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 § 112
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 1-11 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.
Claim 1 recites “through both ends”. This is indefinite because the statement lacks antecedent basis. The insulating sleeve was never previously identified as having two ends.
Claims 2-11 are rejected for depending from claim 1.
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, 2 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AN (US 2020/0221773) in view of YAMADA et al. (US 2024/0081408) having the earliest effective filing date of 7/21/2021.
With respect to claim 1¸ AN discloses an aerosol generating device (abstract; title) that generates a vapor (Paragraphs [0001]) comprising a plurality of segments, 410, that together form a column in a longitudinal direction (e.g., axial direction, figure 5B ) (Paragraphs [0075]-[0089]; Figures 4-7). Each segment comprises a conductive track, 420, (e.g., electrode) (Paragraphs [0087]-[0088]). The segments are assembled into a cylinder (e.g., column) (Paragraph [0076]) and held in place by an elastic member, 430, (Paragraphs [0075], [0091], [0092]). Thus, the segments with their respective electrodes implicitly represent an electrode column. As seen in Figures 6A, 6B and 7 of AN, the elastic member comprises a side opening provided in a side wall of the elastic member, the side opening through an inner side and an outer side of the side wall and through a top end and bottom end of the elastic member. Moreover, as seen in figures 6A and 7, the elastic member fits around the electrode column and therefore implicitly represents the claimed sleeve.
AN further discloses a base, 720 and 725, in which the electrode column is inserted (Figures 9A, 9B and 7; Paragraphs [0100]-[0110]). When assembled (See figure 7), the sleeve is between the electrode column and a portion (e.g., 725) of the base.
AN does not explicitly disclose that the sleeve is electrically insulating.
YAMADA et al. discloses an aerosol generating system (Abstract; Title). Comprising a heater having parts that are assembled and held together by an elastic member, 41, 42 and 43 (Figure 4; Paragraphs [0066], [0073]). The elastic sleeve is formed of electrically insulating material (Paragraph [0073]) in order to prevent short circuiting.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the sleeve of AN of an insulating material, as taught by YAMADA et al. so that the heater can be prevented from short circuiting.
With respect to claim 2, as seen in figures 6B of AN, the side opening of 430 and the electrode column extend in the same plane and in figure 7 are concentrically aligned and thus implicitly have the same axis. Thus, the extension of the opening is implicitly parallel to the extension direction of the sleeve.
With respect to claim 11, AN discloses an electronic vaporization device comprising the vaporizer as outlined in the rejection of claim 1 (Paragraphs [0042], [0047]; figure 6A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 are 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, as well as addressing the indefinite issues of claim 1.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 3, the elastic sleeves of the cited art is not taught to have vent passage(s) therein, in addition to the side opening.
With respect to claim 7, the electrode column of the cited art does not have the claimed flange, per se.
With respect to claim 8, the heater assembly disclosed by AN and YAMADA et al. represent the heater cores of their respective devices. Thus, there isn’t an additional heater core, as would be required by claim 8. Moreover, given that the device of AN and YAMADA et al. are the heater cores, they would not be placed into a lower end of a shell so that one pole thereof is electrically connected to the electrode column, per se.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
LIU (US 2016/0044965) discloses an insulation ring, 2062, (Paragraph [0048]) that fits around an electrode column , 2063 (Paragraph [0049]) and both are fit into a base, 2061 (Paragraph [0054]) such that the insulation ring is between the base and column (Figure 4). This structure is then placed into a bottom end of a shell, 200, (Paragraphs [0033]-[0035]) having a vent tube, 201, 501 and 502 (Paragraph [0035] and [0073]-[0078]; Figure 2) having a vaporization core therein, 207 (Paragraph [0077]). One electrode of the heater 2072 (Paragraph [0080]) is electrically connected to the electrode column (Figure 4).
The overall structure of the claimed invention is generally known, as taught by LIU. However, structural details on the insulation ring, like those of LIU, are generally lacking. As such, the claimed side opening in the insulating ring isn’t disclosed, per se when considering the sleeve in context of a structure disclosed by LIU and others of similar design.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX B EFTA whose telephone number is (313)446-6548. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM EST M-F.
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 Tucker can be reached at 571-272-1095. 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.
/ALEX B EFTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745