DETAILED ACTION
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 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bonici (US 2020/0329759).
Regarding claim 1, Bonici teaches an aerosol-generating article (rod-shaped non-combustion-heating-type tobacco) comprising a tobacco rod portion 20 and a mouthpiece portion 30, wherein the mouthpiece portion 30 includes a filter segment including a filter element 32 [Fig. 1; 0060, 0064], the filter element being composed of a fiber, a cross section of the fiber taken in a circumferential direction being Y-shaped, the fiber having a filament denier of 8 [0037, 0071 and Table 1: Samples 12, 13, 15].
Regarding claim 2, Bonici teaches the filter has a density of 0.12 g/cm3 [Table 2, sample 12].
Regarding claim 3, Bonici teaches the filter element has a radial hardness of 90% or greater [0021]. The formula for determining radial hardness [0016] corresponds approximately to the instant formula for determining compression change. Bonici further teaches the filter element has all of the physical parameters of the claimed filter element, including fiber shape, filament denier, density, and airflow resistance. For the above reasons, the filter of Bonici is interpreted to inherently have the claimed compression change.
Regarding claim 5, Bonici teaches an RTD (airflow resistance) of 206 mmWG (or mmH20) for a rod length of 126 mm [0072 and Table 2: Sample 12, 13, 15], which equals 1.6 mmH20/mm.
Regarding claim 6, Bonici teaches a flavoring agent capsule is disposed inside the filter element [0052].
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dubey (US 2022/0295872).
Regarding claim 1, Dubey [0047; Fig. 1] teaches a rod-shaped non-combustion-heating-type tobacco comprising a tobacco rod portion 3 and a mouthpiece portion 2, wherein the mouthpiece portion includes a filter segment including a filter element 4, the filter element being composed of a fiber, a cross section of the fiber taken in a circumferential direction being Y-shaped [0056], the fiber having a filament denier of 8 [0055].
Regarding claim 2, Dubey teaches the filter has a density of 0.09 to 0.13 g/cm3 [0054].
Regarding claim 3, Dubey teaches the filter element has a hardness of 90-94% [Table 1.0]. The formula for determining hardness [0060-0065] corresponds approximately to the instant formula for determining compression change. Dubey teaches the filter element has all of the physical parameters of the claimed filter element, including fiber shape, filament denier, density, and airflow resistance. For the above reasons, the filter of Dubey is interpreted to inherently have the claimed compression change.
Regarding claim 4, Dubey teaches a length of the filter element 4 in a longitudinal direction is 7 mm [0049].
Regarding claim 5, Dubey teaches a pressure drop (airflow resistance) of the filter segment in a longitudinal direction is 1.05 to 1.70 mmH20/mm [0052].
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonici.
Bonici teaches the filter has a length between 15 mm and 40 mm [0057]. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use any filter length within the range disclosed by Bonici, such as a length of 15-20 mm, to achieve predictable results.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonici as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Braunshteyn (US 2007/0074734).
Bonici teaches the non-combustion-heating-type tobacco is heated to form an aerosol [0060] but does not teach the claimed electric heating device. Braunshteyn teaches an electric heating device including a heater member [0026], a battery unit serving as a power source for the heater member [0025], and a control unit for controlling the heater member [0027]; and a smoking article 22 being inserted in the electric heating device so as to come into contact with the heater member 52 [0032; Fig. 3]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this electric heating device with the article of Bonici for the purpose of forming an aerosol [Braunshteyn 0039] as desired by Bonici.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubey as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Braunshteyn.
Dubey teaches the non-combustion-heating-type tobacco is heated to form an aerosol [0021] but does not teach the claimed electric heating device. Braunshteyn teaches an electric heating device including a heater member [0026], a battery unit serving as a power source for the heater member [0025], and a control unit for controlling the heater member [0027]; and a smoking article 22 being inserted in the electric heating device so as to come into contact with the heater member 52 [0032; Fig. 3]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this electric heating device with the article of Dubey for the purpose of forming an aerosol [Braunshteyn 0039] as desired by Dubey.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC YAARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/ERIC YAARY/Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights