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 Claims
This Office Action is responsive to communication filed on 6/22/2026.
Claims 1, 6-7, and 11 are amended.
Claims 1-15 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Claim Interpretation under §112(f) and rejections under §112
Applicant Argues
Claims 6 and 7 have been amended and should no longer invoke §112(f) and the rejections under §112(a) and (b) should be withdrawn.
Examiner Responds
Applicant’s arguments are persuasive. Claims 6 and 7, as amended, no longer invoke §112(f) and the rejections under §112(a) and (b) are withdrawn.
Claim rejections under §102 and §103
Applicant Argues
ATKINS fails to teach claims 1 and 11 as amended. Specifically, ATKINS fails to teach “the temperature change is sensed using, as a reference, a temperature of stabilized air in the airflow path when preheating of a heater is completed and “ATKINS discloses monitoring during the standby mode, rather than sensing after the standby mode has been completed. Moreover, ATKINS is silent about preheating of a heater; rather, it discloses that the coil is directly heated when the user inhales. Therefore, ATKINS fails to teach the limitation of "the temperature change is sensed using, as a reference, a temperature of stabilized air in the airflow path when preheating of a heater is completed" (emphasis added) as recited in amended claim 1.”
Examiner Responds
Applicant is arguing the claims as amended. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive in part.
The examiner agrees that ATKINS discloses that a temperature is detected at the heating element. However, ATKINS also teaches a temperature of air in the air flow path. ATKINS teaches that the anemometer is used for “measuring air flow and changes in temperature of an anemometer wire element as air flow past it” ([0028]), thus implying detecting a temperature of air in the air flow path, and teaches such in [0062] as outlined below. ATKINS also teaches an embodiment1 where an anemometer is used as the temperature sensing device configured to detect a user’s puff ([0062]: “vaporizer 600 may have a second coil 609, separate from the primary heating element 603 as shown in FIG. 6. The second coil 609 may function as an anemometer for controlling power supplied to the heating element 603 […] it may be more important that the air flows transversely over the second coil 609 than the first element 603 because in this alternative design, the second coil 609 measures the air flow, changes to the temperature due to air flow, and the rates of airflow change for controlling the power delivered to the first heating element 603”).
The examiner disagrees that ATKINS does not teach preheating of a heater. ATKINS recites in [0028] “when a puff is not detected (and optionally when one has not been detected for a set period of time and/or according to some other criteria), the heating element can be maintained at a first temperature, which can be referred to as a standby temperature in some examples. When a start of a puff is detected (and optionally for some time after the start of the puff), the heating element can be elevated to a second temperature, which can be referred to as a vaporizing or vaporization temperature in some examples” and in [0040] “in a temperature-monitoring implementation of the current subject matter, the microcontroller maintains a constant power delivery level to the heating element with the vaporizer in the standby mode and is able to detect changes in the heating element temperature. When some combination of an actual temperature, a first derivative of temperature, and/or a second derivative of temperature matches one or more vaporization mode triggering criteria, the microcontroller determines that a puff is occurring and enters a puffing state in which power to the heating element is increased.” In other words, in standby mode the heater is preheated to a temperature below the vaporization level and maintained at that level until a puff is detected, thus implying a stabilized temperature of the air flow.
In summary, Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been fully considered but fail to place the application in condition for allowance. Applicant’s arguments are over amended features and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103, as mapped below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 5, 9-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ATKINS2 in view of HARRISON (US20170215478A1) (hereinafter – “ATKINS-HARRISON”).
Regarding claim 1
ATKINS teaches an aerosol generating device comprising:
a temperature sensor configured to sense a temperature change [0008]: “A heating control approach consistent with implementations of the current subject matter involves monitoring one or more parameters of a heating element configured for heating of a vaporizable material, and making using of the monitored parameters in an anemometric correlation from which it can be determined whether the vaporizer is idle and when it is being used. When a user initiates an inhalation on the mouthpiece of the vaporizer, a greater amount of air passes over the heating element”; [0028]: ““anemometric” refer to systems and methods for measuring air flow and changes in temperature of an anemometer wire element as air flows past it”, [0062]: “vaporizer 600 may have a second coil 609, separate from the primary heating element 603 as shown in FIG. 6. The second coil 609 may function as an anemometer for controlling power supplied to the heating element 603 […] it may be more important that the air flows transversely over the second coil 609 than the first element 603 because in this alternative design, the second coil 609 measures the air flow, changes to the temperature due to air flow, and the rates of airflow change for controlling the power delivered to the first heating element 603”);
and a controller configured to compare first information that varies depending on the temperature change with preset second information when the temperature change is sensed, and determine whether a user's puff occurred based on a comparison result ([0035]: “microcontroller can be configured to periodically measure a parameter (the singular form is used for the remainder of the disclosure for simplicity of discussion, but as noted above, more than one parameter can be used) of the heating element while the vaporizer is in an ON state and in the standby mode at the standby temperature 120. The measured parameter can optionally be a power 110 supplied to the heating element under control of the microcontroller to maintain a constant temperature 120 of the heating element. The microcontroller may be pre-programmed with the knowledge that when the heating element is at the standby temperature, a certain, known amount of power is constantly required to maintain the standby temperature. When the power required to maintain the standby temperature of the heating element exceeds a pre-set value, the microcontroller may register this difference as being correlated with a user taking an inhalation on the vaporizer (e.g., the start of a puff 130)”),
wherein the temperature change is sensed using, as a reference, a temperature [0028]: when the device is in stand by mode and not being used/not being puffed “the heating element can be maintained at a first temperature”, i.e., the heating element is preheated [0040]: “the microcontroller maintains a constant power delivery level to the heating element with the vaporizer in the standby mode […] microcontroller determines that a puff is occurring and enters a puffing state in which power to the heating element is increased”, i.e., the device is configured to maintain a stable standby/preheated temperature level such that the controller can determine a puff by detecting a deviation from the stabilized/preheated temperature, [0064]: “When the user takes an inhalation on the mouthpiece 608, the air flow over the second coil 609 increases and lowers the temperature of the second coil 609 such that more power is required to maintain the standby temperature at the second coil 609. Once the power required to maintain the standby temperature at the second coil 609 exceeds a pre-set power value, then the microcontroller 604 presumes that the user is taking an inhalation at the mouthpiece and initiates heating the heating element 603 to bring the temperature of the heating element 603 up to the vaporization temperature”).
In summary, ATKINS discloses an aerosol-generating device configured to determine that a user’s puff occurred by determining that the temperature inside the air flow path has varied. ATKINS discloses as the temperature changes in the air flow path, the device will increase power to the heating element to maintain the standby/preheated temperature, and that the power value is compared with a preset power value such that when the power value exceeds the preset power value, the device recognizes the user’s puff and then increases the heating element temperature to a vaporization temperature such that the user is able to take a puff wherein the puff includes the vaporized material. ATKINS disclosure that when in standby mode, the device is configured to maintain a standby/preheated temperature implies that the device is configured to determine the puff occurs in response to a stabilized temperature in the airflow path ([0028] & [0040]). ATKINS discloses using an anemometer to determine the temperature in the air path, and does not explicitly teach to “sense a temperature change of air in an airflow path”. However, HARRISON in an analogous teaches an aerosol generating device configured to deliver vaporized material to a user in response to detecting a puff (Abstract: “breath actuated vaporization device for generating vaporized material for inhalation by a use”), wherein a thermocouple style temperature sensor is used to detect a temperature of air in an airflow path ([0047]: “Air temperature is measured with a thermocouple (2) (or other temperature sensor) placed in the air path”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of HARRISON to the teachings of ATKINS such that ATKINS device would have been configured with an additional temperature sensor, such as thermocouple style temperature sensor of HARRISON, such that the device would be configured to sense a temperature change of stabilized air in the airflow path. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that doing so would provide the benefit of both more accurate temperature data of which to make a puff recognition determination (e.g., determining a weighted sum or average of the temperature data provided from the anemometer and the thermocouple of which to make the puff recognition determination) and/or to determine device diagnostics (e.g., if the data from the sensors differs by some threshold then this could be used to make a determination that the device or a component(s) of the device is not function properly), as ATKINS teaches the microcontroller is already configured as a diagnostic tool ([0072])
Regarding claim 5
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined above.
ATKINS also teaches wherein the first information includes a voltage value that changes according to the temperature change of the airflow path ([0028]: “The voltage output from these anemometers is thus the result of some sort of circuit within the device trying to maintain the specific variable (current, voltage, or temperature) constant, following Ohm's law (V=IR). As described herein, one or more parameters (e.g.an applied current, an applied voltage, a temperature, a resistance, a power required to maintain the heating element at a given temperature, etc.) of a heating element within a vaporizer may be monitored, and a change in such parameters matching a certain predetermined pattern can be interpreted as being indicative of a puff having started and/or stopped”).
Regarding claim 9
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined.
ATKINS also teaches wherein two ore more temperature sensors are provided in the aerosol-generating device, and the first information is calculated based on temperature changes sensed by the two or more temperature sensors ([0082]: “vaporizer may include one or more heating elements (resistive heaters) that are used for vaporizing a vaporizable material and may also be directly monitored, e.g., using a controller and/or other monitoring circuitry, to monitor the temperature and applied power necessary to heat the heating element and to compare the applied power and temperature to a predetermined value(threshold). In this way, as will be described in greater detail herein, the apparatus may detect airflow over the heating element when a user inhales through the mouthpiece of the vaporizer to cause flow of air over the heating element”).
Regarding claim 10
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined above.
ATKINS also teaches wherein the temperature sensor is further configured to selectively sense a temperature change exceeding a preset value ([0082]: “using a controller and/or other monitoring circuitry, to monitor the temperature and applied power necessary to heat the heating element and to compare the applied power and temperature to a predetermined value (threshold)”).
Regarding claim 11
Claim 11 is a method claim reciting substantially the same limitations as the system claim of claim 1 and is rejected as per claim 1.
Regarding claim 15
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 11 as outlined above.
The remaining limitations of claim 15 are substantially the same as claim 10 and are rejected as per claim 10.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by ATKINS-HARRISON in view of ISRAEL (US20200229500A1).
Regarding claim 6 and 7
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined above.
ATKINS-HARRISON are not relied on for wherein the temperature sensor is a variable resistor having a resistance that changes in proportion to the temperature change, or a variable resistor having a resistance that changes in inverse proportion to the temperature change.
However, ISRAEL in an analogous art teaches a vaporization device comprising at least one temperature sensor such as a thermistor ([0143]), wherein the thermistor may be of the negative temperature coefficient type ([0145]) or the positive temperature coefficient type ([0146]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of ISRAEL to the teachings of ATKINS-HARRISON such that ATKINS-HARRISON’s thermocouple would have been substituted with ISRAEL’s PTC and/or NTC thermistor type temperature sensor(s) as they are known substitutes of one another and the results of the substitution would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 2-3, 8 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ATKINS-HARRISON in view of DJORUP3 (hereinafter – “ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP”).
Regarding claim 2
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined above.
ATKINS-HARRISON is not relied on for wherein the first information and the second information change in proportion to a driving voltage of a first module included in the aerosol-generating device.
PNG
media_image1.png
328
354
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, DJORUP in analogous art teaches a temperature anemometer circuit wherein the first information and the second information change in proportion to a driving voltage of a first module included in the aerosol-generating device (Col. 1, ll. 19-37: widespread use of anemometers to measure airflow “anemometer circuit is illustrated in FIG. 1 wherein a single sensing element is shown at 10 and forms one arm of a four arm Wheatstone bridge which is completed by resistances 11, 12 and 13. Differential amplifier 14 is connected to the bridge at points 15 and 16 in order to determine bridge balance or bridge error signal and amplifier 14 output 17 is fed back to the bridge in order to provide bridge excitation”, Fig. 1 shows a temperature anemometer circuit with an op-amp comprising fixed resistors 12 (R12) and 13 (R13) to bias the positive input of the op-amp and a fixed resistor 11 (R11) and a sensing element (Rx) (note that the sensing element 10 is a variable resistance resistor wherein the resistance varies according to the temperature change induced, “sensing element has a temperature coefficient of resistance” to bias the negative input of the op-amp. “Differential amplifier 14 is connected to the bridge at points 15 and 16 in order to determine bridge balance or bridge error signal and amplifier 14 output 17 is fed back to the bridge in order to provide bridge excitation”. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, as a result of the voltage divider equation, that the voltage at node 15 is given by V15=Vin(R10/(R10+R11) and the voltage at node 16 is given by V16=Vin(R12/(R12+R13)). One of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that, that the input voltage to resistors R11 and R13 at a time t is given by Vin(t) and is equal to Vout(t-1). As such, when the output voltage of the module changes, it is feedback to the input of the module thus changing the first and second information in proportion to the feedback (i.e., driving) voltage).
DJORUP is analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of flow sensing devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of DJORUP to the teachings of ATKINS-HARRISON such that DJORUP’s implementation details could be used with ATKINS-HARRISON’s anemometric correlation method for the purposes of creating hysteresis to smooth output switching.
Regarding claim 3
ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP teaches the elements of claim 2 as outlined above.
DJORUP also teaches wherein the first module includes a comparator (Fig. 1 item 14 shows an amplifier 14 configured as comparator).
Regarding claim 8
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 1 as outlined above.
ATKINS-HARRISON is not relied on for wherein the second information is determined based on constant resistance values of two resistors.
However, DJORUP in analogous art teaches a comparator circuit configured to determine an airflow comprising second information wherein the second information is determined based on constant resistance values of two resistors (Col. 1, ll. 19-37 and Fig. 1 shows a biased comparator circuit implying fixed resistors configured before and after node 16 which is the second information (i.e., reference) input to the op-amp configured as a comparator).
Regarding claim 12
ATKINS-HARRISON teaches the elements of claim 11 as outlined above.
The remaining limitations of claim 12 are substantially the same as claim 2 and are rejected as per claim 2.
Regarding claim 13
ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP teaches the elements of claim 12 as outlined above.
The remaining limitations of claim 13 are substantially the same as claim 3 and are rejected as per claim 3.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP in view of ET_NPL.4
Regarding claim 4
ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP teaches the elements of claim 3 as outlined above.
DJORUP does not explicitly teach wherein the first information includes an input voltage of a positive (+) terminal of the comparator, and the second information includes an input voltage of a negative (-) terminal of a comparator. However, DJORUP Fig. 1 teaches the first information includes an input voltage of a negative terminal of the comparator, and the second information includes an input voltage of a negative terminal.
However, ET_NPL teaches the choice of using the inverting or non-inverting input terminal of an op-amp as the input for a reference signal is a known substitute (Positive and Negative Voltage Comparators (heading): “A basic op-amp comparator circuit can be used to detect either a positive or a negative going input voltage depending upon which input of the operational amplifier we connect the fixed reference voltage source and the input voltage too. In the examples above we have used the inverting input to set the reference voltage with the input voltage connected to the non-inverting input. But equally we could connect the inputs of the comparator the other way around inverting the output signal to that shown above. Then an op-amp comparator can be configured to operate in what is called an inverting or a non-inverting configuration.”).
ATKINS teaches wherein the controller is further configured to determine that the user’s puff occurred, based on a signal that is output from an output terminal of the comparator when the input voltage of the positive (+) terminal is greater than the input voltage of the negative terminal (-) ([0028]: “terms “anemometer” or “anemometric” refer to systems and methods for measuring air flow and changes in temperature of an anemometer wire element as air flows past it. Typically, hot wire anemometers use a very fine wire (on the order of several micrometers) electrically heated to some temperature above ambient air temperature. Air flowing past the wire cools the wire. As the electrical resistance of most metals is dependent upon the temperature of the metal (tungsten is a popular choice for hot-wires), a relationship can be obtained between the resistance of the wire and the air flow speed. Several ways of implementing this exist, and hot-wire devices can be further classified as CCA (constant current anemometer), CVA (constant voltage anemometer), and/or CTA (constant-temperature anemometer). The voltage output from these anemometers is thus the result of some sort of circuit within the device trying to maintain the specific variable (current, voltage, or temperature) constant, following Ohm's law (V=IR). As described herein, one or more parameters (e.g.an applied current, an applied voltage, a temperature, a resistance, a power required to maintain the heating element at a given temperature, etc.) of a heating element within a vaporizer may be monitored, and a change in such parameters matching a certain predetermined pattern can be interpreted as being indicative of a puff having started and/or stopped such that a temperature at which the heating element is maintained can be varied between at least two different setpoints […] The term “one or more parameters of a heating element” as used herein is intended to refer to either or both of an actual heating element itself, which can be a component of a heating circuit to which power is applied such that electrical resistance of the heating element causes the applied electrical power to be converted to heat, and other components that are part of the heating circuit. Those other components may, in some implementations of the current subject matter, include the power source or power supply, one or more integrated circuits, resistors, capacitors, conductive elements for connecting other components of the heating circuit, a microcontroller or other processor, etc.”).
ET_NPL is analogous art to the claimed invention because they from the same field of using an op-amp as a comparator. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of ET_NPL to the teachings of ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP such that ET_NPL’s reference signal being applied to the inverting or non-inverting input of the op-amp could be used with ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP’s comparator according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 14
ATKINS-HARRISON-DJORUP teaches the elements of claim 13 as outlined above.
The remaining limitations of claim 14 are substantially the same as claim 4 and are rejected as per claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
ADAIR (US20220408840A1) teaches to delay a temperature measurement in response to a preheater activation command.
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 Michael V Farina whose telephone number is (571)272-4982. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:00-6:00 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, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. 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.
/M.V.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2115
/MARK A CONNOLLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115 7/29/26
1 ATKINS discloses that features and elements taught throughout the disclosure are not specific to a single embodiment ([0114]).
2 ATKINS is a prior art reference cited in the previous office action.
3 DJORUP is a prior art reference cited in the previous office action.
4 ET_NPL is a prior art reference cited in the previous office action.
Prosecution Insights