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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed 9/16/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 4-7, 9-13, 16-17, 19-21 and 23-25 are pending. Claims 2, 3, 8, 14, 15, 18 and 22 are cancelled. Claims 1, 6, 9, 13, 16, 17, 19 and 21 are amended. Claim 25 is new. No new matter is added.
Support for the relative difference in viscosity is implicitly fond in instant published paragraphs [0025] and [0026]. It is noted that the viscosity changes with temperature and the temperature at the vaporization surface is higher than at the opposing surface. Thus, the viscosity of the liquid at the vaporization surface would be expected to be lower.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that ISO 22007 is a multipart standard and the suffix -2 designates Part 2 of that standard. Prebe discloses a TPS thin plate method following an ISO22007-2 standard. See paragraph [0170]. A person of ordinary skill in the art reading amended claim 1 in light of this would understand the call for the Part 2 measurement.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claimed ISO standard includes multiple date assignments. The standard noted in Prebe is from 2008. There are other listed dates for this standard as well. The claim does not indicate which date this standard is from.
Also reinforcing the above argument is that the claimed GBT17473.5 standard is using a 1998 date assignment. This standard also has dates from 2008 and 2025. Thus, the standard claimed isn’t necessarily the latest issued standard.
Applicant argues that the cited art does not disclose the claimed viscosity and the claimed first and second viscosities.
These features were not previously recited and will be addressed hereinafter.
It is further noted that claims 1 and 25 both positively recite the aerosol generating substrate absorbed within the porous ceramic body, and is thus considered part of the porous ceramic substrate. The scope of the invention has been changed to include this substrate.
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, 4-7, 9-13, 16-17, 19-21, 23 and 24 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 an “ISO22007-2.2” standard for measuring thermal conductivity. This does not appear to be a proper standard. The standard (See attached ISO 22007-2:2022 document) appears to include date code after “ISO22007-2” not a simple “2”. Thus, it is unclear which standard Applicant is referring too. It is unclear if this is a separate undefined standard or a mistyped date code for the standard. Either way, it is unclear which standard is being referenced.
To further the aforementioned argument, the above argument is that the claimed GBT17473.5 standard is using a 1998 date assignment. This standard also has dates from 2008 and 2025. Thus, the standard claimed isn’t necessarily the latest issued standard.
Claims 4-7, 9-13, 16-17, 19-21, 23 and 24, are rejected for depending from claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 25 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 25, FENG et al. discloses an atomizing core (Abstract) comprising a single porous ceramic body, 110, (Paragraphs [0029]-[0031]; Figure 1) having a vaporization surface (e.g., surface on which heater, 120, is placed) on a first side thereof and a liquid absorbing surface (e.g., surface opposite said first surface) capable of absorbing liquid (Paragraph [0019]). The thickness of the porous ceramic substrate is between 1.5 and 2 mm (Paragraph [0029]) and the thermal conductivity of the porous ceramic substrate is between, 0.8 W/mk to about 1.0 W/mk (Paragraph [0030]).
PREBE et al. discloses thermally conductive material and they are measured following the ISO 22007-2:2008-12 standard (Paragraph [0170]).
However, FENG et al. explicitly discloses that the viscosity of the liquid is between 120mPa/s to 200 mPa/s (e.g., 120 to 200 cps) (Paragraph [0022]) and that the viscosity is constant (Paragraph [0048]). Thus, FENG et al. teaches away from the claimed viscosity.
PELEG et al. (US 2013/0284192) discloses an electronic cigarette (Abstract) that uses a high viscosity e-liquid in order to reduce leakages (Paragraph [0027]), and that heating the liquid reduces its viscosity (Paragraph [0036]). Thus, there appears to be a general set of conditions in which the liquid of FENG et al. could have one viscosity at the vaporization surface where the temperature is higher, and a lower viscosity at the absorption surface where the temperature is lower. However, PELEG et al. does not necessarily use this liquid in a porous ceramic body, per se. Moreover, PELEG et al. also doesn’t disclose the viscosity of the liquid.
TAN (US 2016/0213866) discloses an ultrasonic vaporization element (Abstract; Title) where the vaping material is a gel-like or wax like substance with high viscosity (Paragraph [0077]). Like PELEG et al., the viscosity isn’t disclosed, per se.
TYGETT (US 2019/0091423) discloses the vaporization of viscous materials (Abstract; Paragraph [0001]). The viscosity of the gel is between 50 and 70 thousand cps (Paragraph [0036]). However, this gel is not used with a porous ceramic body and the substance isn’t necessarily absorbed therein, per se.
GHANOUNI et al. (US 2020/0046027) discloses an aerosol generating device (Abstract) that uses an aerosol gel having a viscosity of between 0.1 and 100 Ns/m2 (Paragraph [0023]) (e.g., 100 to 200,000 cps). However, this gel is not used with a porous ceramic body and the substance isn’t necessarily absorbed therein, per se.
Thus, the art generally teaches aerosol materials that have an overlapping viscosity range. However, these aerosol materials are not disclosed as being absorbed in and passing through a porous ceramic body, per se.
It is noted that claim 1 contains the same features of claim 25, and would be allowable if the 35 U.S.C 112 issues were addressed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX B EFTA whose telephone number is (313)446-6548. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM EST M-F.
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 Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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.
/ALEX B EFTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
Prosecution Insights