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 .
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)(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 20-22, 24-27, 30-33, and 35-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reevell (US 2016/0106155).
Claims 20 and 21. Reevell discloses an electronic cigarette 1 including a generally cylindrical housing 2 (shell). The housing 2 contains a battery 8, sensor circuitry 9 and a vaporizer 10 that produces a vapor to be supplied to the user ([0015]-[0017]; Figures 1 and 2). One end of the vaporizer 10 includes an annular support member 20 that has a peripheral surface 21 that engages with the interior surface of the cylindrical housing 2. The annular support member 20 has a generally circular end face 22 extending diametrically across the housing 2 from which an axial inlet spigot 23 extends towards the mouth end 3 and receives the inlet end 12 of tube 11. The overlying ends of the sheets 18, 19 are retained between an annular, depending flange 24 and the inlet spigot 23 at the inlet end of tube 11, and generally fill the space between the interior surface of housing 2 and the tube 11 ([0024]; Figure 2). The vaporizer 10 includes a tube 11 made of fiberglass material which extends from an inlet end 12 to outlet end 13. The tube 11 includes diametrically opposed side openings 14a, b through which wicking fibers 15 extend, so as to extend diametrically across the interior of the tube 11 and lie along its outer surface 11a. The fibers 15 are wrapped in a spiral pattern around the outer surface 11a of the tube 11 towards both its inlet end 12 and outlet end 13 ([0018]; Figures 3 and 4). An electrical heater coil 16 (heating member) extends diametrically across the tube 11, with the wicking fibers 15 passing axially within the coil 16 (Figure 4, [0021]). A porous matrix that comprises first and second sheets of fibrous material 18, 19 (sheet 19 is interpreted as a reservoir structure configured to store an aerosol precursor composition) is loaded with a vaporizable material, for example a nicotine and glycerol solution (aerosol precursor composition) (Figure 4, [0022]). The sheet 18 has a lower surface area and absorbency than the surrounding sheet 19 which can retain a larger volume of the liquid. Typically, the sheet 19 has a larger pore size than the sheet 18. The sheet 18 however facilitates transfer of the liquid to the wicking fibers 15 so that the liquid is wicked along the core of the heater coil 16 (wicking fibers 15 and sheet 18 are fibrous layers which together form a liquid transport element which surrounds the heater coil 16 and is arranged to transport the liquid from sheet 19 to the heater coil 16) (Figure 4, [0023]).
Claim 22. Reevell discloses that the wicking fibers 15 (first layer of liquid transport element) are made of fiberglass (first material) ([0018]) and the sheet 18 (second layer of liquid transport element) is a porous matrix layer (second material) ([0032]-[0033]).
Claim 24. Reevell discloses that fibers 15 are wound around the outer surface 11a of the tube 11 and that sheet 18 also surrounds the tube 11, thus the fibers 15 and sheet 18 have a substantially tubular shape ([0028]; Figures 4 and 5).
Claims 25 and 26. Reevell discloses that the wicking fibers 15 and sheet 18 (together forming liquid transport element) surround tube 11 which forms an air passageway in its central passage. The tube 11 extends through the wicking fibers 15 and sheet 18 (together forming liquid transport element) from an inlet end 12 to outlet end 13 (Figures 2-5; [0018]; [0028]).
Claim 27. Reevell discloses that the heating coil (curved arrangement) extends between electrical leads 17a and 17b (first and second electrical terminal) (Figures 2 and 4; [0021]).
Claim 30. Reevell discloses that the heater coil 16 (heating member), sheet 19 (reservoir structure), wicking fibers 15 and sheet 18 (together forming liquid transport element) are all contained in a housing 2 (shell) (Figures 1 and 2).
Claim 31. Reevell discloses sensor circuitry 9 (control component), which controls the supply of power to the coil 16 from the battery 8, also located in shell 2 ([0021]; Figure 2).
Claim 32. Reevell discloses battery 8 (power component) located in shell 2 (Figure 2).
Claim 33. Reevell discloses tube 11 (frame) which substantially surrounds heater coil 16 (heating member) (Figures 2, 3, and 4).
Claim 35. Reevell discloses tube 11 (frame) has an open inlet end 12 and open outlet end 13 ([0018]; Figures 2 and 3).
Claim 36. Reevell discloses that the tube 11 (frame) and heater coil 16 (heating member) are arranged such that there is a void space between the heater coil 16 (heating member) and the inlet end 12 of tube 11 and between the heater coil 16 (heating member) and the outlet end 13 of tube 11 (Figure 2).
Claim 37. Reevell discloses that the heater coil 16 (heating member) and part of the wicking fibers 15 (part of the liquid transport element) are located within the tube 11 (frame) with the wicking fibers being positioned between the heater coil 16 and the tube 11 (Figures 2-4).
Claim 38. Reevell discloses that a portion of wicking fibers 15 (part of the liquid transport element) extends outward from tube 11 (frame) ([0018]-[0019]; Figures 3-5 showing wicking fibers 15 passing through openings 14a, 14b in tube 11 and passing axially within coil 16 then winding around outer surface 11a of tube 11).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reevell (US 2016/0106155).
Claim 23. Reevell discloses the device of claim 22 wherein the wicking fibers 15 (first layer of liquid transport element) are made of fiberglass (first material) ([0018]) and the sheet 18 (second layer of liquid transport element) is a porous matrix layer (second material) ([0032]-[0033]). Reevell discloses that the fiberglass wicking fibers 15 exhibit heat resistance ([0018]). Reevell teaches that the sheet 18 is a fibrous material ([0022]) and that it facilitates transfer of the liquid to the wicking fibers 15 so that the liquid is wicked along the core of the heater coil 16 ([0023]).
Reevell does not explicitly disclose that the wicking fibers 15 (first layer of liquid transport element) and the sheet 18 (second layer of liquid transport element) exhibit different properties. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the fiberglass wicking fibers 15 and the fibrous porous matrix layer 18 exhibit different properties, specifically their heat resistance (the fiberglass wicking fibers 15 having a higher heat resistance) and absorbency.
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reevell (US 2016/0106155) in view of Tucker et al. (US 2013/0213419).
Claims 28 and 29. Reevell discloses the device of claim 20 but does not explicitly disclose that the heater coil 16 (heating member) comprises a metal that provides resistive heating or that the heater coil is a metal ribbon.
Tucker et al. discloses an electronic cigarette including a heater formed of a ribbon of electrically resistive mesh material wrapped around a wick that is in fluid communication with a liquid supply. The mesh material is a planar metal ribbon ([0015]; Figures 1 and 8-11).
Tucker et al. discloses that the use of a planar metal ribbon such as a mesh material as the heater provides many advantages. The wrapped ribbon provides increased surface to surface contact between the heater and the wick so as to provide more efficient and uniform transfer of heat between the heater and the wick. The arrangement provides a greater volume of aerosol for the same amount of electrical energy, than a wire heater (a single wire coil). In addition, dimensions of the ribbon heater may be adjusted to achieve a higher or lower electrical resistivity to meet design requirements of a particular electronic cigarette. Being a ribbon of material, the resistivity of the ribbon heater can be more consistently controlled from one heater to the next. Likewise, because of the size of the ribbon heater, the wrapping of the ribbon heater about the wick may be more consistently controlled (Tucker [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the heater coil 16 (heating member) of Reevell be replaced with a metal ribbon heater such as that of Tucker et al., in order to increase surface to surface contact between the heater and the wick and provide more efficient and uniform transfer of heat as taught by Tucker et al. ([0015]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reevell (US 2016/0106155) in view of Liu (US 2016/0128388).
Claim 34. Reevell discloses the device of claim 33 and further discloses that the tube 11 (frame) is made of fiberglass ([0018]). Reevell does not disclose that the tube 11 (frame) can be made of metal.
Liu discloses an electronic cigarette comprising a hard ventilation tube 224 which is a ceramic tube, glass tube, metal tube, high temperature resistant plastic pipe and etc. ([0016]; [0046]; Figure 3).
Since the tube 11 (frame) of Reevell and the hard ventilation tube 224 are functionally similar and positioned similarly in their respective devices, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the tube 11 (frame) of Reevell be can be made out of a different material such as metal, since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (See MPEP § 2144.07).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 1/2/26 concern claim amendments that are addressed in the rejections above.
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 Katherine A Will whose telephone number is (571)270-0516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00AM-6:00PM(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, Michael Wilson can be reached on (571)270-3882. 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.
/KATHERINE A WILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights