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 13-32 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. Claims 1-12 are canceled. Claims 31-32 are withdrawn. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 13-30 in the reply filed on 05/22/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figure 10, S604: “been attachment" should read "been attached"
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 22, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), and further in view of Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026).
With regard to Claim 1, Lamb, directed to a flexible display for an aerosol delivery device, teaches (i) a control body of an aerosol delivery device that supplies power to a heat generation element configured to generate aerosol [0055-0056]. (ii) The control body comprises a power source, an electronic paper display, an indicator separate from the electronic paper display, and a control component [0055]. (iii) The control component is configured to control the heating element, connected to a power source [0018], to activate and vaporize components [0013]. (iv) The control component is configured to control the electronic paper display to present information indicating an amount of aerosol precursor composition contained in or consumed form the housing [0016]. Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however Lamb is silent to:
Operate the first indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in case where a remaining amount of the power supply is not smaller than a first threshold
Operate the second indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in a case where the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than the first threshold
Wang teaches (i) wherein if a current power level is greater than a power threshold, a first display screen is turned on. (ii) If a current power level is less than a preset power threshold, the second display screen turns on [0010]. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the threshold technique of Wang with the first and second indicators of Lamb to improve battery life while providing information to a user [0007].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first and second indicator of modified Lamb to operate the first indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in case where a remaining amount of the power supply is not smaller than a first threshold and operate the second indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in a case where the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than the first threshold because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays relating to power control. Wang teaches a first and second display that turns on based on power threshold values to improve battery life while providing information to a user [0007] and this merely involves combining prior art elements according to known power consumption methods to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 14, Lamb teaches wherein the indicator may include one or more light emitting diodes [0058]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Wherein the first indicator is an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display
Wang teaches an indicator element implemented as an OLED display [0008]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute the LED of Lamb with the OLED of Wang to provide high speed and good image color for information relayed to a user [0005].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first indicator of Lamb to wherein the first indicator is an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays relating to power control. Wang teaches an OLED display to provide high speed and good image color for information relayed to a user [0005] and this merely involves simple substitution of one known indicator for another to obtain predictable results.
With regard to Claim 15, Lamb teaches wherein the device comprises an electronic paper display [0041].
With regard to Claim 17, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Wherein a power consumption of the first indicator is larger than a power consumption of the second indicator
Wang, directed to a dual screen switching electronic device, teaches wherein OLED displays have a higher power consumption, while e-ink displays have a lower power consumption [0005].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify Lamb to wherein a power consumption of the first indicator is larger than a power consumption of the second indicator because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays relating to power control. Wang teaches wherein the OLED displays have a higher power consumption and e-ink displays have a lower power consumption [0005] to improve high speed and comfortable reading [0005] and this merely involves the use of a known display technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
With regard to Claim 18, Lamb teaches wherein the control component is configured to illuminate the indicator [0058] and the electronic paper display [0013]. Lamb further teaches a heating component connectable with a power source [0009], wherein the control component controls electrical current flow from the power source to other components of the device [0033]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Control supplying electric power to the heater by stopping operation of the first indicator
Control supplying electric power to the heater while continuing operation of the second indicator
Wang teaches (i) wherein an OLED display may be turned off is the battery value is less than a battery threshold [0038]. (ii) Wang further teaches wherein an e-ink screen may remain on while the OLED display is turned off [0038]. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the display control technique of Wang with the battery powered heating component to improve battery life while providing information to a user [0007].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first and second indicator of modified Lam to wherein the circuity is configured to control supplying electric power to the heater by stopping operation of the first indicator and control supplying electric power to the heater while continuing operation of the second indicator because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays relating to power control. Wang teaches an OLED display that may be turned off while an e-ink screen remains on to improve battery life while providing information to a user [0007] and this merely involves combing prior art elements according to known power consumption methods to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 19, Lamb teaches that when a puff is sensed, the control body directs current to the heating element [0061] and that the electronic paper display presents information indicating an amount of aerosol precursor composition or charge remaining in the power source [0063-0064]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Wherein the circuitry is configured to continue operation of the second indicator even after the supplying of electric power to the heater is stopped
Wang teaches wherein a current battery level is less than a battery threshold, the e-ink display is turned on and the OLED display is turned off [0029-0003]. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to configure Lamb's control component such that the electronic paper display continues to present the remaining aerosol precursor and battery information after current to the heating element is stopped, similar to Wang's teaching of maintaining the lower powered e-ink display after less power is administered to the device to improve endurance of the electronic device [0004]. Such a modification would have allowed device status information to remain available to the user while reducing power consumption after heating is no longer required.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second indicator of modified Lamb to wherein the circuitry is configured to continue operation of the second indicator even after the supplying of electric power to the heater is stopped because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays in aerosol generating devices. Wang teaches wherein an e-ink display remains on when a current battery level is less than a threshold to improve endurance of the electronic device [0004] and this merely involves use of a known display technique to improve similar power supply devices in the same way.
With regard to Claim 22, Lamb teaches wherein the electronic paper display is capable of presenting information such as an approximate remaining power supply or aerosol precursor composition [0003]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
The circuitry is configured to continue operation of the second indicator until the remaining amount of the element is above a predetermined threshold value
Wang teaches wherein when a current power value is greater than a power threshold, a driving device turns off the e-ink display [0034] to sustain battery life [0004].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second indicator of modified Lamb to wherein circuitry is configured to continue operation of the second indicator until the remaining amount of the element is above a predetermined threshold value because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays in power supply devices. Wang teaches wherein an e-ink display turns off after reaching a specific power threshold to sustain battery life [0004] and this merely involves use of a known display technique to improve similar power supply devices in the same way.
With regard to Claim 29, Lamb teaches wherein the control component may configure the electronic paper display to indicate the amount of charge contained in or consumed from the power source [0019].
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1) and Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), as applied to claims 13 and 15 above, and further in view of Nie (“Green Revolution in Electronic Displays”).
With regard to Claim 16, Lamb teaches wherein the electronic paper display may be in the form of a bistable display [0041]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
The electronic paper display consumes electric power only to rewrite contents to be displayed
Nie, directed to electronic displays, teaches wherein bistable displays require little electric drive to switch pages without consuming additional power to continuously display information or images to greatly reduce the power and heat consumption of digital display (Pg. 2, Col. 1, Lines 1-8). Thus it is well known in the art for bistable/electronic paper displays to only user power to rewrite contents.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to wherein the electronic paper display consumes electric power only to rewrite contents to be displayed because both Lamb and Nie are directed to electronic display components. Nie teaches wherein bistable displays consume very little power compared to other display devices to greatly reduce the power and heat consumption of digital displays (Pg. 2, Col. 1, Lines 1-8). and this merely involves the use of a known power efficiency technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1) and Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), as applied to claims 13 and 18 above, and further in view of Cho (US 20210083498 A1).
With regard to Claim 20, modified Lamb teaches a heating element [0061] and all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Operate in a sleep mode in which power consumption of the circuitry is smaller than in an active mode in which the supplying of electric power to the heater is executable; and continue operation of the second indicator in the sleep mode
Cho, directed to an electronic device, teaches wherein a device may operate in a sleep state in which the device is drive with minimum power compared to an application execution state [0081-0082]. During this time a partial region of a display may be activated [0091]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply this the heater function of Lamb to allow information to remain presented to a user [0103].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the circuitry of Lamb to operate in a sleep mode in which power consumption of the circuitry is smaller than in an active mode in which the supplying of electric power to the heater is executable and continue operation of the second indicator in the sleep mode because both Lamb and Cho are directed to electronic devices comprising visual indicators. Cho teaches a device with a display that operates during a sleep mode to allow information to remain presented to a user [0103] and this merely involves applying a known control technique to a known electronic device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), and Cho (US 20210083498 A1), as applied to claims 13, 18, and 20 above, and further in view of Nie (“Green Revolution in Electronic Displays”).
With regard to Claim 21, Lamb teaches wherein the electronic paper display may be in the form of a bistable display [0041]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
The second indicator is configured to continue operation in the sleep mode without consuming the electric power
Nie, directed to electronic displays, teaches wherein bistable displays require little electric drive to switch pages without consuming additional power to continuously display information or images to greatly reduce the power and heat consumption of digital display (Pg. 2, Col. 1, Lines 1-8). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a bistable display is one that retains an image without continuous power.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to wherein the second indicator is configured to continue operation in the sleep mode without consuming the electric power because both Lamb and Nie are directed to electronic display components. Nie teaches wherein bistable displays consume very little power compared to other display devices to greatly reduce the power and heat consumption of digital displays (Pg. 2, Col. 1, Lines 1-8). and this merely involves the use of a known power efficiency technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claims 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1) and Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Colavito (US 20180205249 A1).
With regard to Claim 23, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
a third indicator different from the first indicator and the second indicator
wherein the circuitry is configured to operate the third indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in a case wherein the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than a second threshold smaller than the first threshold
Colavito, directed to a power capacity indicator, teaches (i) three indicators, in the form of LEDs, each corresponding to a different power condition [0110]. (ii) The indicators are operated to indicate whether a power supply is within a first, second, or third predetermined power range [0107, 0108, 0113]. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the indicators provide statuses corresponding to different battery conditions. The progression from first to second to third indicator would reflect either an increase or decrease in remaining battery level. Thus, it would have been obvious to apply a third indicator and threshold logic of Colavito to modified Lamb to inform a user of the various stages of a devices charge status levels [0008].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power supply unit of modified Lamb to comprise a third indicator different from the first indicator and the second indicator, wherein the circuitry is configured to operate the third indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element in a case wherein the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than a second threshold smaller than the first threshold because both Colavito and Lamb are directed to indicators in power supply devices. Colavito teaches three indicators that are active in different power ranges to inform a user of the various stages of a devices charge status levels [0008] and this merely involves applying a known third indicator to a known power supply device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With regard to Claim 25, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
The third indicator includes a vibration motor configured to vibrate a housing of the power supply unit
Colavito teaches wherein a power status indicator may further comprise a vibration device to provide tactile feedback to a user [0034].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to include a vibration motor configured to vibrate a housing of the power supply unit because both Lamb and Colavito are directed to indicators in power supply device. Colavito teaches a vibration device to provide an additional way of feedback to a user [0034] and this merely involves applying a known feedback technique to a known electronic device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claims 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), and Colavito (US 20180205249 A1), as applied to claim 13 and 23 above, and further in view of Zhan (CN 111511064 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation).
With regard to Claim 24, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Wherein the third indicator includes a light emitting diode (LED) display
Zhan, directed to an intelligent lamp control, teaches an LED array comprising multiple Micro LED array elements to form a display [0071]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the same indicator type to the third indicator of modified Lamb to create a multi-functional interface for users [0071] and improve luminous efficiency [0006].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to wherein the third indicator includes a light emitting diode (LED) display because both Zhan and Lamb are directed to battery powered devices comprising visual displays to communicate with a user. Zhan teaches multiple Micro LED array elements to create a multi-functional interface for users [0071] and improve luminous efficiency [0006] and this merely involves applying a known indicator type to a known power supply device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), and Colavito (US 20180205249 A1), as applied to claims 13 and 23 above, and further in view of Nie (“Green Revolution in Electronic Displays”).
With regard to Claim 26, Lamb teaches wherein the electronic paper display may be in the form of a bistable display [0041]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
Wherein a power consumption of the first indicator is larger than a power consumption of the second indicator
Wherein a power consumption of the third indicator is larger than a power consumption of the second indicator
In regards to i., Wang, directed to a dual screen switching electronic device, teaches wherein OLED displays have a higher power consumption while e-ink displays have a lower power consumption [0005].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify Lamb to wherein a power consumption of the first indicator and a power consumption of the third indicator are larger than a power consumption of the second indicator because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays in aerosol generating devices. Wang teaches wherein LED and OLED displays have a higher power consumption and e-ink displays have a lower power consumption [0005] to improve high speed and comfortable reading [0005] and this merely involves applying a known display technique to a known electronic device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
In regards to ii., Nie, directed to electronic displays, teaches wherein the use of displays with bistable characteristics require very little electric drive without consuming additional power to continuously display information or images (Pg. 2, Col. 1, Lines 1-8). The energy consumption of commercialized LEDs contain both display and heat dissipation energy consumption (Fig. 1, Caption). One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that if the second indicator of Lamb is an electronic paper display, that the third indicator modified as an LED, would have a lower power consumption than the electronic paper display due to its bistable characteristics.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to wherein a power consumption of the third indicator is larger than a power consumption of the second indicator because both Lamb and Nie are directed to electronic display components. Nie teaches wherein bistable displays consume very little power compared to other display devices to eliminate issues concerning high energy consumption and non-user friendly displays (Pg. 1, Col 1, Lines 9-11) and this merely involves the use of a known power efficiency technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), Colavito (US 20180205249 A1), and Nie (“Green Revolution in Electronic Displays”), as applied to claim 13, 23, and 26 above, and further in view of Zhan (CN 111511064 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation).
With regard to Claim 27, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
wherein the power consumption of the first indicator is larger than the power consumption of the third indicator
Wang teaches an indicator element implemented as an OLED display [0008]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the first indicator of Lamb with the OLED of Wang to provide high speed and good image color for information relayed to a user [0005].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first indicator of Lamb to wherein the first indicator is an organic light emitting diode (OLED) display because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays relating to power control. Wang teaches an OLED display to provide high speed and good image color for information relayed to a user [0005] and this merely involves applying a known display technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Zhan teaches an LED array comprising multiple Micro LED array elements [0071]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the same indicator type to the third indicator of modified Lamb to create a multi-functional interface for users [0071]. Micro LED's have lower power consumption than existing OLED technology while providing advantages in luminous efficiency and energy density [0006].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third indicator of modified Lamb to wherein the power consumption of the first indicator is larger than the power consumption of the third indicator because both Zhan and Lamb are directed to battery powered devices comprising visual displays to communicate with a user. Zhan teaches wherein Micro LED's have lower power consumption than existing OLED technology multiple Micro LED array elements to create a multi-functional interface for users [0071] while providing advantages in luminous efficiency and energy density [0006] and this merely involves combining prior art elements according to known display methods to yield predictable results.
Claims 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1), Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), and Colavito (US 20180205249 A1), as applied to claim 13 and 23 above, and further in view of Sun (US 20190081499 A1).
With regard to Claim 28, modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
In a case where the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than the second threshold, the circuitry is configured to operate both the second indicator and third indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element
Sun, directed to a power system, teaches a display and light emitting diode that may be simultaneously activated based on a battery charge status [0043-0044]. One of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to configure the controller of modified Lamb to configured the second and third indicators to active simultaneously in order to display different types of information at the same time [0004 & 0042].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the second and third indicator to wherein in a case where the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than the second threshold, the circuitry is configured to operate both the second indicator and third indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element because both Lamb and Sun are directed to the operation of displays indicating a power level. Sun teaches two indicators that may be simultaneously activated to display different types of information at the same time [0004 & 0042] and this merely involves applying a known notification technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Wang teaches wherein a controller compares a remaining battery level with power thresholds to determine when a display is going to be activated. When a remaining battery level is less than predetermined threshold the electronic paper display is used [0038]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to combine the simultaneous activity of modified Lamb and the threshold logic of Wang to provide controlled visual notifications while offering good image color effect [0004 & 0021].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the operation of the first and second indicator of modified Lamb to wherein in a case where the remaining amount of the power supply is smaller than the second threshold, the circuitry is configured to operate both the second indicator and third indicator to indicate the remaining amount of the element because both Lamb and Wang are directed to displays which communicate operating statuses in electronic devices. Wang teaches a controller that operates a display based on being less than a specific battery threshold to provide controlled visual notifications while offering good image color effect [0004 & 0021] and this merely involves combining prior art elements according to known display methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb (US 20170251724 A1) and Wang (CN 105354000 A, hereinafter citations referring to English Machine Translation and as cited in IDS dated 05/22/2026), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Sun (US 20190081499 A1).
With regard to Claim 30, Lamb teaches a control component with means for actuating, controlling, regulating, and ceasing power for heat generation by controlling electrical current flow from a power source to the heating element [0033]. Modified Lamb teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Lamb is silent to:
a switch configured to control energization to the heater and at least one voltage converter configured to supply voltage to the heater via the switch
wherein the circuitry is configured to control the switch to control supplying electric power form the power supply to the heater
Sun teaches switching circuitry that is turned on and off based on control signals provided by power control circuitry [0020]. The device has a power converter for converting AC power into DC power, wherein DC power is used to power the control circuitry [0020]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to combine Sun's switching circuitry and Lamb's heat generation arrangement to provide controlled voltage supply to the heater of modified Lamb [0004].
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the power supply of modified Lamb to comprise a switch configured to control energization to the heater and at least one voltage converter configured to supply voltage to the heater via the switch, wherein the circuitry is configured to control the switch to control supplying electric power form the power supply to the heater because both Lamb and Sun are directed to the operation of displays indicating different power levels. Sun teaches switching circuitry that works in combination with a power converter to provide controlled voltage supply and ascertain battery charge levels [0004] and this merely involves combining prior art elements according to known power methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUWATOSIN O DIYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 am - 6 pm.
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.
/O.O.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights