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 1-7, 16, and 21-32 are pending and are subject to this Office Action.
Claims 8-15 and 17-20 have been cancelled.
Claim 16 is withdrawn.
This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 and 21-32 in the reply filed on 5/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 16 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/18/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
New claim 23 recites wherein the tank appears to be fully illuminated when light is emitted from the first, second, and third light emitting portions. However, wherein the tank appears to be fully illuminated is not described in the instant specification, and therefore was not described in the specification at the time the application was filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 3, 23 and 28 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.
Regarding claim 3, it is unclear what is meant by “wherein the light emitting portion is interrupted”. The term 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. It is unclear whether the light emitting portion being interrupted refers to the light emitting portion having a plurality of discrete portions and thus interrupted by portions that are not light emitting, or whether the light emitting portion is interrupted is some other way. For purposes of examination, the light emitting portion being interrupted refers to the light emitting portion having a plurality of discrete portions.
Regarding claim 23, the term “appears to be fully illuminated” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “appears to be fully illuminated” 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. Appearing a certain way is relative and therefore it is unclear what the scope of the claim is. For purposes of examination, the light emitting portions emitting light would read on wherein the tank appears to be fully illuminated.
Regarding claim 28, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For purposes of examination, “such as an elongated cylinder or an elongated cuboid” are considered to be optional limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7, 21-23 and 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jabber (US2022/0400774) in view of Terry (US2020/0376207).
Regarding claim 1, Jabber discloses:
A vaporizing system (device 100, figure 1, [0040]) comprising:
a tank (housing 102) with a reservoir for holding a liquid to be vaporized (liquid solution container 210 holding liquid solution 212, [0044], figure 2a), the tank comprising a body with a proximal end for connection to a mouthpiece (the end of housing 102 where the mouthpiece 108 detachably attaches to container 210, [0042], figure 2a), a distal end (end of housing 102 containing distal housing member 103, [0044], figure 2a), and a light emitting portion extending radially outwardly from the body of the tank (transparent portions of the proximal housing member 101 that comprise the outer sidewall 217 and distal end wall 219 so that light is discernible, [0044]).
the light emitting portion for providing a visual light indication of activation of the vaping system for a user (as the light indicates battery power ([0044]), and therefore is an indication of activation).
a light produced by a light-emitting diode (illumination member 1502 such as an LED) on a printed circuit board (light circuit board 1504, a printed circuit board [0064]) to the light emitting portion (to direct light to toward the distal end wall 219 of container 210 and the light is visible from the outer sidewall 217, [0064]).
Jabber does not appear to disclose the tank having a lightpipe extending from the distal end to the light emitting portion, the lightpipe for channeling the light produced by the light-emitting diode on the printed circuit board to the light emitting portion.
Terry, directed to a vaporizing unit, teaches:
a tank (outer main shell 102) with a light emitting portion extending outwardly from the body of the tank (an end surface of the cartridge that is translucent and is illuminated by the light produced internally to the vaporizer unit, [0086]).
the tank having a lightpipe extending from the distal end to the light emitting portion (light pipe sleeve 140, figure 7, [0097]), the lightpipe for channeling a light produced by a light-emitting diode (LEDs 125-127) on a printed circuit board (PB-board 124) to the light emitting portion ([0113]).
the light emitting portion may illuminate logos, letters, or other symbols ([0093]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Jabber to have a lightpipe extending from the distal end to the light emitting portion to channel light produced from the light-emitting diode to the light emitting portion as taught by Terry, because both Jabber and Terry are directed to personal vaporizers with light produced from a light-emitted diode being directed to a light emitting portion, Terry teaches this allows the illumination of logos, letters, or other symbols, and this merely involves a known way to direct light from a light-emitting diode to a light-emitting portion of a similar vaporization device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 2, Jabber further teaches wherein the light emitting portion is continuous (as the entirety of the proximal housing member may be transparent/formed of borosilicate glass ([0045])) and disposed near the proximal end of the tank (as shown in figure 2a, proximal housing member 101 is near the proximal end of housing 102).
Regarding claim 3, Jabber further teaches wherein the light emitting portion is interrupted (as there may be portions of the proximal housing member that are transparent/formed of borosilicate glass ([0045])).
Regarding claim 6, modified Jabber further teaches:
wherein the printed circuit board is attached to the distal end of the tank (light circuit board 504 is attached to distal housing member 103, figure 2A) such that such that the lightpipe is positioned over the light-emitting diode of the printed circuit board (as Terry teaches light pipe sleeve 140 positioned over LEDS 125-127 of the PB-board 124).
Regarding claim 7, Jabber further teaches wherein the light emitting portion comprises more than one light emitting portion (at least portions, [0044]) and a first light emitting portion is disposed near the proximal end of the tank (proximal housing member 101, [0044], figure 2a).
Regarding claim 21, Jabber teaches a first light emitting portion disposed near a proximal end of the tank (transparent portions of the proximal housing member 101 that comprise the outer sidewall 217 so that light to is discernible, [0044]).
Jabber does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the light emitting portion comprises more than one light emitting portion, with a second light emitting portion disposed near the distal end of the tank.
However, Terry teaches a light emitting portion (visible logos, letters, or other symbols illuminated by a light source, [0093]) disposed near the distal end of a tank (end view of the distal end of a personal vaporizer fig. 4a, [0093] or the LOGO as shown in figs. 1-2). Terry further teaches the light source may be activated in such a manner as to simulate the glowing ash of a cigar or cigarette ([0093]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Jabber to have a light emitting portion disposed near the distal end of the tank as taught by Terry, and thus a second light emitting portion, as both Jabber and Terry are directed to vaporizers with light emitting portions, Terry teaches this simulates the glowing ash of a cigarette and/or illuminates a logo, and this merely involves incorporating a light emitting portion to a known location of a similar vaporization device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 22, Jabber teaches wherein the light emitting portion comprises more than one light emitting portion (portions that are transparent, [0044]), with a first light emitting portion disposed near a proximal end of the tank (transparent portions of the proximal housing member 101 that comprise the outer sidewall 217, [0044]) and a third light emitting portion disposed near a middle of the tank (transparent portion of proximal housing member that comprises distal end wall 219, [0044]).
Jabber does not appear to explicitly disclose a second light emitting portion disposed near the distal end of the tank.
However, Terry teaches a light emitting portion (visible logos, letters, or other symbols illuminated by a light source, [0093]) disposed near the distal end of a tank (end view of the distal end of a personal vaporizer fig. 4a, [0093] or the LOGO as shown in figs. 1-2). Terry further teaches the light source may be activated in such a manner as to simulate the glowing ash of a cigar or cigarette ([0093]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Jabber to have a light emitting portion disposed near the distal end of the tank as taught by Terry, and thus a second light emitting portion, as both Jabber and Terry are directed to vaporizers with light emitting portions, Terry teaches this simulates the glowing ash of a cigarette and/or illuminates a logo, and this merely involves incorporating a light emitting portion to a known location of a similar vaporization device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 23, Jabber further teaches wherein the tank appears to be fully illuminated when light is emitted from the first, second, and third light emitting portions (as the level of liquid solution as well as the color of light from illumination member 1502 are discernable through portions of the proximal housing member to a person of normal, unaided vision, and it may be the entirety of proximal housing member 101, [0044]).
Regarding claim 28, modified Jabber further teaches wherein the lightpipe comprises an elongated shape (light pipe sleeve 140 is an elongated cylinder as show in in fig. 62 of Terry).
Regarding claim 29, Jabber further teaches wherein the tank further comprises at least one light diffusion portion in association with the proximal end of the tank, the at least one light diffusion portion for directing light to the light emitting portion of the tank (the portions of the proximal housing member 101 that are not transparent, [0044]).
Regarding claim 31, modified Jabber further teaches wherein the lightpipe is concealed by the tank (as the portions of the housing member that are not transparent ([0045]) would conceal the light pipe).
Regarding claim 32, modified Jabber further teaches wherein the lightpipe is not concealed by the tank (as at least portions of the housing member 101 are transparent ([0045]), and therefore the lightpipe of modified Jabber would not be concealed through the transparent portions).
Claim(s) 4-5 and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jabber (US2022/0400774) in view of Terry (US2020/0376207 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Benyezzar (US2022/0273046).
Regarding claims 4-5, Jabber does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the light is produced by the light-emitting diode upon activation of the vaporizing system.
Benyezzar, directed to a system for controlling a smoking substitution device, teaches a smoking substitute device 110 with a light 126 that may be configured to illuminate when the smoking substitute device 110 is activated ([0140]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the light produced by the light-emitting diode of Jabber to illuminate when the vaporizing system is activated as taught by Benyezzar, because both Jabber and Benyezzar are directed to vaporization devices with lights, and this merely involves applying a known technique (i.e. light illuminated when a device is activated) to a known device (i.e. vaporizing device) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
This further reads on claim 5 wherein the light is produced by the light-emitting diode substantially simultaneously with activation of the vaporizing system.
Regarding claim 24, Jabber further teaches wherein the liquid to be vaporized that is stored in the reservoir of the tank acts as a diffuser for the light produced by the LED (the light from the illumination member 1502 shines through the liquid solution 212 in the fluid chamber 213 ([0064]), and therefore the liquid acts as a diffuser).
Jabber does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein this occurs upon activation of the vaping system.
Benyezzar, directed to a system for controlling a smoking substitution device, teaches a smoking substitute device 110 with a light 126 that may be configured to illuminate when the smoking substitute device 110 is activated ([0140]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the light produced by the light-emitting diode of Jabber to illuminate when the vaporizing system is activated as taught by Benyezzar, because both Jabber and Benyezzar are directed to vaporization devices with lights, and this merely involves applying a known technique (i.e. light illuminated when a device is activated) to a known device (i.e. vaporizing device) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 25, modified Jabber further teaches:
wherein the reservoir is positioned adjacent the light-emitting diode such that light emitted from the light-emitting diode passes through the reservoir and the liquid to be vaporized stored therein as well as through the lightpipe (as light from the illumination member 1502 may further produce an appealing visual effect by shining through and illuminating liquid solution 212 present in the fluid chamber 213, [0064]).
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jabber (US2022/0400774) in view of Terry (US2020/0376207 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rushforth (WO2022/189766A1).
Regarding claim 26, modified Jabber does not appear to disclose wherein the lightpipe comprises more than one lightpipe, each lightpipe extending from the distal end to a respective light emitting portion and for channeling the light produced by the light-emitting diode on the printed circuit board to the light emitting portion.
Rushforth, directed to aerosol provision systems, teaches:
wherein the lightpipe comprises more than one lightpipe (a plurality of light guides / pipes integrally former with each other, page 30, last paragraph).
By providing a separate illuminating element such as one or more LEDs in optical communication with each discrete light-transmitting regions a controller 22 can independently illuminate each discrete light transmitting region to provide different display patterns representing usage information (page 31, first paragraph).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the lightpipe of modified Jabber to comprise more than one lightpipe, each having a separate LED in optical communication with a discrete light-transmitting region as taught by Rushforth, because both modified Jabber and Rushforth are directed to vaporization devices with lightpipes for transmitting light from an LED to a light emitting region, Rushforth teaches this allows a controller to independently illuminate each region to provide different display patterns, and this merely involves incorporating a know way to configure a lightpipe to a similar vaporization device to yield predictable results.
As the lightpipe of Jabber extends from the distal end to a respective light emitting portion and for channeling the light produced by the light-emitting diode on the printed circuit board to the light emitting portion as discussed with claim 1 previously, modified Jabber having more than one lightpipe would yield each lightpipe to do the same.
Regarding claim 27, Rushforth further teaches the lightpipes transmit light to a plurality of display regions 281 to 288 (page 25, second paragraph) some of which are disposed near a front of the tank and some of which are disposed near a back of the tank (as shown in figure 4), and therefore modified Jabber would have a first lightpipe is disposed near a front of the tank and a second lightpipe is disposed near a back of the tank.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jabber (US2022/0400774) in view of Terry (US2020/0376207 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bell (US2023/0024525).
Regarding claim 30, Jabber does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one light diffusion portion comprises one or more of a frosted portion, an opaque portion, a reflective potion, a transparent portion, or a translucent portion.
However, Bell, directed to an electronic aerosol provision system, teaches:
A cartridge made of an opaque material that physically prevents light ([0061] as the cartridge physically prevents light from reaching a light sensor particularly if made of an opaque material).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the portions of the at least one light diffusion portion of Jabber to be opaque as taught by Bell, because both Jabber and Bell are directed to vaporization devices with cartridges, Jabber teaches there are portions of the cartridge that are not transparent and Bell teaches a cartridge material that prevents light, and this merely involves incorporating a known type of non-transparent material to a similar cartridge to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicole A Szumigalski whose telephone number is (703)756-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00 - 4:30 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.
/N.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights