Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/408,241

INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AEROSOL GENERATION SYSTEM, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 09, 2024
Examiner
CORUM JR, WILLIAM A
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Japan Tobacco Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
350 granted / 464 resolved
+17.4% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
476
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 464 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/10/26 has been entered. Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 1 and 13 have been amended. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 13 have been considered and are accepted. The Examiner finds that applicant's amendments do have support in applicant's as-filed disclosure. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 02/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejections of the claims under the prior art have been fully considered. However, those arguments are rendered moot in light of the new grounds of rejection outlined below, which were necessitated by the applicant's amendment. 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 1-3, 5-8, 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sur et al. (US Pub. 20200128877A1) and further in view of Ferrari et al. (US Pub. 20230346037 A1). Sur discloses the following limitations: (currently amended) An information processing method comprising: acquiring biometric information of a user (para. 9- to enroll the user for biometric authentication, the microprocessor in the enrollment mode configured to receive a baseline electrocardiogram signal for the user from the heart rate monitor, and generate the corresponding identifier from the baseline electrocardiogram signal.); acquiring a predetermined request from the user (para. 79- The control component may then be configured to control operation of at least one functional element of the aerosol delivery device 100 or the control body 102 based on the biometric authentication, such as to alter a locked state of the aerosol delivery device or its control body. In this regard, the aerosol delivery device or its control body may be locked whereby the device/control body or more specifically one or more of its components (e.g., atomizer) may be disabled, and the control component may unlock the device/control body when the user is authenticated) ; performing biometric authentication, based on a comparison of the biometric information acquired before the predetermined request is acquired (para. 11- perform the biometric authentication includes the microprocessor further configured to at least access corresponding identifiers of an authorized user, the corresponding identifiers formed from respective baseline electrocardiogram signals for the authorized user; perform a comparison of the identifier with the corresponding identifiers; and based on the comparison, verify the user is the authorized user when the identifier and any of the corresponding identifiers match or have at least a threshold similarity.); and controlling an operation of an inhaler device in accordance with a result of the biometric authentication (para. 18- perform a biometric authentication of the user based on the identifier, and wherein the microprocessor further configured to control operation of the at least one functional element includes the microprocessor further configured to alter a locked state of the control body based on the biometric authentication), the inhaler device being configured to generate an aerosol to be inhaled by the user, (para. 36) wherein the acquiring of the biometric information includes repeatedly acquiring the biometric information at a predetermined cycle before acquiring the predetermined request.(para. 83-84- re-enrollment of biometric information occurring at intervals) Sur does not specifically teach that the comparison is performed with biometric information registered in the past. However, in the related art of aerosol generating devices which perform biometric authentication, Ferrari teaches where the comparison is performed with biometric information registered in the past. (see para. 86). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use this teaching of Ferrari with the disclosure of Sur as a known way to have reference biometric features available that were provide during a set-up procedure to be used during the initial authentication processes. 2. (previously presented) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the performing of the biometric authentication includes performing the biometric authentication, based on the biometric information that is acquired last among pieces of biometric information obtained by repeatedly acquiring the biometric information. (para. 10- force re-enrollment of the user, including the microprocessor further configured to repeat the enrollment mode in which the microprocessor is configured to receive an updated baseline electrocardiogram signal for the user, and update the corresponding identifier from the updated baseline electrocardiogram signal.) 3. (previously presented) The information processing method according to claim 2, wherein the performing of the biometric authentication includes performing the biometric authentication, based on the biometric information that is acquired last among the pieces of biometric information obtained by repeatedly acquiring the biometric information and that is acquired within a predetermined time before a timing at which the predetermined request is acquired. (para. 83-84) 5. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the biometric authentication is performed based on a plurality of types of the biometric information. (para. 85, 96) 6. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the controlling of the operation of the inhaler device includes: permitting or prohibiting execution of a process of generating the aerosol. (para. 80- the control component may then unlock the aerosol delivery device 100 or its control body 102 when the user is verified as the authorized user.) 7. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined request is acquired by the inhaler device. (para. 79) 8. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined request is acquired by a terminal device associated with the inhaler device in advance. (para. 95) 10. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the biometric authentication is performed by the inhaler device. (para. 79) 11. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the biometric authentication is performed by a terminal device associated with the inhaler device in advance. (para. 92) 12. (Original) The information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the biometric authentication is performed by a server located on the Internet. (para. 92-93, 96) Regarding claim 13, it is rejected as applied to claim 1 because a corresponding system would have been necessitated to carry forth the method steps of claim 1. The applied prior art also discloses the corresponding architecture. (Figs. 2-3) 14. (Original) The aerosol generation system according to claim 13, wherein the inhaler device is configured to generate the aerosol by using a substrate including at least one of an aerosol source from which the aerosol is generated or a flavor source from which a flavor to be imparted to the aerosol is generated, and the aerosol generation system includes the substrate. (paras. 38, 40) Regarding claim 15, it merely recites a computer program that when executed, performs the functional steps of method claim 1, and thus, rejected for the same rationale. 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. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sur and Ferrari and further in view of Lo et al. (US Pub. 20150172285). Regarding claim 4, Sur discloses in the information processing method according to claim 2, further comprising: when the biometric information that is acquired last among the pieces of biometric information obtained by repeatedly acquiring the biometric information is acquired outside a predetermined time from a timing at which the predetermined request is acquired, newly acquiring the biometric information (para. 83-84) Sur does not specifically teach performing the biometric authentication, based on the biometric information that is newly acquired, instead of performing the biometric authentication based on the biometric information acquired before the predetermined request is acquired. However, in the related art of biometric authentication, Lo teaches performing the biometric authentication, based on the biometric information that is newly acquired, instead of performing the biometric authentication based on the biometric information acquired before the predetermined request is acquired (see abstract, paras. 2,3,18). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use this teaching of Lo with the disclosure of Lo as a known way to account for user changes over time when performing biometric authentication on the user as suggested by Lo. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable the combination of Sur and Ferrari further in view of Cali et al. (US Pub. 20230385392 A1). Regarding claim 9, Sur does not specifically teach that the biometric information is acquired by a wearable terminal worn by the user. However, in the related art of aerosol devices using biometric information, Cali teaches that the biometric information is acquired by a wearable terminal worn by the user (see paras. 83-84). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use this teaching of Cali with the disclosure of Sur as a known alternative way of collecting biometric information to be used in authenticating a user of an aerosol device. Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sur and Ferrari and further in view of Cartaya (US Pub. 20170063850 A1). Regarding claims 16-17, Sur does not specifically teach wherein the acquiring biometric information of a user includes a time at which the biometric information was acquired, wherein the performing biometric authentication comprises comparing a time of the request with the time at which the biometric information was acquired. However, in the related art of performing biometric authentication, Cartaya teaches the acquiring biometric information of a user includes a time at which the biometric information was acquired, wherein the performing biometric authentication comprises comparing a time of the request with the time at which the biometric information was acquired. (see Fig. 20 and associated paras., paras. 39, 46). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use this teaching of Cartaya with the disclosure of Sur as a known way to ensure that stale enrolled biometrics are not used in the biometric authentication procedure as suggested by Cartaya. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM A CORUM JR whose telephone number is (303)297-4234. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 8 AM - 5 PM 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571)272-6798. 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. /WILLIAM A CORUM JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 09, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 10, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Feb 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 19, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602590
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM THAT COLLECTS INTERACTIVE PICTURE DATA FOR BUILDING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE DATA AND ANALYZES CORRELATION BETWEEN ART COMPETENCY AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596821
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REMOTELY PROVISIONING FACIAL RECOGNITION DATA TO HETEROGENEOUS COMPUTING PLATFORMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12579241
SERVER-BASED BIOMETRIC AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM FOR PARTNER BUSINESSES, SERVER DEVICE, AUTHENTICATION TERMINAL, CONTROL METHOD OF SERVER DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12578879
ENCRYPTION TECHNIQUE ROTATION USING INPUT/OUTPUT OPERATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567959
Secure Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) Reseeding
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.8%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 464 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month