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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Species A, in the reply filed on 6/26/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the burden placed on Applicant in filing and prosecuting multiple applications outweighs any burden places on the Examiner associated with searching and considering all claims in a single application. Applicant submits that searching and considering all claims together in a single application does not present an undue burden. This is not found persuasive because the restriction requirement, dated 4/22/2026, established the groupings lack unity of invention because they do not share the same or corresponding special technical feature (that is, a technical feature that makes a contribution over the prior art). Applicant's traverse does not address or provide evidence that the invention groupings possess the same or corresponding special technical feature or point out errors in Examiner's restriction requirement. A showing of serious search and examination burden is not a required element for a unity of invention restriction. That said, Examiner notes that a search and examination burden exists because the invention groups are directed towards different controller implementations which require different fields of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries) and prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 6/26/2026.
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.
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 3-5 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.
Claims 3-5 each depend upon a cancelled claim (see "claim 2" in the first line of each claim) and lack proper antecedent basis. For the purpose of examination, the claims are assumed to refer to the system of claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 12, 13, 15, 16, 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 20210030059) in view of CN'413 (CN106235413, with English machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Moloney discloses an aerosol provision system for generating an aerosol for user inhalation from aerosol-generating material using an aerosol generator (see aerosol generating system 100 comprising device 102 and consumable 106, [0043], Fig. 1), wherein the aerosol provision system comprises:
an indicator (indicator, [0083]); and
a controller (see controller 433; [0072]) configured to:
identify the end of a usage session, the usage session being a period of time in which a user inhales aerosol generated by the aerosol provision system (controller monitors a period of time elapsed from when the heater was last switched off, [0072]);
determine, after and dependent on identifying the end of the usage session, that a temperature of the aerosol provision system is below a predefined threshold temperature, wherein the controller is configured to determine that the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined threshold temperature by determining that a predefined cool down period has elapsed since the end of the usage session (controller monitors a period of time since heater was switched off and determines if the monitored time has reached a threshold, the threshold period of time can be predetermined and is set as period of time for a liner temperature to cool to a temperature that would not cause discomfort if handled by a user following use of the heater within the device; [0072]).
Regarding indicator control, Moloney discloses the controller operates to lock and release a liner within the device ([0072]). The liner requires removal for replacement and/or cleaning and the locking system is designed to stop a user from removing the liner while it is still hot ([0064,0072]). Moloney discloses controlling the indicator to indicate to a user that the liner requires changing and/or cleaning but does not expressly disclose controlling the indicator in response to determining the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined temperature threshold. In the same field of endeavor of aerosol provision systems, CN'413 discloses an aerosol system having a heating element with safety system to prevent a user from being burned when cleaning the device ([0007]). CN'413 discloses a locking system and an alarm indicator system wherein the alarm is provided with an indicator to indicate when the temperature of the device is above or below a safe temperature (red light or green light; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the system controller of Moloney to control the indicator to indicate the temperature is below the predefined threshold temperature since (1) Moloney discloses the controller as having a locking system to prevent a user from being burned when removing a liner ([0064,0072]) and (2) CN'413, teaches controlling an indicator light so to indicate to a user whether the device above or below a safe temperature that permits cleaning ([0090]). One would have been motivated to inform the user when the locking system is disengaged and the liner could be safely removed in Moloney.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Moloney discloses threshold period of times of 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 or more seconds ([0072]).
Regarding claim 12, Moloney discloses the controller identifies the end of usage session by based on a user input (control element such as a switch is operated by user to operate the heater, [0044] and the controller monitors when the heater is last switched off [0072]).
Regarding claim 13, Moloney discloses an aerosol generator (heater) and the controller identifies the end of usage session by determining a time of a last activation of the aerosol generator (controller monitors when the heater is last switched off, [0072]).
Regarding claim 15, Moloney discloses the indicator is audio, visual, or haptic ([0083]) and CN'413 also discloses the indicator as audio, visual, or buzzing device ([0090]).
Regarding claim 16, Moloney discloses a consumable comprising aerosol generating material (see consumable 106, [0043]).
Regarding claim 26, Maloney discloses an aerosol provision device for an aerosol provision system for generating an aerosol for user inhalation from aerosol-generating material using an aerosol generator (see aerosol generating system 100 comprising device 102 and consumable 106, [0043], Fig. 1), wherein the aerosol provision device comprises:
an indicator (indicator, [0083]); and
a controller (see controller 433; [0072]) configured to:
identify the end of a usage session, the usage session being a period of time in which a user
inhales aerosol generated by the aerosol provision system (controller monitors a period of time elapsed from when the heater was last switched off, [0072]);
determine, after and dependent on identifying the end of the usage session, that a temperature of the aerosol provision system is below a predefined threshold temperature, wherein the controller is configured to determine that the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined threshold temperature by determining that a predefined cool down period has elapsed since the end of the usage session (controller monitors a period of time since heater was switched off and determines if the monitored time has reached a threshold, the threshold period of time can be predetermined and is set as period of time for a liner temperature to cool to a temperature that would not cause discomfort if handled by a user following use of the heater within the device; [0072]).
Regarding indicator control, Moloney discloses the controller operates to lock and release a liner within the device ([0072]). The liner requires removal for replacement and/or cleaning and the locking system is designed to stop a user from removing the liner while it is still hot ([0064,0072]). Moloney discloses controlling the indicator to indicate to a user that the liner requires changing and/or cleaning but does not expressly disclose controlling the indicator in response to determining the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined temperature threshold. In the same field of endeavor of aerosol provision systems, CN'413 discloses an aerosol system having a heating element with safety system to prevent a user from being burned when cleaning the device ([0007]). CN'413 discloses a locking system and an alarm indicator system wherein the alarm is provided with an indicator to indicate when the temperature of the device is above or below a safe temperature (red light or green light; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the system controller of Moloney to control the indicator to indicate the temperature is below the predefined threshold temperature since (1) Moloney discloses the controller as having a locking system to prevent a user from being burned when removing a liner ([0064,0072]) and (2) CN'413, teaches controlling an indicator light so to indicate to a user whether the device above or below a safe temperature that permits cleaning ([0090]). One would have been motivated to inform the user when the locking system is disengaged and the liner could be safely removed in Moloney.
Regarding claim 27, Moloney discloses a method for controlling an aerosol provision system for generating an aerosol for user inhalation from aerosol-generating material using an aerosol generator (see aerosol generating system 100 comprising device 102 and consumable 106, [0043], Fig. 1), the method comprising:
identifying the end of a usage session, the usage session being a period of time in which a user inhales aerosol generated by the aerosol provision system (controller monitors a period of time elapsed from when the heater was last switched off, [0072]);
determining, after and dependent on identifying the end of the usage session, that a temperature of the aerosol provision system is below a predefined threshold temperature, by determining that a predefined cool down period has elapsed since the end of the usage session (controller monitors a period of time since heater was switched off and determines if the monitored time has reached a threshold, the threshold period of time can be predetermined and is set as period of time for a liner temperature to cool to a temperature that would not cause discomfort if handled by a user following use of the heater within the device; [0072]).
Regarding indicator control, Moloney discloses the controller operates to lock and release a liner within the device ([0072]). The liner requires removal for replacement and/or cleaning and the locking system is designed to stop a user from removing the liner while it is still hot ([0064,0072]). Moloney discloses controlling the indicator to indicate to a user that the liner requires changing and/or cleaning but does not expressly disclose controlling the indicator in response to determining the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined temperature threshold. In the same field of endeavor of aerosol provision systems, CN'413 discloses an aerosol system having a heating element with safety system to prevent a user from being burned when cleaning the device ([0007]). CN'413 discloses a locking system and an alarm indicator system wherein the alarm is provided with an indicator to indicate when the temperature of the device is above or below a safe temperature (red light or green light; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the system controller of Moloney to control the indicator to indicate the temperature is below the predefined threshold temperature since (1) Moloney discloses the controller as having a locking system to prevent a user from being burned when removing a liner ([0064,0072]) and (2) CN'413, teaches controlling an indicator light so to indicate to a user whether the device above or below a safe temperature that permits cleaning ([0090]). One would have been motivated to inform the user when the locking system is disengaged and the liner could be safely removed in Moloney.
Regarding claim 28, Moloney discloses aerosol provision means, for generating an aerosol for user inhalation from aerosol-generating means using an aerosol generator means (see aerosol generating system 100 comprising device 102 and consumable 106, [0043], Fig. 1), wherein the aerosol provision means comprises:
indicator means (indicator, [0083]); and
control means (see controller 433; [0072]) configured to:
identify the end of a usage session, the usage session being a period of time in which a user inhales aerosol generated by the aerosol provision system (controller monitors a period of time elapsed from when the heater was last switched off, [0072]);
determine, after and dependent on identifying the end of the usage session, that a temperature of the aerosol provision means is below a predefined threshold temperature, wherein the control means is configured to determine that the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined threshold temperature by determining that a predefined cooldown period has elapsed since the end of the usage session (controller monitors a period of time since heater was switched off and determines if the monitored time has reached a threshold, the threshold period of time can be predetermined and is set as period of time for a liner temperature to cool to a temperature that would not cause discomfort if handled by a user following use of the heater within the device; [0072]).
Regarding indicator control, Moloney discloses the controller operates to lock and release a liner within the device ([0072]). The liner requires removal for replacement and/or cleaning and the locking system is designed to stop a user from removing the liner while it is still hot ([0064,0072]). Moloney discloses controlling the indicator to indicate to a user that the liner requires changing and/or cleaning but does not expressly disclose controlling the indicator in response to determining the temperature of the aerosol provision system is below the predefined temperature threshold. In the same field of endeavor of aerosol provision systems, CN'413 discloses an aerosol system having a heating element with safety system to prevent a user from being burned when cleaning the device ([0007]). CN'413 discloses a locking system and an alarm indicator system wherein the alarm is provided with an indicator to indicate when the temperature of the device is above or below a safe temperature (red light or green light; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the system controller of Moloney to control the indicator to indicate the temperature is below the predefined threshold temperature since (1) Moloney discloses the controller as having a locking system to prevent a user from being burned when removing a liner ([0064,0072]) and (2) CN'413, teaches controlling an indicator light so to indicate to a user whether the device above or below a safe temperature that permits cleaning ([0090]). One would have been motivated to inform the user when the locking system is disengaged and the liner could be safely removed in Moloney.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 20210030059) in view of CN'413 (CN106235413, with English machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN111972724, with English machine translation).
Regarding claim 5, Moloney discloses setting a threshold period of time for cooling down where the time can be dependent on various factors such as properties of the chamber/heater ([0071]). Moloney does not expressly disclose the predefined cooldown period is dependent on a length of the usage session with longer periods for longer sessions; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided longer cooldown periods for longer usage sessions since (1) Zhang, similarly directed towards an aerosol generating device, teaches setting a cooling cycle duration based on heat dissipation rate and usage habits ([0129]) and that prolonged and/or repeated use can create increased temperature ([0128]) and (2) it is well known and conventional that increased temperatures require longer cooldown periods to dissipate the extra heat. One would have been motivated to configure the cooldown period based on the usage session to ensure the device has adequate time to reach a safe temperature.
Claims 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 20210030059) in view of CN'413 (CN106235413, with English machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dignum (US 20210052829).
Regarding claims 11 and 14, Moloney does not disclose the controller as configured to identify that the usage session has ended by determining that a predefined time period for the usage session has elapsed since the start of the usage session. In the same field of endeavor of aerosol provision devices, Dignum discloses maintaining a device temperature at a preconditioning temperature to assist in the rapid generation of aerosol ([0087]). Dignum further discloses that in operation, the device waits for a predetermined amount of time (e.g., two to five minutes) after an activation before automatically entering an inoperative state where the power shuts down and the heater returns to ambient state ([0086]). In other words, Dignum identifies that a usage session has started (identifies activation of the device) and that the usage session has ended based on the elapse of a predetermined amount of time (heater is turned off after a time period and allowed to cool down). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the controller to identify the start of a usage session and the end of a usage session based on the elapse of a predetermined amount of time from the start since Dignum discloses determining whether a predetermined amount of time has elapsed since last activation of the device before automatically shutting off the heater ([0086]). One would have been motivated to provide a preconditioning temperature to assist in rapid aerosol generation and to shut off the heater after a period of time to save energy when use has ended ([0086-0087]). As to claim 14, as noted above, Moloney discloses the controller monitors a period of time since heater was switched off to determine if a cooldown period has elapsed ([0072]). Taken together with Dignum, the system would monitor for a period of time since activation (Dignum) and then a period of time for the cooldown (Moloney).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 20210030059) in view of CN'413 (CN106235413, with English machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Qiu (WO2019/196737, with English machine translation).
Regarding claim 23, Moloney does not disclose a further predefined threshold temperature and the indicator is controlled to indicate the temperature is below the further predefined threshold temperature; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the controller to determine and indicate when the temperature is below a further predefined threshold temperature since (1) Qiu, similarly directed towards an aerosol provision system, discloses providing an indicator light that changes to multiple colors to correspond with a temperature of the device ([0078]) and (2) in displaying colors to indicate cooling of the device (CN'413 discloses red/green), one would have found it obvious to display multiple colors to indicate the decreasing temperature of the device with associated thresholds (e.g., red/yellow/green where yellow is the first threshold temperature and green is the second threshold temperature). One would have been motivated to provide the user with information regarding the temperature and cooldown period of the device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
EP3711539 discloses a HNB system with threshold time period for cooling ([0120]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C DYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT C DYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights