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 .
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.
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 4-7 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 4 recites the limitation "the width" in the second line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “close” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For example, the relative term “close” as recited in the phrase “the heating assembly is arranged close to the proximal end” is unclear and the claim language fails to provide guidance as to the scope of the limitation such that the skilled artisan may not know how to avoid infringing on the claimed invention, because the metes and bounds of what is considered by the term “close” are not clearly defined by the claim. Thus, for the purposes of compact prosecution, the claims are examined with “close” being given its broadest reasonable interpreted as being within the same device or in proximity.
Claims 5-7 are indefinite by dependence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 8-9, 12-13, 15, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. (US 2020/0093177).
Regarding claim 1, Han discloses a vapor generation device, configured to heat an aerosol-generating product (cigarette 3) to generate an aerosol, and comprising a main housing (casing 10010, Figs. 53 and 54, [0527]) wherein the main housing comprises:
a heating assembly (heater 10030) configured to heat the aerosol-generating product (the end portion of the heater is inserted into the bottom surface of an end portion of the cigarette when the cigarette is accommodated in the accommodating portion 10040, Figs. 54 and 55, [0544]); and
a door cover (door 10030), movably coupled to the main housing at a first position (best seen in annotated Fig. 40A) (the door slides in a straight line along the rail 10030r on the top surface of the cover 10020), Fig. 53, [0445, 0530]), and at a second position (annotated Fig. 40B, Fig. 53) (the door 10030 moves along the rail 10030r, in the direction indicated by the arrow Fig. 53, [0530]),
wherein the door cover covers the heating assembly at the first position, (the heater 10300 is installed in the casing 10010 such that an end portion is located inside the protruding tube 10200, Fig. 55, [0544], therefore suggesting to one of ordinary skill in the art the heating assembly must be covered when the door cover is at the first position as shown in annotated Fig. 40A which covers outside hole 10020p), and exposes the heating assembly at the second position (when the door 10030 slides in the straight line along the rail10030r on the top surface of the cover 10020, the outside hole 10020p and the insertion hole 10040p are exposed to the outside, (Figs. 53 and 55, [0530]). This anticipates claims 1 and 2.
PNG
media_image1.png
548
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
586
366
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Han discloses door cover configuration to be linearly moveable between the first and the second position relative to the main housing (see door straight line movement in claim 1 rejection). This anticipates claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Han discloses the linear movement is in the width direction (W) as shown on annotated Fig. 53. This anticipates claim 3.
PNG
media_image3.png
624
456
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Han discloses an extractor (accommodating portion 10040), configured to extract the aerosol-generating product from the vapor generation device (a cleaning operation of the aerosol-generating apparatus may be performed by separating the accommodating portion 10040 from the casing 10010 to expose the inner space and a heater of the aerosol-generating apparatus to the outside and remove a tobacco material therefrom, Fig. 56, [0540]. This anticipates the extractor limitation of claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Han discloses the extractor is selectively configurable from an operating position (see Fig. 55 wherein cigarette 3 is accommodated (i.e., inserted) in the accommodating portion 10040 [0544]) to an extraction position (Fig. 56 as discussed in claim 8 rejection), wherein the aerosol-generating product is in contact with the heating assembly when the heating assembly when the extractor is in the operating position (the end portion of the heater 10030 is inserted into the bottom surface of an end portion of the cigarette 3, [0544]), and the aerosol-generating product is separated from the heating assembly when the extractor is at the extraction position (Fig. 56, [0540]). This anticipates claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, Han discloses the extractor is configured to move relative to the main housing (the protruding tube 10020 includes a guiding groove 10020n extending in a straight line in the lengthwise direction of the protruding tube 10020 to couple with the accommodating portion 10040, Fig. 56, [0542], thus anticipating the relative movement limitation of the claim) or be removed from the main housing to be configured from the operating position to the extraction position (Fig. 56, [0540] as discussed in claim 9 rejection, thus anticipating removal from the main housing limitation of the claim). This anticipates claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, Han discloses the heating assembly comprises:
a heater, configured to heat the aerosol-generating product (heater 10030; the end portion of the heater is inserted into the bottom surface of an end portion of the cigarette when the cigarette is accommodated in the accommodating portion 10040, Figs. 54 and 55, [0544]); and
a bracket, at least partially surrounding the heater (accommodating portion 10040 includes sidewall 10040w that forms the accommodating path 10040h and bottom wall 10040b that closes the other end of the accommodating path 10040h and includes the heater hole 10040c through which the end portion of the heater 10030 passes, Figs. 56 and 57, [0546]). The sidewall 10040w and bottom wall 10040b anticipate the bracket limitation of claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, Han discloses the heater has a free front end configured to be inserted into the aerosol-generating product (the end portion of the heater 10030 is inserted into the bottom surface of an end portion of the cigarette when the cigarette is accommodated in the accommodating portion 10040, Figs. 54 and 55, [0544], thus anticipates the free front end limitation of the claim); and
the bracket at least partially defines:
a window (slits 10040s formed through the sidewall 10040w of the accommodating portion 10040; anticipates a window), at least partially surrounding the heater and avoiding the free front end, to partially expose the heater, Fig. 57 [0560]; Fig. 57 in combination with Fig. 55 anticipates at least partially surrounding the heater limitation of the claim.) This anticipates claim 15.
Regarding claim 17, Han discloses a receiving hole, wherein the aerosol-generating product is removably received in the main housing through the receiving hole during use (insertion hole 10040p through which the cigarette 3 may be inserted Fig. 53, [0530]); and
the door cover simultaneously covers the heating assembly and the receiving hole at the first position (the heater 10300 is installed in the casing 10010 such that an end portion is located inside the protruding tube 10200, Fig. 55, [0544], therefore suggesting to one of ordinary skill in the art the heating assembly must be covered when the door cover is at the first position as shown in annotated Fig. 40A which covers outside hole 10020p and insertion hole 10040p), and exposes the heating assembly at the second position (when the door 10030 slides in the straight line along the rail10030r on the top surface of the cover 10020, the outside hole 10020p and the insertion hole 10040p are exposed to the outside, (Figs. 53 and 55, [0530]). This anticipates claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, Han discloses wherein a guide structure is arranged on the door cover, to provide guidance when the door cover moves between the first position and the second position (In an embodiment, the door 10030r is installed to move in a straight line with respect to the cover 10020. However, the embodiment is not limited by the structure in which door 10030 is coupled with the cover 10020 [0448]. The rail 10030r is has a concave groove shape, but is not limited by the shape of the rail 10030r [0449]. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably suggested that a corresponding structure on the lower/underside door surface must be present in order to maintain the door 10030 installed on the rail 10030r. This anticipates the guide structure limitation of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, Han discloses a vapor generation system, configured to heat an aerosol-generating product (cigarette 3) to generate an aerosol, and comprising a main housing (casing 10010, (Figs. 53 and 54, [0527]) wherein the main housing comprises:
a heating assembly (heater 10030) configured to heat the aerosol-generating product (the end portion of the heater is inserted into the bottom surface of an end portion of the cigarette when the cigarette is accommodated in the accommodating portion 10040, Figs. 54 and 55, [0544]); and
a door cover (door 10030), coupled to the main housing, and configured to moveable relative to the main housing (the door slides in a straight line along the rail 10030r on the top surface of the cover 10020), Fig. 53, [0445, 0530]), to cover or expose at least two surfaces of the heating assembly, and at a second position (annotated Fig. 40B, Fig. 53) (the door 10030 moves along the rail 10030r, in the direction indicated by the arrow Fig. 53, [0530]),
wherein the door cover covers the heating assembly at the first position, (the heater 10300 is installed in the casing 10010 such that an end portion is located inside the protruding tube 10200, Fig. 55, [0544], therefore suggesting to one of ordinary skill in the art at least two surfaces of the heating assembly must be covered when the door cover is at the first position as shown in annotated Fig. 40A which covers outside hole 10020p), and exposes at least two surfaces of the heating assembly (when the door 10030 slides in the straight line along the rail10030r on the top surface of the cover 10020, the outside hole 10020p and the insertion hole 10040p are exposed to the outside (Figs. 53 and 55, [0530]). This anticipates claims 20.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US 2020/0093177).
Regarding claim 18, Han discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses the cover 10020 and the casing 10010 may include a plastic material with low heat conductivity or a metal coated with a heat barrier material on its surface but is silent to the door 10030 material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to practice the invention of Han to make the door 10030 of t a metal coated with a heat barrier material on its surface because Han teaches such a material for the cover 10020 and the door 10030 is installed on the top surface of cover 10020 [0530]. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 10-11, 14, and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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:
Regarding claim 4, Han discloses the main housing has a length direction, a width direction, and a thickness direction, and has a proximal end and a distal end that are opposite to each other in the length direction; the heating assembly is arranged close to the proximal end; (see annotated Fig. 53 and Fig. 55) and; wherein when being configured at the first position, the door cover further blocks the heating assembly from the proximal end of the main housing (the heater 10300 is installed in the casing 10010 such that an end portion is located inside the protruding tube 10200, Fig. 55, [0544], therefore suggesting to one of ordinary skill in the art the heating assembly must be blocked when the door cover is at the first position as shown in annotated Fig. 40A which covers outside hole 10020p.) The prior art of record does not reasonably suggest the combined structure wherein the door cover further blocks a first side of the main housing in the thickness direction, and a second side of the main housing in the thickness direction. Claims 5-7 are objected to due to dependency.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record does not reasonably suggest the combined structure wherein the door cover blocks the extractor at the first position, to prevent the extractor from being configured from the operating position to the extraction position; and the door cover at least partially exposes the extractor and releases the blocking at the second position.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record does not reasonably suggest the combined structure of an operating portion, actuating the receiving portion through the operating position during use, and further causing the receiving portion to be configured from the operating position to the extraction position to extract the aerosol-generating product, wherein the door cover blocks the operating portion at the first position, and exposes the operating portion at the second position.
Regarding claim 14, Han discloses the extractor comprises a receiving portion (accommodating), configured to keep the aerosol-generating product (cigarette 3 is placed in the accommodating path the path 10040h, [Fig. 55, [0531]). The prior art of record does not reasonably suggest the combined structure of an operating portion, actuating the receiving portion through the operation portion during use, and further causing the receiving portion to configured from the operating position to the extraction position to extract the aerosol-generating product, wherein the door cover blocks the operating portion at the first position, and exposes the operating portion at the second position.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record does not reasonably suggest the combined structure wherein the door cover exposes the window at the second position, to enable cleaning of the heater though the window.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONNIE KIRBY JORDAN whose telephone number is 571-272-5214. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM - 4PM (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, Michael H. Wilson can be reached on 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.
/RONNIE KIRBY JORDAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Christopher M Rodd/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights