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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an air jet generating member … wherein the air jet generating member is arranged and configured to generate an air jet in the airflow through the air duct causing a drop of the static air pressure in the vicinity of the evaporation section” in claim 16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. In this case, the corresponding structure is “at least one jet nozzle”, “at least one air path constriction in the air duct”, or “an aperture plate forming the air path constriction” (Specification Page 3).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 16-35 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.
The term “in the vicinity of the evaporation section” in claim 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “in the vicinity of” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 17-35 are rejected by dependence.
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.
Claims 16 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lord (US 2016/0106154).
Claim 16. Lord discloses an electronic cigarette 1 comprising a generally cylindrical housing 2 which contains a porous matrix that comprises first and second sheets of fibrous material 18, 19 (liquid reservoir) loaded with a vaporizable material (aerosol-forming liquid), for example a nicotine and glycerol solution. The housing 2 also contains a battery 8, sensor circuitry 9 and a vaporizer 10 that produces a vapor to be supplied to the user. The vaporizer 10 includes a tube 11 with an outer surface 11a and includes diametrically opposed side openings 14a, 14b (reservoir orifice) through which wicking fibers 15 (capillary liquid conveyor) extend, so as to extend diametrically across the interior of the tube 11 and lie along its outside on surface 11a. An electrical heater coil 16 extends diametrically across the tube 11, with the wicking fibers axially within the coil 16 ([0017]-[0021]; Figures 1-6 where heater coil 16 is in the evaporation section). A flow restrictor 34 is provided to accelerate the airflow that passes the heater coil 16. In the electronic cigarette shown in FIG. 2, the flow restrictor comprises an airflow restrictor plug 35 that is press fitted into an end of the airflow passageway through spigot 23 of the annular support member 20. As shown in more detail in FIG. 5 the airflow restrictor plug 35 (air jet generating member) includes an axial restrictor bore 36 (ejector portion) of a smaller cross sectional area than the tube 11 that channels the air drawn through the inlet end 12 of the tube which can improve the vaporization of liquid from the wicking fibers 15 by the heater coil 16 ([0031]; Figures 1-6 wherein the area inside tube 11 downstream of the plug 35 is the expansion zone). The wicking fibers may be arranged in a spread configuration as shown schematically in FIG. 8A for example. The fibers 15 diverge from one another from the side openings 14a, 14b into generally fan shaped, spread regions 15a, 15b which lie on the curved outer surface 11a of the tube 11 ([0036]; Figures 4-8b wherein spread regions 15a, 15b are at a downstream end portion of the wick).
Claims 19, 20, and 21. Lord discloses that the airflow restrictor plug 35 (air jet generating member/aperture plate) includes an axial restrictor bore 36 (ejector portion/jet nozzle/air path constriction) of a smaller cross sectional area than the tube 11 that channels the air drawn through the inlet end 12 of the tube which can improve the vaporization of liquid from the wicking fibers 15 by the heater coil 16 ([0031]; Figures 1-6).
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.
Claims 16 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thorens et al. (US 20110094523) in view of Lord (US 2016/0106154).
Claims 16 and 18. Thorens et al. discloses a smoking system having a liquid storage portion. In the mouthpiece end 103, there is provided a liquid storage portion (liquid reservoir) in the form of cartridge 113 containing liquid 115, a capillary wick 117 and a heating element in the form of heating coil 119. One end of the capillary wick 117 extends into the cartridge 113 and the other end of the capillary wick 117 is surrounded by the heating coil 119 (this end is interpreted as the evaporation section and the opening of the cartridge through which the wick extends is the reservoir orifice). The housing 101 also includes an air inlet 123, an air outlet 125 at the mouthpiece end 103 and a chamber in the form of aerosol forming chamber 127. In use, liquid 115 is transferred by capillary action from the cartridge 113 from the end of the wick 117 which extends into the cartridge to the other end of the wick 117 which is surrounded by the heating coil 119. When a user draws on the device at the air outlet 125, ambient air is drawn through air inlet 123. The battery 107 supplies a pulse of energy to the heating coil 119 to heat the end of the wick 117 surrounded by the heating coil 119. The liquid in that end of the wick 117 is vaporized by the heating coil 119 to create a supersaturated vapor. The supersaturated vapor created is mixed with and carried in the air flow from the air inlet 123. In the aerosol forming chamber 127, the vapor condenses to form an inhalable aerosol, which is carried towards the outlet 125 and into the mouth of the user ([0076]-[0077]; Figure 1). The smoking system 200 includes guides for channeling the air flow within the smoking system. In this embodiment, the guides are provided in removable insert 201 and in the housing inside walls 203 (the guides define an air duct). The removable insert 201 extends across the entire cross section of the smoking system 200 and includes channels 205 for channelling the air flow between the air inlet and the capillary wick and heating coil. The channels 205 taper inward to direct the air flow generally in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the housing but diagonally (tangentially) towards the capillary wick and heating coil (Figure 2a; [0082]-[0083]). The embodiment shown in FIGS. 2a, 2b and 2c provides a substantially axially directed incoming air flow from the air inlet to the capillary wick and heating coil and a substantially axially directed outgoing air flow from the capillary wick and heating coil to the air outlet. It has been found that managing the air flow in this way improves the aerosol formation occurring within the smoking system. The guides provided by insert 201 (air jet generating member) channel the air flow so as to concentrate air flow onto the wick and heating element and so as to increase turbulence. This decreases the particle size of the aerosol inhaled by a user. The guides provided by the housing inside walls 203 reduce the volume of the aerosol forming chamber 202 in the smoking system and therefore improve aerosol flow towards the air outlet (Figure 2a; [0086]).
Thorens et al. does not explicitly disclose a fan-out portion at least at a downstream end portion of the filament bundle.
Lord et al. discloses an electronic cigarette 1 comprising vaporizer 10 includes a tube 11 with an outer surface 11a and includes diametrically opposed side openings 14a, 14b (reservoir orifice) through which wicking fibers 15 (capillary liquid conveyor) extend, so as to extend diametrically across the interior of the tube 11 and lie along its outside on surface 11a. An electrical heater coil 16 extends diametrically across the tube 11, with the wicking fibers axially within the coil 16 ([0017]-[0021]; Figures 1-6 where heater coil 16 is in the evaporation section). The wicking fibers may be arranged in a spread configuration as shown schematically in FIG. 8A for example. The fibers 15 diverge from one another from the side openings 14a, 14b into generally fan shaped, spread regions 15a, 15b which lie on the curved outer surface 11a of the tube 11 ([0036]; Figures 4-8b wherein spread regions 15a, 15b are at a downstream end portion of the wick).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the wick 117 of Thorens et al. so that the wick filaments fan out at the downstream end, as taught by Lord, in order to maximize the surface area of the filaments that is exposed to the air passing the evaporation section.
Claims 19-21. Modified Thorens discloses the removable insert 201 (aperture plate) extends across the entire cross section of the smoking system 200 and includes channels 205 (jet nozzle/air path constriction) for channelling the air flow between the air inlet and the capillary wick and heating coil. In this embodiment, the liquid cartridge, the capillary wick and the heating coil all form part of the removable insert 201, although this need not be the case. The channels 205 taper inward to direct the air flow generally in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the housing but diagonally towards the capillary wick and heating coil (Thorens Figures 2a-2c; [0083]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lord (US 2016/0106154) in view of Tong (US 2020/0146350).
Claim 34. Lord discloses the arrangement of claim 16 but does not explicitly disclose wherein the liquid reservoir is a volume compensating liquid reservoir configured to counteract capillary imbibition of the capillary liquid conveyer.
Tong discloses a liquid supply for an electronic smoking device which has a compartment (102) within a housing (100). A reservoir (200) is provided in the compartment (102) for storing liquid, with at least one portion the reservoir (200) attached to the housing (100). The reservoir (100) contracts as liquid flows out of the reservoir (200) (Abstract). The reservoir compensates for pressure changes and remains in position within the housing even as the volume of the reservoir decreases as liquid flows out of the reservoir ([0002]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to switch the sheets of fibrous material 18, 19 (liquid reservoir) of Lord to a reservoir made from an elastomeric material as taught by Tong in order to compensate for pressure changes and remain in position within the housing even as the volume of the reservoir decreases as liquid flows out of the reservoir (Tong [0002]).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lord (US 2016/0106154) in view of Bleloch et al. (US 2015/0320116).
Claim 35. Lord discloses the arrangement of claim 16 but does not explicitly disclose that the wicking fibers are inductively heated.
Bleloch et al. discloses a vaporizer device 100 comprising cartridge 107 which is sized and configured to fit within the induction coil 121. The cartridge 107 has an aperture 125 in one end that allows the vapor or aerosol from the vaporizable substance to flow out of the cartridge 107. The cartridge is configured with a reservoir and the reservoir is structured to hold a vaporizable substance. A wick element is configured to be contained within the reservoir and the wick element contacts the vaporizable substance of the reservoir. The induction coil 121 is configured to be housed within the heating element body 123. The induction coil 121 is inductively coupled to a wick element within the cartridge 107 such that the wick element is heated by electromagnetic induction, through heat generated in the wick element by eddy currents ([0044]-[0046]).
Bleloch et al. teaches that resistive heating coils operate at a temperature that is necessarily higher than the temperature ideally required to vaporize liquid in the wick. This temperature difference can result in unwanted chemical reactions taking place at this hotter surface of the heater coil when sufficient heat is available to achieve the desired vaporization of liquid in the bulk of the wick. The unwanted chemical reactions can detrimentally effect both the quality of the experience by influencing the flavor and the health impact by increasing the presence of toxic chemicals ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the switch the heater coil 16 of Lord with the inductive heating configuration of Bleloch et al. so that the liquid can be vaporized at a lower temperature and avoid unwanted chemical reactions as taught by Bleloch et al. ([0004]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17, 22-33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art is Lord. Lord discloses the aerosol-generating arrangement of claim 20 but does not explicitly disclose wherein the air duct comprises a guide wall whose distance to a length axis of the capillary liquid conveyer is smaller at a position of the evaporation section than at other positions in the air duct proximately upstream and proximately downstream of the evaporation section, such that the air path constriction in the air duct is formed at the position of the evaporation section. Lord also does not disclose that the air duct comprises a guide sleeve having a varying cross-section along a sleeve length axis, and wherein the evaporation section is located within the guide sleeve at a minimum of the cross-section such as to form the air jet generating member. Lord also does not disclose wherein when the capillary liquid conveyer comprises the two opposing plates, each of the two opposing plates comprises the one or more perforations at the downstream end portion of the capillary liquid conveyer.
Conclusion
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 at (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