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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-19 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species A, claims 2-8 and 17-19 in the reply filed on 5/21/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would be no undue burden on the Examiner to examine all of the groups of claims. This is not found persuasive because the examination of each species would still involve substantially different search strategies and different questions of patentability. This would be expected to introduce serious burden into the examination of all species presented in this application.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 9-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/21/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 3 misspelled protrudes as “protruds”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-8 and 17-19 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.
Regarding claim 2, lines 3-4 recite the first absorber and the second absorber are arranged in a length direction of the first absorber. However, it is unclear how the first absorber can be arranged in a length direction of itself. For purposes of examination, the claim will be considered to recite the second absorber is arranged in a length direction of the first absorber. Claims 3-8 and 17-19 are similarly rejected for their dependence on claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, lines 3-5 recite the heating surface has a smaller dimension in a direction perpendicular to the length direction of the first absorber than that of the first absorber. However, it is unclear what dimension “than that of the first absorber” refers, such as the length direction of the first absorber or a direction perpendicular to the length direction of the first absorber. For purposes of examination, the dimension is considered to be the length direction of the first absorber.
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, 4-8 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mironov (JP2020124229A, citations will refer to the translation provided) in view of Kominami (US2019/0307176).
Regarding claim 1, Mironov teaches:
An aerosol generator (cartridge 20, [0072]) comprising:
an aerosol source storage unit (liquid storage section, [0081]) including a liquid first aerosol source and a first absorber having the first aerosol source absorbed (second capillary material 38 holding a liquid aerosol forming substrate, [0083]); and
an aerosol generation unit (heater assembly in contact with the first capillary material, [0079], [0083]) including a liquid second aerosol source and a second absorber having the second aerosol source absorbed (first capillary material 36 holding a liquid aerosol forming substrate, [0083]), the second absorber being in contact with the first absorber (figure 2).
a rate at which the second absorber absorbs the first aerosol source being higher than a rate at which the first absorber absorbs the first aerosol source (as the pore size of the first capillary material is smaller than the porosity of the second capillary material, [0027], and the instant specification teaches smaller pores lead to a higher rate of absorption (see [0117] and [0120])).
Mironov does not appear to disclose wherein the first and second absorber includes a tobacco material.
However, Kominami, directed to a heating flavor inhaler, teaches:
An absorber having a liquid aerosol source absorbed (wick 120Q sucks up the aerosol source, [0068]).
The absorber includes a tobacco material (tobacco material included in the wick 120Q may be leaf tobacco or a molded body including lead tobacco ([0077]).
This allows a user to feel sufficient tobacco flavor ([0081]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the first and second absorbers of Mironov to include a tobacco material as taught by Kominami, because both Mironov and Kominami are directed to aerosol generation devices with absorbers for absorbing a liquid aerosol source, Kominami teaches this allows a user to feel sufficient tobacco flavor, and this merely involves incorporating a known absorber material (i.e. tobacco) to a similar absorber for a vaporization device to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 2, Mironov further teaches wherein the first absorber has a shape extending in one direction (length direction of second capillary material 38, figure 2) and the second absorber is arranged in a length direction of the first absorber (figure 2).
Regarding claim 4, Mironov further teaches a cylindrical body accommodating the aerosol storage unit and the aerosol generation unit (cylindrical housing 24, [0084], figure 3), wherein the aerosol source storage unit and the aerosol generation unit are arranged in a length direction of the cylindrical body (figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 5, Mironov further teaches wherein the cylindrical body has a smaller diameter of an opening closer to the aerosol generation unit than an inner diameter at a position of the aerosol source storage unit (where the inner surface of the housing may be conical so the inner diameter on the left side is half the inner diameter on the right side, [0088], figure 5).
Regarding claim 6, Mironov further teaches a heater (heater element 46, [0085]) including a heating surface (surface in direct contact first capillary material 16, [0083]) facing the first absorber with the second absorber interposed therebetween (the first capillary material 36 separated the heater element 46 from the second capillary material 38, [0083], figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Mironov further teaches wherein the heater includes one or more grooves provided in the heating surface (as the heater may have a mesh formed of filaments ([0016]), and thus the spaces between the filaments define grooves).
Regarding claim 8, Mironov further teaches:
wherein the second absorber is tapered towards the heating surface (as the diameter of the capillary material corresponds to the inner diameter of the housing 24 ([0088]), which is tapered towards one end of the housing as shown in figure 5, [0088]).
and the heating surface has a smaller dimension in a direction perpendicular to the length direction of the first absorber than that of the first absorber (as shown in figure 2, the width of the heating element is smaller than the length of second capillary material 38).
Regarding claim 17, Mironov further teaches:
A flavor inhaler (aerosol generation system, [0071], figure 1a) comprising:
the aerosol generator according to claim 6 (including cartridge 20, [0071]);
a power supply supplying electric power to the heater (battery 14, [0073], figure 1a);
and a case (device 10) including a mouthpiece at one end (mouthpiece portion 12), and accommodating the aerosol generator and the power supply (the main body includes battery 14 and a recess 18 to receive cartridge 20, [0073]-[0074], figure 1a).
Regarding claim 18, Mironov further teaches wherein the aerosol generator is positioned between the power supply and the mouthpiece (figure 1a).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mironov (JP2020124229A, citations will refer to the translation provided) in view of Kominami (US2019/0307176) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Qiu (WO2021/012961, citations will refer to the English version US2022/0132926).
Regarding claim 3, Mironov does not appear to disclose wherein an interface between the first absorber and the second absorber protrudes at a central portion therefor toward the second absorber.
However, Qiu, directed to an aerosol generating device, teaches:
A liquid absorbing member 31 with a protrusion 311 located at the center of the liquid absorbing surface 31A of the liquid absorbing member 31 to improve the structural strength of the liquid absorbing member 31 ([0050]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the first absorber to have a protrusion at the center of the surface as taught by Qiu, because both Mironov and Qui are directed to aerosol generating devices with liquid absorbing members, Qiu teaches this improves the structural strength of the liquid absorbing member, and this merely involves the change in form or shape without any new or unexpected results, which is an obvious engineering design.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mironov (JP2020124229A, citations will refer to the translation provided) in view of Kominami (US2019/0307176) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Saygili (US2020/0163376).
Regarding claim 19, Mironov teaches wherein the case includes an air inlet (air intake ports 13, [0073]), and the aerosol generator and the case form a flow path therebetween from the air inlet to the mouthpiece (the airflow path as shown by the arrows in figure 1d).
Mironov does not appear to disclose wherein the air inlet is at a position between the power supply and the aerosol generator.
However, Saygili, directed to a cartridge assembly, teaches:
A case (aerosol-generating device 12) with an air inlet (air inlets 56) at a position between a power supply (power supply 24) and an aerosol generator (heater 22, figure 3, [0107]).
Air entering the system airflow inlets 56 enters the device cavity 20 via device airflow inlets 19 so that air is divided into ventilation air and mainstream air ([0109]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the air inlet of Mironov to be configured to be at a position between the power supply and the aerosol generator as taught by Saygili, because both Mironov and Saygili are directed to aerosol-generating device with air inlets, Saygili teaches this allows incorporation of airflow inlets to divide the air into ventilation air and mainstream air, and this merely involves incorporation of a known way to position an air inlet to a similar aerosol generating device to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicole A Szumigalski whose telephone number is (703)756-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00 - 4:30 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, 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.
/N.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights