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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to applicant’s amendments and arguments filed on 4/22/2026. Claims 1-14 are pending for examination.
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.
Claims 1-3, 11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (CN 210382651, with English Machine Translation Provided) in view of Tsutomu (JP H08-135888 – of Record).
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a flavor inhaler capable of heating a consumable (Para. [0004]) comprising a containing unit that accommodates the consumable (Fig. 1, empty space in middle), a heating element that heats the consumable (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 1), a heat insulating member (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 2) that has a height that less than the height of the containing unit. However, Han does not teach how the insulated member is attached to the container and heater.
In an analogous art, Tsutomu teaches a cylindrical vessel (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 5) with a tape member (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 2) that is attached to both the vessel and a heat insulating member (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 1). The tape can be divided into a first and a second part that are attached to each other where the ends of both parts (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 21) extend beyond the heat insulating member.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Han with Tsutomu in order to attach the heat insulating member to the containing unit with tape. This modification will make it easy to attach heat insulating materials (Tsutomu; Para. [0017]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Han teaches that the first tape member has a fixing part (Tsutomu; Fig. 2a, Ref. num. 21) that extends past the insulating member and attaches to the vessel being insulated.
Regarding claim 3, modified Han teaches that the first tape member (Tsutomu; Fig, 2a, Ref. Num. 2) is attached to the heat insulating member (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 1) throughout the entire length.
Regarding claim 11, modified Han teaches that in both x and y axis directions the tape (Tsutomu; Fig, 2a, Ref. Num. 2) is longer than 50% the length of the insulating member (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Han teaches that the containing unit has an opening which the consumable is inserted (Fig. 1, top of empty space in middle) and a bottom (Fig. 1, bottom of empty space in middle) and that the heating element (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 1) is disposed closer to the opening than to the bottom.
Regarding claim 14, Han teaches that the heating element (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 1) heats the consumable from the outer side.
Claims 4, 5, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (CN 210382651) in view of Tsutomu (JP H08-135888) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hupkes et al. (US 2023/0165309 A1 – of Record).
Regarding claim 4, modified Han does not teach how many times the heat insulating member is wound around the containing unit.
In an analogous art, Hupkes teaches a containment unit that accommodates the consumable (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 10) with an insulating member (Fig. 3B, Ref. Num. 20) wound around it for at least one turn and preferably multiple turns (Para. [0044]) around the outer circumference of the containing unit.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Han in order to wrap the insulating member around the containment unit at least one turn and preferably multiple. This modification will improve the thermal insulation (Hupkes; Para. [0044]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Han teaches that the heat insulating member is wrapped around the containment unit for at least one turn and preferably multiple turns (Hupkes; Para. [0044]) around the outer circumference of the containment unit, which overlaps with the claimed times of two or more which is a prima facie case of obviousness.
Regarding claim 12, modified Han does not teach that the insulating member is made out of fibrous material.
In an analogous art, Hupkes teaches a containment unit that accommodates the consumable (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 10) with an insulating member (Fig. 3B, Ref. Num. 20) where the insulating material is made out of ceramic fiber (Para. [0044])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Han with Hupkes to make the insulating material out of fibrous material. This modification will improve thermal insulation (Hupkes; Para. [0044]).
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (CN 210382651) in view of Tsutomu (JP H08-135888) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tabasso et al. (US 2019/0320717 A1 – of Record).
Regarding claim 6, Han does not teach a thermistor.
In an analogous art, Tabasso teaches a flavor inhaler (Fig. 1) with a thermistor (Para. [0104]) where the thermistor is provided on the outside of the heating unit and insulating material (Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 210).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Han with Tabasso to provide a thermistor outside the insulating material and the tape. This modification will be able to sense the ambient temperature to prevent thermal overshoot (Tabasso; Para. [0109]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Han teaches that the thermistor (Tabasso; Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 210) is located radially outside of the heating element (Tabasso; Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 140).
Regarding claim 8, modified Han teaches that containing unit has a cylindrical side wall (Fig. 2b) that has a flat outer surface where the thermistor is located outside the flat outer surface (Tabasso; Fig. 2a, Ref. Num. 210) in a radial direction.
Regarding claim 9, modified Han does not explicitly teach that the thermistor is attached with a second tape member; however, adhering the thermistor with heat-resistant tape, such as in Tsutomu is common practice. When the thermistor is attached with a second tape member, it will be sandwiched between the first and second tape member.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han (CN 210382651) in view of Tsutomu (JP H08-135888) and Tabasso et al. (US 2019/0320717 A1) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Yamada et al. (US 2021/0045448 A1 – of Record).
Regarding claim 10, modified Han does not teach a shrinkable tube
In an analogous art, Yamada teaches that a shrinkable tube is place outside the thermistor and heating unit (Para. [0163]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified Han with Yamada to add a shrinkable tube outside the thermistor. This modification will help fix the container, sensor, and heater together (Yamada; Para. [0165]). Since the tube is placed outside the thermistor it is also outside the second tape member.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J WEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-2664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:30pm.
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.
/N.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1749
/KATELYN W SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights