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 1 in the reply filed on 3/16/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that it is not a serious burden to examine the non-elected claims. This is not found persuasive because that argument is based on US practice, while the restriction was done under PCT practice. The instant application does not have a special technical feature at least because of original restriction requirement. In addition, for Groups 1, 3, and 4, the restriction is further maintained over Kwon KR 10-2019-0130914 as it teaches the technical feature of claim 1 as shown in the rejection below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kwon (KR 10-2019-0130914, English translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system (“minute particle generator”) comprising: a chamber (item 13) for receiving at least part of a consumable (item 11) through an aperture of the chamber (item 12), where the aerosol provision system is ‘configured’ to generate an aerosol from a consumable received in the chamber (Kwon pg 2, para 3), and wherein the aerosol provision system further comprises a visual indicator (Kwon pg 1, Technical Field, item 20) for providing user feedback arranged around the aperture (Kwon pg 1, Technical Field). It is noted that the embodiments of figures 4 and 5 show the visual indicators circumscribing the minute particle generator, and may thus be considered to be arranged around the aperture.
Regarding claims 2-4, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system as above for claim 1. Kwon further teaches that the visual indicator is a display (Kwon pg 4, para 3) which extends around the aperture as above for claim 1. This satisfies that the display extends partially, continuously, and around a perimeter of the of the aperture (Kwon figs 3, 4 items 20).
Regarding claim 7, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system as above for claim 1. Kwon further teaches that the visual indicator provides a display comprising a plurality of display regions arranged on a path around the aperture (Kwon figs 3, 4, items 20; pg 4 para 5, 6).
Regarding claims 9, 11, and 19, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system as above for claims 1 and 7. Kwon further teaches that there may be a plurality of display regions and that they may be formed from oLEDs or LEDs, both of which provide for pixels (each diode) and they are ‘illuminating elements’ as they are light-emitting (Kwon pg 3-4).
Regarding claim 12, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system with a visual indicator as above for claim 1. Kwon illustrates a stack of concentric display regions in figure 4, where each has a separate path around the aperture. In the instant case, the stack of display regions/rings of items 21, 22, 23, and 24 are stacked over each other with the same common centerpoint, further they are discrete from each other and may thus be considered arranged on a separate path (Kwon fig 4, item 20, subitems 21-24).
Regarding claim 18, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system as above for claim 7. Kwon further teaches the plurality of display regions are independently controllable display regions (Kwon pg 4, description of fig 3,5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hejazi et al. (US 2020/0060340).
Regarding claim 5, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system with a visual indicator as above for claim 1. Kwon further teaches that the aperture enters into a receiving recess (item 13) for the consumable (item 11), where the recess has a central axis (Kwon fig 1).
Kwon is silent with respect to a planar display region of the visual indicator being oriented substantially parallel to the central axis of the recess.
Kwon and Hejazi are related in the field of aerosol provision systems comprising displays. Hejazi teaches that the indicator LEDs may be at any location on the mouthpiece or body of the aerosol device (Hejazi para 108 fig 9, item 406). Hejazi further teaches that the location of the indicators may be selected depending on what information the indicator is trying to display (Hejazi para 108 fig 9, item 406). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the location of the visual indicator of Kwon to be oriented substantially perpendicular to the central axis of the receiving recess because Hejazi teaches the indicators can be placed as needed on the aerosol generating device to effectively communicate various information.
Regarding claim 6, Kwon teaches an aerosol provision system with a visual indicator as above for claim 1.
Kwon is silent with respect to a planar display region of the visual indicator being disposed on a mouthpiece end surface.
Kwon and Hejazi are related in the field of aerosol provision systems comprising displays. Hejazi teaches that the indicator LEDs may be at any location on the mouthpiece or body of the aerosol device (Hejazi para 108 fig 9, item 406). Hejazi further teaches that the location of the indicators may be selected depending on what information the indicator is trying to display (Hejazi para 108 fig 9, item 406). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the location of the visual indicator of Kwon to be disposed on a mouthpiece end surface because Hejazi teaches the indicators can be placed as needed on the aerosol generating device to effectively communicate various information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA B FIGG whose telephone number is (571)272-9882. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9a-6p Mountain.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. 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.
/LAURA B FIGG/Examiner, Art Unit 1781 9/29/26
Prosecution Insights