wall extending parallel to the device axis” would overcome this rejection.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a proximal end receiving the pushing element.” Claim 8 depends from Claim 1, which recites “the pushing bar comprises a pushing element.” It is not clear how the pushing bar receives the pushing element and also comprises the pushing element.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “each of the proximal end and the distal end being slidable in a respective straight section of the winding pathway.” It is not clear if “a respective straight section” refers to one of the two parallel straight sections or to a different straight section.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the actuator is configured to fit closely the slot at least at the distal position to prevent air entering inside the device body.” It is not clear what is intended by the phrases “to fit closely the slot” and “to prevent air entering inside the device body.”
The remaining claims depend from and inherit the indefiniteness of a rejected claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 10 depends from itself. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 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 2-16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 4th paragraph, as set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art is represented by Reevell (US 11,197,503), Acconcia et al (US 2021/0298360) and rogan et al (US 2023/0263225). .
Reevell discloses an aerosol-generating article comprising a housing having an open end and a cavity for holding an aerosol-forming substrate, a heating chamber adjacent to the cavity along the same longitudinal axis and comprising a movable base, or piston. The piston is activated by a lever movable along a slot in the housing to push the piston through the heating chamber and eject the aerosol-forming substrate partially out of the cavity.
Reevell fails to disclose or suggest an ejection mechanism comprising pushing bar formed from a flexible material and configured to slide within the heating chamber between a retracted position and an ejecting position, the pushing bar being flexible to follow a winding pathway inside the device body; wherein the pushing bar comprises a pushing element configured to eject the aerosol generating substrate from the heating chamber by pushing the aerosol generating substrate from the closed end toward the open end while the pushing bar is sliding from the retracted position to the ejecting position.
Acconcia et al discloses a system including an aerosol-generating device including a heating chamber to receive an aerosol-generating article, the article including an aerosol-forming substrate; and an adapter element to be inserted into the heating chamber and configured to have an outer shape to be at least partly inserted into the chamber, and an extractor element movable between an operation position and an extraction position. The extractor element has an outer shape to be at least partly inserted into the heating chamber between the adapter element and an inner wall of the heating chamber and may be configured for at least partly separating an aerosol-forming article from a heating element of the aerosol-generating device in the extraction position.
Acconcia et al fails to disclose or suggest an ejection mechanism comprising pushing bar formed from a flexible material and configured to slide within the heating chamber between a retracted position and an ejecting position, the pushing bar being flexible to follow a winding pathway inside the device body; wherein the pushing bar comprises a pushing element configured to eject the aerosol generating substrate from the heating chamber by pushing the aerosol generating substrate from the closed end toward the open end while the pushing bar is sliding from the retracted position to the ejecting position.
Rogan et al discloses an aerosol generating device includes a heating chamber having an opening to receive an aerosol generating medium; and a base plate that is moveable along a length of the heating chamber when the aerosol generating medium is received. The heating chamber further comprises a biasing member such as a spring arranged to provide a resisting, or restoring, force to the base plate toward the opening. In an example, the heating chamber may comprise a release mechanism to cause the base plate to move back toward the opening of the heating chamber and eject a spent consumable.
Rogan et al fails to disclose or suggest an ejection mechanism comprising pushing bar formed from a flexible material and configured to slide within the heating chamber between a retracted position and an ejecting position, the pushing bar being flexible to follow a winding pathway inside the device body; wherein the pushing bar comprises a pushing element configured to eject the aerosol generating substrate from the heating chamber by pushing the aerosol generating substrate from the closed end toward the open end while the pushing bar is sliding from the retracted position to the ejecting position.
The prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest an ejection mechanism as claimed comprising pushing bar formed from a flexible material and configured to slide within the heating chamber between a retracted position and an ejecting position, the pushing bar being flexible to follow a winding pathway inside the device body; wherein the pushing bar comprises a pushing element configured to eject the aerosol generating substrate from the heating chamber by pushing the aerosol generating substrate from the closed end toward the open end while the pushing bar is sliding from the retracted position to the ejecting position. The prior art further fails to provide motivation to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify existing devices to provide an ejection mechanism as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS R CORDRAY whose telephone number is (571)272-8244. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 AM-5 PM (EST).
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571) 270-7457. 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.
/DENNIS R CORDRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748