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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/9/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed 3/9/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 3-7, 9-14 and 16-23 are pending. Claims 2, 8 and 15 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3, -7, 9-14, 16-18 and 21 are amended. Claims 22 and 23 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant notes that the cited art uses a porous ceramic made of multiple layers. Thus, the cited art does not apply to the claims that explicitly require a single porous ceramic body forming the substrate.
Examiner notes that this requirement was not previously required and will be addressed hereinafter.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by FENG et al. (US 2023/0413907).
With respect to claim 1, 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 1.0 W/mk (Paragraph [0030]).
With respect to claim 4¸ FENG et al. discloses that the porous ceramic substrate has a porosity between 40-50% (Paragraph [0021]).
With respect to claim 7, FENG et al. discloses that the pore size is between 15 and 25 microns (Paragraph [0020]).
With respect to claim 9, FENG et al. discloses a ceramic heating body comprising the porous ceramic substrate (See rejection of claim 1). The heating element comprises a heater, 120, on the vaporization surface configured to vaporize the aerosol generating substrate and the liquid absorbing surface is configured to absorb the substrate (Paragraphs [0019], [0029]-[0030]).
With respect to claim 10¸ FENG et al. discloses that the heating body is capable of reaching a temperature greater than 80C (Paragraphs [0043], [0052]) and the liquid absorbing surface is necessarily capable of being raised by the conducted heat given its thermal conductivity.
With respect to claim 11, FENG et al. discloses an electronic vaporization device comprising the heating body of claim 9 (Abstract; Title) (See rejection of claim 9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3, 12, 13, 14 and 17-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FENG et al. (US 2023/0413907).
With respect to claim 3, FENG et al. discloses that the thermal conductivity is up to about 1.0 W/mk (Paragraph [0030]).
The courts have generally held that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (The prior art taught carbon monoxide concentrations of "about 1-5%" while the claim was limited to "more than 5%." The court held that "about 1-5%" allowed for concentrations slightly above 5% thus the ranges overlapped.); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP 2144.05, I.
With respect to claim 12, FENG et al. FENG et al. discloses that the porous ceramic substrate has a porosity up to about 50% (Paragraph [0021]).
The courts have generally held that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (The prior art taught carbon monoxide concentrations of "about 1-5%" while the claim was limited to "more than 5%." The court held that "about 1-5%" allowed for concentrations slightly above 5% thus the ranges overlapped.); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP 2144.05, I.
With respect to claim 13, FENG et al. does not explicitly disclose that the porous ceramic substrate is a sheet shape. The courts have generally held that mere changes in shape is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2144.04, IV, B. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, to provide the porous ceramic body in a sheet shape so as to provide it in a form factor to fit within the confines of an electronic vaporizing device. The heating element comprises a heater, 120, on the vaporization surface configured to vaporize the aerosol generating substrate and the liquid absorbing surface is configured to absorb the substrate (Paragraphs [0019], [0029]-[0030]).
With respect to claim 14¸ the aerosol-generating substrate is a material worked upon and its inclusion does not impart patentability to the claims. See, MPEP 2115.
With respect to claim 17, FENG et al. discloses that the liquid flows through the pores of the ceramic (Paragraphs [0019], [0029]-[0030]), thus it is capable of transferring the liquid via capillary force to the heating element.
With respect to claim 18, the aerosol-generating substrate is a material worked upon and its inclusion does not impart patentability to the claims. See, MPEP 2115.
With respect to claim 19, the aerosol-generating substrate is a material worked upon and its inclusion does not impart patentability to the claims. See, MPEP 2115. FENG et al. discloses that the substrate is a liquid (Paragraphs [0019], [0029], [0030]).
With respect claim 20, FENG et al. discloses an electronic cigarette comprising the heating body of claim 19, (Paragraph [0034]).
With respect to claim 21, FENG et al. discloses that the liquid flows through the pores of the ceramic (Paragraphs [0019], [0029]-[0030]), thus it is capable of transferring the liquid via capillary force to the heating element.
With respect to claim 22, the aerosol-generating substrate is a material worked upon and its inclusion does not impart patentability to the claims. See, MPEP 2115.
______________________________________________________________________
Claim(s) 5, 6, 16 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FENG et al. (US 2023/0413907) in view of BAI et al. (CN 110627519, machine translation).
With respect to claims 5 and 6, FENG et al. does not explicitly disclose the claimed materials in the claimed amount. BAI et al. discloses a porous ceramic atomizing core (Abstract). The core is formed from 20-40 mass% alumina, 10-20 mass% silica and 10-30 mass% silicon carbide (Claims 2 and 3) so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process (See highlighted sections in the machine translation). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the materials in the amounts disclosed by BAI et al. to form the porous substrate of FENG et al. so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process and ensure the capillary effect.
With respect to claim 16, FENG et al. does not explicitly disclose the claimed materials in the claimed amount. BAI et al. discloses a porous ceramic atomizing core (Abstract). The core is formed from 20-40 mass% alumina, 10-20 mass% silica and 10-30 mass% silicon carbide (Claims 2 and 3) and the pore diameter is between 10 and 30 microns, so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process (See highlighted sections in the machine translation) so as to ensure the production efficiency and . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the materials in the amounts disclosed by BAI et al. and the pore size to form the porous substrate of FENG et al. so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process and ensure the capillary effect.
With respect to claim 23, FENG et al. does not explicitly disclose the claimed materials in the claimed amount. BAI et al. discloses a porous ceramic atomizing core (Abstract). The core is formed from 20-40 mass% alumina, 10-20 mass% silica and 10-30 mass% silicon carbide (Claims 2 and 3) and the pore diameter is between 10 and 30 microns, so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process (See highlighted sections in the machine translation) so as to ensure the production efficiency and . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the materials in the amounts disclosed by BAI et al. and the pore size to form the porous substrate of FENG et al. so as to ensure the atomizing effect of the porous ceramic core, improve the production efficiency and the production process and ensure the capillary effect.
The courts have generally held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. MPEP 2144.05, I.
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