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 1-11 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 4 are rejected 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Spencer (US 20200376208 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Spencer discloses an aerosol delivery system (100, “a vaporizer”, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B), comprising:
A first aerosol delivery device (10, “a first vaporizer”) comprising a first mouthpiece end (35, “a first mouthpiece”), a reservoir (160, “a first oil tank”), a battery (210, “a first battery”), and a controller attached to a printed circuit board (215, “a first electronic controller”, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 5A, [0033-0035, 0043-0046]),
A second aerosol delivery device (10’, “a second vaporizer”) comprising a second mouthpiece end (35’, “a second mouthpiece”), a reservoir (160’, “a second oil tank”), a battery (210’, “a second battery”, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 5A, [0033-0035, 0043-0046, 0063]),
The first and second aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) have similar components ([0045]) and while not shown in the drawings, the second delivery device (10’) is considered to comprise the same controller attached to printed circuit board (215, “a second electronic controller”) as the first aerosol delivery device (10, Fig. 2, [0034]),
The first aerosol delivery device comprises magnetic portions (226) which are magnetically coupled with magnetic portions (226’) of the second aerosol delivery device (10’) such that the first and second aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) in an uncoupled state (Fig. 5A, “separated mode”) are attracted to one another (i.e. biases the first mouthpiece to the second mouthpiece) and couple together (Fig. 5B, “connected mode”) in which a user can inhale from both mouthpiece ends (35, 35’) simultaneously (Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B, [0042-0045, 0047-0048, 0050]),
The coupling surfaces (224, 224’) having magnetic portions (262, 262’) are considered to be a magnetic attachment (Fig. 5A, Fig. 5b),
The aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) have a cuboid shape and therefore the portions of the aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) that couple to one another are considered to be a first vaporizer back having a flat face (224) and second vaporizer back having a flat face (224’, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B, [0025, 0050]), as shown in the annotated Fig. 5A below.
PNG
media_image1.png
762
1192
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Spencer discloses the mouthpiece ends (35, “first mouthpiece”, 35’, “second mouthpiece”) are provided adjacent to one another in the coupled state/connected mode (Fig. 5B, Fig. 5C, [0048]).
Regarding claim 4, Spencer discloses:
The magnetic attachment (coupling surfaces 224, 224’) comprises electrical connections (228, 228’) which enable control signals (i.e. communication between the controllers, [0059]) to pass between the first and second aerosol delivery devices (i.e. connects the first and second electronic controller, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B, [0031, 0053-0056, 0059]),
The control signals may be used to establish one of the controllers as a “master controller” for controlling the functions of both aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’, [0059-0061]), and;
The controllers may provide power to the heaters for vaporization ([0034]).
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a master controller controlling the functions of both aerosol delivery devices would result in synchronized vapor production (i.e. vapor production occurring in both devices at the same time).
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 2, and 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spencer (US 20200376208 A1) in view of Hwang (US 20240365871 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Spencer discloses an upper and lower magnetic portion (i.e. a first upper attachment and first lower attachment, 226, 226’) provided on each vaporizer back (224, 224’, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) where the magnetic force is sufficiently strong to hold the aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) together ([0048]).
Spencer does not explicitly disclose a second upper attachment and second lower attachment provided on each vaporizer back.
However, Hwang, directed to a vaporizing device (100, Fig. 2B, Fig. 4) , discloses
Two pairs of magnets (58, i.e. first and second upper and lower attachments) provided on a planar back face (17) for attaching a first vaporizing device to a second vaporizing device (Fig. 2B, Fig. 4, Fig. 11A, [0053, 0063]), and
The strength of the magnets tightly holds the first and second vaporizing devices together (Fig. 11A, [0079])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Spencer by modifying the magnetic portions of both the first and second aerosol delivery device to have a pair of upper magnetic portions and a pair of lower magnetic portions as taught by Hwang because both Spencer and Hwang are directed to aerosol generating device, Spencer and Hwang both teach that the magnets have sufficient strength to hold the two aerosol generating devices together, and this involves applying additional magnets in a known arrangement to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, Spencer discloses a first and second mouthpiece (35, 35’) each having a flat back (i.e. a flat first and second mouthpiece taper back, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B).
Spencer does not explicitly disclose the mouthpieces (35, 35’) comprise a taper.
However, Hwang, directed to a vaporizing device (100, Fig. 2B, Fig. 9) , discloses
A first and second vaporizing device (206, 208) each comprising a mouthpiece (30) having a tapered portion (37) and a planar back face (35), where the planar back face (35) of each mouthpiece conforms to the other mouthpiece to provide a combined mouthpiece taper (Fig. 5, Fig. 9, [0047, 0081]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Spencer by substituting the mouthpiece of each aerosol delivery devices with the tapered mouthpieces taught by Hwang because both Spencer and Hwang are directed to aerosol generating devices, and this involves substituting a known mouthpiece with another in a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 6, Spencer discloses an upper and lower magnetic portion (i.e. a first upper attachment and first lower attachment, 226, 226’) provided on each vaporizer back (224, 224’, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) where the magnetic force is sufficiently strong to hold the aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) together ([0048]).
Spencer does not explicitly disclose a second upper attachment and second lower attachment provided on each vaporizer back.
However, Hwang, directed to a vaporizing device (100, Fig. 2B, Fig. 4) , discloses
Two pairs of magnets (58, i.e. first and second upper and lower attachments) provided on a planar back face (17) for attaching a first vaporizing device to a second vaporizing device (Fig. 2B, Fig. 4, Fig. 11A, [0053, 0063]), and
The strength of the magnets tightly holds the first and second vaporizing devices together (Fig. 11A, [0079])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Spencer, in view of Hwang, by modifying the magnetic portions of both the first and second aerosol delivery device to have a pair of upper magnetic portions and a pair of lower magnetic portions as taught by Hwang because both Spencer and Hwang are directed to aerosol generating device, Spencer and Hwang both teach that the magnets have sufficient strength to hold the two aerosol generating devices together, and this involves applying additional magnets in a known arrangement to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, Spencer discloses the mouthpiece ends (35, “first mouthpiece”, 35’, “second mouthpiece”) are provided adjacent to one another in the coupled state/connected mode (Fig. 5B, Fig. 5C, [0048]).
Regarding claim 8, Spencer discloses:
The magnetic attachment (coupling surfaces 224, 224’) comprises electrical connections (228, 228’) which enable control signals (i.e. communication between the controllers, [0059]) to pass between the first and second aerosol delivery devices (i.e. connects the first and second electronic controller, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B, [0031, 0053-0056, 0059]),
The control signals may be used to establish one of the controllers as a “master controller” for controlling the functions of both aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’, [0059-0061]), and;
The controllers may provide power to the heaters for vaporization ([0034]).
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a master controller controlling the functions of both aerosol delivery devices would result in synchronized vapor production (i.e. vapor production occurring in both devices at the same time).
Regarding claim 9, Spencer discloses an upper and lower magnetic portion (i.e. a first upper attachment and first lower attachment, 226, 226’) provided on each vaporizer back (224, 224’, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) where the magnetic force is sufficiently strong to hold the aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) together ([0048]).
Spencer does not explicitly disclose a second upper attachment and second lower attachment provided on each vaporizer back.
However, Hwang, directed to a vaporizing device (100, Fig. 2B, Fig. 4) , discloses
Two pairs of magnets (58, i.e. first and second upper and lower attachments) provided on a planar back face (17) for attaching a first vaporizing device to a second vaporizing device (Fig. 2B, Fig. 4, Fig. 11A, [0053, 0063]), and
The strength of the magnets tightly holds the first and second vaporizing devices together (Fig. 11A, [0079])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Spencer, in view of Hwang, by modifying the magnetic portions of both the first and second aerosol delivery device to have a pair of upper magnetic portions and a pair of lower magnetic portions as taught by Hwang because both Spencer and Hwang are directed to aerosol generating device, Spencer and Hwang both teach that the magnets have sufficient strength to hold the two aerosol generating devices together, and this involves applying additional magnets in a known arrangement to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 10, Spencer discloses the mouthpiece ends (35, “first mouthpiece”, 35’, “second mouthpiece”) are provided adjacent to one another in the coupled state/connected mode (Fig. 5B, Fig. 5C, [0048]).
Regarding claim 11, Spencer discloses an upper and lower magnetic portion (i.e. a first upper attachment and first lower attachment, 226, 226’) provided on each vaporizer back (224, 224’, Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) where the magnetic force is sufficiently strong to hold the aerosol delivery devices (10, 10’) together ([0048]).
Spencer does not explicitly disclose a second upper attachment and second lower attachment provided on each vaporizer back.
However, Hwang, directed to a vaporizing device (100, Fig. 2B, Fig. 4) , discloses
Two pairs of magnets (58, i.e. first and second upper and lower attachments) provided on a planar back face (17) for attaching a first vaporizing device to a second vaporizing device (Fig. 2B, Fig. 4, Fig. 11A, [0053, 0063]), and
The strength of the magnets tightly holds the first and second vaporizing devices together (Fig. 11A, [0079])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Spencer, in view of Hwang, by modifying the magnetic portions of both the first and second aerosol delivery device to have a pair of upper magnetic portions and a pair of lower magnetic portions as taught by Hwang because both Spencer and Hwang are directed to aerosol generating device, Spencer and Hwang both teach that the magnets have sufficient strength to hold the two aerosol generating devices together, and this involves applying additional magnets in a known arrangement to a similar device to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Newton (US 20220346454 A1) discloses attachable personal vaporizers (100) that couple to each other using magnets (110, 208A-C), where each personal vaporizer (100) comprises a mouthpiece (206), a reservoir (204), a microcontroller (212), and a battery (210, Fig. 1A, Fig. 1B, Fig. 2, [0013-0014, 0016-0020])
Hwang (US 20220304375 A1) discloses magnetically connectable electronic vaping devices (910a, 910b) each having a magnetized side (945a, 945b), a mouthpiece (912a, 912b), a pre-vapor formulation, and a battery (Fig. 9, Fig. 10, [0027, 0033, 0050])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MORGAN FAITH DEZENDORF whose telephone number is (571)272-0155. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-430pm 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, 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.
/M.F.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755