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 Claims
Claims 1-15 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the labels for controller and battery are reversed in Figure 2. The controller is listed as #140 in the specification, and the battery is listed as #130. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a second member” in claim 4.
The term uses generic placeholders (“second member”) coupled with functional language (“arranged between the passage structure and the receiving portion and configured to prevent air moved through the airflow passage from leaking into spaces other than an inside of the receiving portion”) without citing sufficient structure to achieve the function.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. As per the specification, the second member is being interpreted as a seal element.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and further in view of US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023).
Regarding claim 1 Kim et al. 2022a teaches an aerosol generating device comprising housing and an air inlet (figures 3A & 5A - housing #100, air inlet #300), with a heater module arranged inside the housing and configured to heat an aerosol generating article (paragraph 10; figure 2 – housing #100, heater #200, aerosol generating article #20). Kim et al. 2022a further teaches a chamber for insertion of an aerosol generating article (paragraph 9, figure 2 – receiving portion #300, aerosol generating article #20, heater #200), a coil for generating magnetic fields (paragraph 16, Figures 3A & 5A – coil #210), and a pressure sensor configured to detect pressure in the receiving chamber and that is operationally connected to a controller (paragraph 81, Figures 2, 3A, 3B, 5A, 5B – pressure sensor #500).
Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a passage structure arranged on one side of the receiving portion and comprising one airflow passage configured to receive external air through the air inlet and transfer the received external air to the receiving portion. Lee teaches an aerosol generating device in which outside air may flow into the inflow passage through an inflow hole and then may move or flow to the inside of the aerosol generating device along the inflow passage, which is positioned on one side of the receiving space (paragraph 103; Figure 4 air inflow passage #1310, receiving space #1320).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the air intake pathway of Kim et al. 2022a with the air passageway of Lee because Lee indicates that the addition of an air intake pathway allows for fluid communication between outside air and the atomizer (paragraph 22). Lee further teaches that the wall of the inflow passage may be used to form a Coanda surface which helps to guide air towards the discharge passage, enhancing the flow of air (paragraph 143; figures 6A & B, 7 & 8 #1430), and helps reduce agglomeration of aerosols on the vaporization space (paragraph 137). Additionally, an inflow passage allows for a convenient placement for a sensor which can control device heating based on a user’s inhalation (paragraph 182; figure 10 #1900)
Regarding claim 5, figures 3A & 5A of Kim et al. 2022a detail a schematic of the aerosol generating device, and show the flow of air through the device. Air enters the device through an air inlet (figure 1, #100h) and flows down through the first chamber which forms a narrow passageway when an aerosol generating article is inserted (figures 2, 3A & 3B, 5A & 5B #300). During inhalation, air will be pulled downward below the cigarette or aerosol generating article, and pulled upward into the aerosol generating article through a chamber described in claim 5 as having a diameter greater than the inner [AltContent: textbox (Figure 1 - Figure 5A from WO 2022/260369. Arrow pointing to chamber wider than airflow passage, but thinner than receiving space.)]diameter of the airflow passage, but smaller than the diameter of the
PNG
media_image1.png
357
388
media_image1.png
Greyscale
receiving space.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2022/0015430 A1 (Gill and Brvenik 2021).
Regarding claim 2, Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach magnetic coils generating a magnetic field crossing a direction in which the receiving portion extends. Gill teaches an aerosol generating device with coils arranged on the periphery of the receiving portion that generate a magnetic field perpendicular to the aerosol generating article and receiving portion (paragraph 67; Figures 1 & 4 – magnetic coils #2, aerosol generating article #20, magnetic field lines #6, heating/receiving space #10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol generating device of Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee with the perpendicular magnetic field of Gill because Gill indicates that with the receiving portion being substantially perpendicular to the magnetic field lines, this allows for easy manufacture of the aerosol generating device and good electromagnetic coupling between the field and susceptors (paragraph 7). Furthermore, the design allows for efficient heating of an aerosol generating article (paragraph 15).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2017/0347713 A1 (Robinson et al. 2017).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a sealing member arranged between the air inlet and the passage structure configured to prevent air received through the air inlet from leaking into spaces other than the inside of the airflow passage. Robinson teaches an aerosol generating device with a mouthpiece which comprises a seal surrounding the air inlet (paragraph 105; figure 4 – air inlet seal #37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol generating device described by Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee with the air inlet seal of Robinson because, Robinson states that the seal of the mouthpiece prevents air from bypassing the chamber of the cartridge when travelling from the recess to the channel of the mouthpiece (paragraph 155), thus preventing air from leaking into other spaces throughout the aerosol generating device.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2014/0360514 A1 (Zhu 2014).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teach an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a seal member arranged between the passage structure and the receiving portion configured to prevent air moved through the airflow passage from leaking into spaces other than the receiving portion. Zhu teaches an atomizer containing a cigarette holder assembly which includes a cigarette holder, and a seal gasket fixedly mounted at a bottom portion of the cigarette holder (paragraph 32; figures 2 & 4 cigarette holder #101, seal gasket #102).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol generating device described by Kim modified by Lee with the seal location of Zhu because, Zhu indicates that the seal gasket allows the bottom portion of the cigarette holder assembly to be hermetically connected to the top portion of the atomization assembly (paragraph 37), thus preventing leakage of airflow throughout the device.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2023/0012249 A1 (Qi et al. 2023).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a heater module that comprises an insulation pipe surrounding the receiving portion and comprising a metal material. Qi teaches an aerosol generating article containing a heat insulation mechanism which includes an accommodation space configured to accommodate the magnetic field generator and the susceptor, a heat insulator, which includes a tube wall, and a central region defined by the tube wall, wherein the tube wall contains a metal or an alloy (paragraph 17; Figure 3 – insulation pipe #60, accommodation space #511).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol generating device described by Kim modified by Lee with the metal insulation pipe of Qi because, Qi indicates that in order to enable the heat insulation equipment to have a strength to withstand vacuumizing under a low thickness, generally the heat insulation equipment is made of metal materials having a proper strength (paragraph 3).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/60369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of WO 2021/246644 A1 (Kim et al. 2021), as evidenced by WO 2017/051011 A1 (Reevell 2017).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teach an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a circuit board comprising an inductance and capacitance sensor configured to generate a signal about an amount of change in inductance or capacitance inside the receiving portion or a first groove in an outer peripheral surface of the receiving portion with the capacitance sensor coupled to the first groove and in contact with the receiving portion. Kim et al. 2021 teaches an aerosol generating device which includes a printed circuit board (paragraph 117; figure 8 #11). Kim et al. 2021 further teaches a sensor which measures the amount of change in capacitance of a capacitance channel and the amount of change of frequency in an inductance channel that occur when a cigarette is inserted into the insertion space, which can then be utilized for automatic activation of the device (paragraph 160; Figure 12 – receiving portion #1210, heater #1230, inductance channel #1271 & #1275, capacitance channel #1273 & #1275).
Kim et al. 2021 further teaches that the inductance and capacitance channels are arranged to surround an outer circumferential boundary of the cigarette insertion space (paragraph 27; figure 12 – cigarette insertion space #1210, heater #1230, capacitance channels #1273 & 1277). The capacitance channel is being interpreted as the groove since the channels are described as having a hollow therein (paragraph 126) and contain boundary points (paragraph 159; figure 12 - #1270). Additionally, the channel is configured to output a signal indicating the capacitance that varies depending on an object inserted into the cigarette insertion space between two electrodes arranged at respective ends of the cigarette insertion space (paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generating device described by Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee with the capacitance and inductance sensors of Kim et al. 2021 as evidenced by Reevell 2017. Reevell indicates that a capacitance sensor that measures changes in capacitance in the aerosol generating article allows the aerosol generating device to cease heating of the aerosol generating article when a depletion of one or more volatile compounds from the aerosol-generating substrate occurs, which can help prevent a diminished smoking experience, or accidental combustion of the aerosol generating substrate. And allows for the use of a heating cycle of length appropriate to the aerosol-generating substrate allowing for more efficient device power usage (column 2 lines 32-26, column 3 lines 1-7).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a) in view of US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) and WO 2021/246644 A1 (Kim et al. 2021) as applied to claim 8, and further in view of US 2018/0070639 A1 (Chen et al. 2018).
Kim et al. 2022 modified by Lee and Kim et al. 2021 teach an aerosol generating device containing an inductance and capacitance sensor, with the capacitance sensor coupled to a groove in contact with the receiving portion (paragraph 33). Kim et al. 2022a, Kim et al. 2021 and Lee do not teach one or more coils arranged along the outer peripheral surface of the receiving portion, and a groove located between the first and second coil. Chen et al. 2017 teaches an aerosol generating device including a plurality of electromagnetic induction coils being disposed on the periphery of the induction heater, with the receiving portion being inside the induction heater (paragraph 10; figure 3 #221 coils, #2231 receiving portion; figure 2 – coils #121, storage chamber #123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generation device of Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee and Kim et al. 2021 with a plurality of induction coils on the outer peripheral surface of the heater and receiving portion found in Chen, because Chen indicates having two electromagnetic induction coils that are employed and symmetrically disposed may more uniformly heat the tobacco materials in the induction heater (paragraph 29). Furthermore, with multiple coils, each coil may be independently connected to a circuit such that each coil is independently controlling heat generation. Tobacco materials in the storage chamber may then be heated segmentally according to actual needs (paragraph 30). In order for the capacitance sensor to be near the receiving portion and sense capacitance changes therein, it would be obvious to place to capacitance sensor groove between the two induction coils. This would also reduce the likelihood of heat damaging the capacitance sensors/electrodes.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/60369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2021/0030996 A1 (Simpson et al 2021).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach a second groove recessed in a region of an outer peripheral surface of the receiving portion, and a heater module further comprising a temperature sensor coupled to the second groove of the receiving portion, in contact with the receiving portion, and generating a signal about a temperature of the aerosol generating article. Simpson teaches a first temperature sensor placed in the preformed notch of the first knotted wire filter that detects the temperature close to the heating elements. And a second temperature sensor attached to the main oven tube and detects the temperature close to the aerosol generating article (paragraph 43; figures 2C & 2D, temperature sensors #215 & #216).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generating device of Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee with the temperature sensor and locations of Simpson, because Simpson indicates that temperatures of the oven and aerosol generating article can vary widely, independently of the amount of power supplied. Being able to sense the oven temperature and temperature fluctuations allows the device to vary the power sent to the heating elements improving device efficiency. And this can help limit the maximum temperature aerosol generating articles are exposed to (paragraph 18). Placing the temperature sensor in a notch in the receiving portion or nearby the aerosol generating article allows for more precise measurements of temperature.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 10945466 B2 (Mironov et al 2021), as evidenced by US 2020/0214350 A1 (Courbat et al. 2020).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 1. Kim et al. 2022a does not teach an aerosol generating article comprising one or more thin films that generate heat by a magnetic field, wherein one or more coils apply a magnetic field to one or more thin films of the aerosol generating article in the receiving portion. Or an aerosol generating system wherein at least some of the one or more thin films are arranged at positions corresponding to positions of the one or more of the coils. Mironov teaches an aerosol generating article comprising a susceptor (column 1 lines 15-20). The susceptor is a thin film 10-200µM in diameter (column 5 lines 54-60). The susceptor is heated with an alternating electromagnetic field (column 3 lines 14-20). Additionally, the inductor may comprise one or more coils that generate the fluctuating magnetic field (column 13 lines 54-57). Figure 5 shows inductor #210, susceptor #4, and aerosol forming substrate #20 all in close proximity of each other.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generating device of Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee with thin film susceptors arranged in positions corresponding to induction coils found in Mironov because Courbat indicates that by providing a plurality of elongate susceptor elements spaced apart in a transverse direction of the chamber, more even heating of an aerosol-generating article may be achieved across the width of the aerosol-generating article (paragraph 18), thus increasing energy efficiency of the aerosol generating article.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/260369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022) in view of US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023) and US 10945466 B2 (Mironov et al. 2021) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of US 20220015430 A1 (Gill and Brvenik 2021).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee and Mironov teach an aerosol generating device as described in claim 11; however they do not teach a magnetic field generated by coils that is applied in a direction crossing a direction in which one surface of the one or more thin films extend. Gill teaches coils that generate a magnetic field perpendicular to the aerosol generating article (and susceptors) and receiving portion (paragraph 67; Figures 1 & 4 – magnetic coils #2, aerosol generating article #20, magnetic field lines #6, heating/receiving space #10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol generating device of Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee and Mironov with the perpendicular magnetic field of Gill, because Gill indicates that with the receiving portion being substantially perpendicular to the magnetic field lines this allows for easy manufacture of the aerosol generating device and good electromagnetic coupling between the field and susceptors (paragraph 7). Furthermore, the design allows for efficient heating of an aerosol generating article (paragraph 15).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/60369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a), and in view of US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023), and US 10945466 B2 (Mironov et al. 2021) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of KR 2022/0069614 A (Kim et al. 2022b).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee and Mironov teaches an aerosol generating device as described in claim 11. However, they do not teach an aerosol generating article comprising an identification mark arranged on at least one region of an outer peripheral surface of the aerosol generating article and configured to provide visual information, and a heater module comprising an article detection sensor configured to sense the visual information provided by the identification mark and generate a signal according to the sensed visual information. Kim et al. 2022b teaches an identification mark which indicates information or type of the aerosol-generating article and may be printed or affixed to the wrapper of the aerosol generating article (paragraph 71 of translation; figures 7-9, 11-17 identification indicia #250 & 251). Kim et al. 2022b further teaches a sensor that recognizes an identification mark on an aerosol-generating article (paragraph 72 of translation), and a processor which controls the heater based on the identification mark recognized by the sensor (paragraph 76 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generating device taught by Kim et al. 2022a and modified by Lee and Mironov with the identification mark and sensor technologies of Kim et al. 2022b with reasonable expectation of success because Kim et al. 2022b indicates that specific heating methods can be stored in the device memory corresponding to pre-defined identification marks. This allows for optimized heating methods to be used on different aerosol generating articles such as heating to the optimum temperature, altering power output to the heater, avoiding use of incorrect articles, or not heating spent articles allowing for improved efficiency and function of the aerosol generating device (paragraphs 95-103 of translation).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2022/60369 A1 (Kim et al. 2022a) in view of US 20230033764 A1 (Lee et al. 2023), US 10945466 B2 (Mironov, et al. 2021), and KR 20220069614 A (Kim et al. 2022b) for claim 14 and further in view of US 20210007396 A1 (Bellusci et al. 2021).
Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee, Mironov and Kim et al. 2022b teaches an aerosol generating device with thin film susceptors, utilizing a sensor for detecting information about aerosol generating articles used in the device as described in claim 14. These sources do not teach an optical window arranged in a space between the aerosol generating article and the article detection sensor. Bellusci teaches an optical window overlying an article detection sensor (paragraphs 96 and 104-106; figure 1 – optical window #30, light sensor #26, receiving space #32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the aerosol generating device with thin film susceptors and an article detection sensor taught by Kim et al. 2022a modified by Lee, Mironov and Kim et al. 2022b with the optical window of Bellusci et al. 2021 as optical sensors are delicate devices and an optical window provides protection from unwanted mechanical forces, dust and debris.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brendon Juengst whose telephone number is (571)272-8750. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
/BRENDON THOMAS JUENGST/ Examiner, Art Unit 1749
/KATELYN W SMITH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights