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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Examiner has not established a proper prima facie case of obviousness as the cited art, alone or in any combination, fails to properly teach or suggest the feature of a distinct first and second phase of inhalation which is separated by a specific event as currently claimed. Thorens ‘861 and ‘750 each simply fail to teach or suggest the aforementioned feature of the second phase of inhalation begins when the airflow drops below a non-zero threshold. LIU suffers from the same deficiency. That is, LIU merely discloses that the integrated circuit is able to generate different control commands corresponding to different trigger signals. However, LIU does not disclose controlling two subsequent phases which are linked, nor a transition between these phases when a threshold is reached.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Thorens ‘750 explicitly discloses a threshold, 401b, that when airflow drops below this threshold, a different phase of inhalation occurs (Paragraphs [0076] and [0077]). In the instant case, the heater is on prior to this threshold, and when the airflow rate drops below threshold 401b, the heater is turned off in order to avoid overheating towards the end of the puff.
Thus, Thorens ‘750 establishes a non-zero threshold that contains a first and second phase of inhalation. The first phase existing prior to reaching the non-zero threshold, and the second phase existing after passing the non-zero threshold.
LIU discloses conditions (e.g., above and below a predefined airflow) that when triggered, change the type of aerosol generated. The different types of aerosol being generated based on the sensed airflow represents “different versions of aerosol are generated in the first and second inhalation phases”, as claimed. Thus, when considering LIU with Thorens ‘750, and the trigger being the non-zero threshold, 401b, when passing below the non-zero threshold (e.g., below an airflow rate) a different type of aerosol is generated (e.g., a second and third vaporizer activated, according to LIU) than when compared to above the non-zero threshold (e.g., first and second vaporizers activated, according to LIU).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over THORENS (US 2017/0318861) in view of THORENS (US 2013/0340750) and LIU (US 2014/0060527).
With respect to claim 1¸ THORENS discloses a method of controlling an inhalation device (Abstract) comprising recording a user puff signature based on signals from a gas flow sensor during a set-up procedure (Paragraph [0012]). The set-up procedure involves the user providing a series of puffs (e.g., inhalations) that are measured and recorded (Paragraphs [0082], [0083]; Figures 2, 3 and 4). The puffs are used to create a temporal profile (e.g., model) of the inhalation profile based on the measurements, that are stored in the memory of the device (Paragraphs [0081], [0085], [0086], [0089]).
The profiles made in figure 2 represent a model that is formed from an inhalation airflow profile.
THORENS further discloses that the set-up procedure can be replaced with a first operation (Paragraph [0084]) of the device to generate the inhalation profile, that involves the generation of aerosol to be inhaled by the user (Paragraphs [0010], [0046], [0080]).
THORENS may not explicitly disclose that each inhalation profile defines a timing at which airflow drops below a non-zero threshold level. THORENS ‘750 discloses an aerosol generating system having proper heater control (Abstract; Title). The controller controls the heater of the device (Paragraph [0089], [0090]) such that when airflow drops below a defined threshold, at 401b, which has a defined timing, 405b, based thereon, the power is cut to the heater (Paragraph [0076]; Figure 4). This prevents overheating towards the end of the puff (Paragraph [0077]). As seen in figure 4, the threshold is a non-zero level.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to set a non-zero threshold and a defined timing, in the airflow profile of THORENS, as taught by THORENS ‘750, so that the power to the heater can be cut at the end of an inhalation cycle thereby preventing overheating of the device.
THORENS does not explicitly disclose the first and second phases of inhalation.
LIU discloses an electronic cigarette comprising a plurality of atomizing chamber (Abstract). Each chamber is controlled by the controller (Paragraph [0030]) and the vaporizers for each chamber are triggered by a flow sensor (Paragraphs [0008], [0030], [0045]). The trigger for the air flow sensor is based on the size of the air flow (Paragraph [0045]). The types of aerosol provided based on the respective triggers allows for different atomizers to activate or different combination of atomizers to activate (Paragraph [0046]) in order to generate big and thick smoke for good flavor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a flow sensor that can measure the size of airflow generated by inhalation in THORENS as taught by LIU, so that the specific mix of atomizer activation can be achieved to in order to generate big and thick smoke for good flavor. Specifically, by having a certain mix of atomizers (e.g., first and second) operate at a particular air flow, then below said particular air flow a different mix of atomizers are activated (e.g., second and third), the air flow level itself is the non-zero threshold. Wherein the first phase occurs at said particular air flow and until the size of the air flow is reduced, then the second phase occurs utilizing a different mix of aerosol.
With respect to claim 2, THORENS shows that the profile includes the velocity (flow rate in ml/s on the y-axis) over the course of a puff (e.g., 300, 310, 320, 200) (Figures 2 and 3).
With respect to claim 3, the shape of the profile defines a shape (Figure 2). Since the authentication puffs are measured against this profile (Paragraphs [0088]-[0089]), this represents the target curve.
With respect to claim 4, THORENS discloses that the profile defines a peak for the profile (Figures 2 and 3; Paragraphs [0019], [0039], [0081], [0082]).
With respect to claim 5, THORENS shows that each profile also defines a duration of the inhalation profile (e.g., deltaT1) (Paragraph [0081]).
With respect to claim 6, THORENS discloses a timing (e.g., delta T2 and T3) for each peak in the profile (Paragraph [0081]; Figure 2).
With respect to claim 10, THORENS discloses a method of controlling an inhalation device (Abstract) comprising recording a user puff signature based on signals from a gas flow sensor during a set-up procedure (Paragraph [0012]). The set-up procedure involves the user providing a series of puffs (e.g., inhalations) that are measured and recorded (Paragraphs [0082], [0083]; Figures 2, 3 and 4). The puffs are used to create a temporal profile (e.g., model) of the inhalation profile based on the measurements, that are stored in the memory of the device (Paragraphs [0081], [0085], [0086], [0089]).
The profiles made in figure 2 represent a model that is formed from an inhalation airflow profile.
THORENS then compares the subsequent airflow measurements from the user to the model in order to create a correlation score (e.g., matching airflow measurements to a modelled profile) to determine if the inhalation measurement is within a tolerance (Paragraphs [0015], [0017], [0085], [0088], [0091]).
THORENS further discloses that the set-up procedure can be replaced with a first operation (Paragraph [0084]) of the device to generate the inhalation profile, that involves the generation of aerosol to be inhaled by the user (Paragraphs [0010], [0046], [0080]).
THORENS may not explicitly disclose that each inhalation profile defines a timing at which airflow drops below a non-zero threshold level. THORENS ‘750 discloses an aerosol generating system having proper heater control (Abstract; Title). The controller controls the heater of the device (Paragraph [0089], [0090]) such that when airflow drops below a defined threshold, at 401b, which has a defined timing, 405b, based thereon, the power is cut to the heater (Paragraph [0076]; Figure 4). This prevents overheating towards the end of the puff (Paragraph [0077]). As seen in figure 4, the threshold is a non-zero level.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to set a non-zero threshold and a defined timing, in the airflow profile of THORENS, as taught by THORENS ‘750, so that the power to the heater can be cut at the end of an inhalation cycle thereby preventing overheating of the device.
THORENS does not explicitly disclose the first and second phases of inhalation.
LIU discloses an electronic cigarette comprising a plurality of atomizing chamber (Abstract). Each chamber is controlled by the controller (Paragraph [0030]) and the vaporizers for each chamber are triggered by a flow sensor (Paragraphs [0008], [0030], [0045]). The trigger for the air flow sensor is based on the size of the air flow (Paragraph [0045]). The types of aerosol provided based on the respective triggers allows for different atomizers to activate or different combinations of atomizers to activate (Paragraph [0046]) in order to generate big and thick smoke for good flavor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a flow sensor that can measure the size of airflow generated by inhalation in THORENS as taught by LIU, so that the specific mix of atomizer activation can be achieved to in order to generate big and thick smoke for good flavor. Specifically, by having a certain mix of atomizers (e.g., first and second) operate at a particular air flow, then below said particular air flow a different mix of atomizers are activated (e.g., second and third), the air flow level itself is the non-zero threshold. Wherein the first phase occurs at said particular air flow and until the size of the air flow is reduced, then the second phase occurs utilizing a different mix of aerosol.
With respect to claim 11, THORENS discloses that the user’s puff signature may be unique enough that authentication can take place based on the first few moments of puffing (Paragraph [0084]). Thus, the scope of THORENS appears to include authenticating (e.g., measuring and comparing the puff signature) while puffing and as puffing progresses, but prior to finishing of the puff signature.
With respect to claim 12, THORENS discloses a sensor (e.g., detector) to detect the gas flow (Abstract; Paragraphs [0009], [0091]).
With respect to claim 13, THORENS discloses the device having a controller and processor configured to perform the processes identified in the rejection of claim 1 (Paragraphs [0043] and [0083]-[0086]).
With respect to claim 14, THORENS discloses the device having a controller and processor configured to perform the processes identified in the rejection of claim 10 (Paragraphs [0043] and [0083]-[0086]).
______________________________________________________________________
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over THORENS (US 2017/0318861) in view of THORENS (US 2013/0340750) and LIU (US 2014/0060527), as applied to claims 1-6 and 10-14 ,and further in view of AMPOLINI et al. (US 2016/0007651).
With respect to claims 8 and 9, modified THORENS discloses that control parameters (THORENS; Paragraphs [0059], [0081]-[0085], [0089]) can be adjusted (THORENS; Paragraphs [0020]). Modified THORENS does not explicitly disclose that the profiles are downloaded wirelessly using a mobile phone interface.
AMPOLINI et al. discloses an inhaler system (Abstract; Title) that is wirelessly connected to a mobile phone (Paragraphs [0005]-[0006]). A user interface is used on said device by the user (Paragraph [0068]) to give commands to the system. The interface allows the user to modify operating parameters (Paragraphs [0055]-[0058]), such as puff settings (Paragraph [0056]). In some embodiments, AMPOLINI et al. may download information from the device (Paragraph [0023]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wirelessly connect the inhaler of modified THORENS to a mobile device, as taught by AMPOLINI et al., and to download the programmed information (including the puffing profile) so that the user can modify the control settings on the interface, such as the peaks of the inhalation profile, thereby allowing the user to tailor the authentication procedure (e.g., curating the provide) through their mobile device interface.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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
Prosecution Insights