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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 3-8, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fernando (US 2017/0360093).
Claim 1. Fernando discloses an aerosol-generating system comprising a device 10 and a cartridge 20. The cartridge 20 has an outer cartridge housing 21 and a liquid storage portion 30 having a liquid storage housing 34 is provided inside the outer cartridge housing 21. The liquid storage portion housing is annular and an airflow passage 22 is formed through its center ([0061]-[0063]; Figures 1 and 2). A reservoir of liquid aerosol-forming substrate is held between inner and outer walls of the liquid storage housing 34 ([0064]; Figures 1 and 2). A heating element 26 (vaporizer) is supported on the spigot 32 downstream of the liquid outlet. An aerosol-forming chamber 28 is provided downstream of the heater. The aerosol-forming chamber 28 (second tube section wherein the inner wall of the second tube section comprises a streamline arcuate surface which expands away from the first tube section) is a region in which vapour from the heater can cool and condense to form aerosol before exiting the air outlet 24 into a user's mouth ([0066]-[0067]; Figure 2 annotated below showing the first and second sections of the vent tube).
PNG
media_image1.png
784
392
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 3. Fernando discloses that the inner wall of the aerosol-forming chamber 28 (second tube section) is a streamline arcuate surface which uniformly transitions to the first section (See annotated Figure 2 above).
Claim 4. Fernando discloses a third section of the vent tube extending from the aerosol-forming chamber 28 (second tube section) to the heating element 26 (vaporizer) (See annotated Figure 2 above).
Claim 5. Fernando discloses a smooth transition between the first and second tube sections and the second and third tube sections (See annotated Figure 2 above).
Claim 6. Fernando discloses that the first, second, and third tube sections are connected as one piece (Figures 1-3).
Claim 7. Fernando discloses that the first, second, and third tube sections are coaxial with each other (Figures 1-3).
Claim 8. Fernando discloses that an inner diameter of the second tube section is greater than an inner diameter of the first tube section (inner diameter of the widest part of the second tube section is wider than the inner diameter of the first tube section where the first and second tube sections meet) and the inner diameter of the first tube section where it meets the second tube section is equal to the minimum inner diameter of the second tube (See annotated Figure 2 above).
Claim 14. Fernando discloses that the third section of the vent tube extends from the aerosol-forming chamber 28 (second tube section) to the heating element 26 (vaporizer) (See annotated Figure 2 above).
Claim 20. Fernando discloses an aerosol-generating system comprising the vaporizer of claim 1 ([0061]-[0067]; Figures 1 and 2).
Claims 1, 3-7, 9, 13-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Illidge et al. (US 2022/0192259).
Claim 1. Illidge et al. discloses a smoking substitute apparatus comprising pod 3 which has a main housing that defines a tank 160z holding an e-liquid aerosol precursor. Mouthpiece 154z is formed at the upper part of the pod. Electrical contacts 156z are formed at the lower end of the pod. Wick 162z is held in a vaporization chamber. A vent tube extends between the vaporization chamber and mouthpiece as shown in annotated Figure 8A reproduced below (Figures 8A and 8B; [0192]).
PNG
media_image2.png
620
354
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 3. Illidge et al. discloses that the inner wall of the second section of the vent tube is a streamline arcuate surface which uniformly transitions to the first section (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 4. Illidge et al. discloses a third section of the vent tube extending from the second tube section to the vaporization chamber (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 5. Illidge et al. discloses a smooth transition between the second and third tube sections (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 6. Illidge et al. discloses that the first, second, and third tube sections are connected as one piece (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 7. Illidge et al. discloses that the first, second, and third tube sections are coaxial with each other (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 9. Illidge et al. discloses that the diameter of the third tube section is equal to the maximum inner diameter of the second tube section (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 13. Illidge et al. discloses that the wall thickness of the first, second, and third vent tube sections are uniform (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 14. Illidge et al. discloses that the vaporization chamber is arranged in the third tube section (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claims 15 and 16. Illidge et al. discloses that the vaporization assembly comprises a wick 162z (liquid guide member) held in a vaporization chamber wherein the ends of the liquid guide member are attached to an inner wall surface of the third tube section. A heater coil is wrapped around the wick. The central through hole of the vaporization chamber is in fluid communication with the second tube section (See annotated Figure 8A above).
Claim 17. Illidge et al. discloses pod 3 has a main housing that defines a tank 160z (liquid storage cavity) holding an e-liquid aerosol precursor (See annotated Figure 8A above wherein the tank is defined between the main housing and the vent tube).
Claim 19. Illidge et al. discloses mouthpiece 154z is formed at the upper part of the pod and hermetically blocking an upper opening of the tank 160z (liquid storage cavity) wherein the mouthpiece 154z comprises an outlet channel and the upper end of the first vent tube section is embedded in the mouthpiece 154z and in communication with the air outlet (Figures 8A and 8B; [0192]).
Claim 20. Illidge et al. discloses a smoking substitute system in the form of an e-cigarette system 110. The system 110 comprises a main body 120 of the system 110, and a smoking substitute apparatus in the form of an e-cigarette consumable (or “pod”) 150 ([0135]; See annotated Figure 8A above).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fernando (US 2017/0360093).
Claims 10-12. Fernando discloses the vaporizer of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose dimensions of the minimum inner diameter of the second tube section, maximum inner diameter of the second tube section, or the height of the second tube section. However, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A)).
Claims 10-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Illidge et al. (US 2022/0192259).
Claims 10-12. Illidge et al. discloses the vaporizer of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose dimensions of the minimum inner diameter of the second tube section, maximum inner diameter of the second tube section, or the height of the second tube section. However, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A)).
Claim 18. Illidge et al. discloses the vaporizer of claim 17 but does not explicitly disclose a capacity of the tank 160z (liquid storage cavity). However, mere changes in size or proportion are not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art (See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A)). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the size or capacity of the tank 160z (liquid storage cavity) may be scaled to have the claimed capacity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art is Fernando (US 2017/0360093) and Illidge et al. (US 2022/0192259). Neither Fernando nor Illidge et al. disclose an annular first boss, an outermost radius of an inner wall surface of the annular first boss being greater than an outermost radius of an inner wall surface of the first tube section, and wherein the first tube section is arranged between the annular first boss and the second tube section.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katherine A Will whose telephone number is (571)270-0516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00AM-6:00PM(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, Michael Wilson can be reached at (571)270-3882. 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.
/KATHERINE A WILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights