DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
Claims 1-4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mcevoy (US 2024/0206547).
Regarding claim 1, Mcevoy [Fig. 1-3] teaches an aerosol generating device comprising: a housing 15 comprising an accommodation space 7 in which an aerosol generating article 6 is accommodated [0041]; and an air flow path through 3 which fluid moves inside the housing, wherein a volume of the air flow path is variable [0052].
Regarding claim 2, Mcevoy teaches a deformable membrane 5 (adjuster) located inside the accommodation space, surrounding at least a portion of the air flow path, and movable to adjust a volume of the air flow path [0040, 0049; Fig. 3-6].
Regarding claim 3, Mcevoy teaches a movable portion 16 located along a circumferential direction of the air flow path and movable, within a preset movement range, in a first direction toward an inside of the air flow path or a second direction opposite to the first direction [Fig. 3-6; 0049, 0054].
Regarding claim 4, the sections of the side wall of the deformable section 5 to which movable portion 16 as shown in Fig. 3-6 is attached are interpreted as a fixed portion arranged in the circumferential direction to support the movable portion, and comprising a guide surface along which the movable portion is guided to linearly move. Alternatively, Mcevoy teaches the movable portion comprises a movable wall section [0050]. This implies that the remainder of the wall, adjacent to the movable wall section, is a fixed portion arranged in the circumferential direction to support the movable portion, and comprising a guide surface along which the movable portion is guided to linearly move.
Regarding claim 15, Mcevoy teaches an adjuster 16 movable to adjust a volume of the air flow path; and an actuator 17 configured to move the adjuster [0054].
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 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy.
Regarding claim 5, Mcevoy does not specifically teach the movable portion comprises a first movable portion and a second movable portion that is movable in the first direction with respect to the first movable portion. However, the inclusion of a second movable portion is considered a duplication of parts that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to achieve predictable results. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
Regarding claims 6-7, Mcevoy teaches an adjustment unit 5 arranged in an extension direction of the air flow path and movable, within a preset movement range, in a direction from an edge of the air flow path toward an inside [0040, 0049; Fig. 3-6]. Mcevoy does not specifically teach a second adjustment unit. However, the inclusion of a second adjustment unit is considered a duplication of parts that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to achieve predictable results. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.). Each adjustment unit would include a respective adjusting means [0051] such that the plurality of adjustment units are independently movable.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Emmett (US 2024/0130426).
Mcevoy teaches the housing comprises an opening (upper end of housing in Fig. 2-3 through which article 6 is inserted) open toward an outside at one end of the accommodation space 7. Mcevoy does not teach an adjustment plate located in the opening and movable to adjust an area of the opening. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by Emmett to allow for selectively obstructing the opening and facilitate correct positioning of the article [see closure member (plate) 22; 0023-0032; Fig. 1-4]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply include this plate in the opening of Mcevoy for the above reasons suggested by Emmett.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Williamson (US 2023/018084).
Regarding claims 9-10, Mcevoy does not teach one or more sliding portions having tubular shapes and sequentially arranged in a direction from an edge of the air flow path toward an inside, wherein the one or more sliding portions are movable in an extension direction of the air flow path within a preset movement range, wherein the one or more sliding portions have tubular shapes surrounding the air flow path. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by Williamson, for the purpose of adjusting the resistance to draw [0058-0059; Fig. 5B-5E]. As the purpose of the Mcevoy is also to adjust the resistance to draw [0052], one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the RTD adjustment element of Williamson for the RTD adjustment element of Mcevoy, and the results would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 11, Mcevoy does not teach one or more rotating portions arranged along a circumferential direction of the air flow path and one or more rotating grooves in which the one or more rotating portions are accommodated, wherein the one or more rotating portions are rotatable along the circumferential direction of the air flow path around a rotation axis within a preset movement range. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by Williamson, for the purpose of adjusting the resistance to draw [0052-0053; Fig. 2A-2F]. As the purpose of the Mcevoy is also to adjust the resistance to draw [0052], one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the RTD adjustment element of Williamson for the RTD adjustment element of Mcevoy, and the results would have been predictable.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of White (US 2024/0114957).
Mcevoy does not teach a support portion supporting one end of the aerosol generating article, wherein the support portion comprises an inclined surface to support aerosol generating articles having different thicknesses. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by White [0055] and would have been obvious to one of ordinary sill in the art to apply to the device of Mcevoy to enable the device to be used with different sized articles.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Potter (US 2026/0047609).
Mcevoy teaches a heater configured to heat the aerosol generating article accommodated in the accommodation space [0045] but does not teach the heater is movable in a direction from an outside to an inside of the accommodation space or a direction opposite to the direction. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by Potter to facilitate removal of the article and provide a larger contact surface [0035, 0071, 0078] and would have been obvious to one of ordinary sill in the art to apply to the device of Mcevoy for these reasons.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcevoy as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of England (US 2025/0113854).
Mcevoy does not teach an input unit configured to generate a signal according to a user's input so that the user adjusts a volume of the air flow path. However, this configuration is known in the art as taught by England [0143]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide such electronic actuation as an alternative to manual actuation in the device of Mcevoy to achieve predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC YAARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, 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.
/ERIC YAARY/ Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights