DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues “Luo does not disclose that the porous metal portion 102 is divided into multiple portions according to functional differentiation. nor does Luo teach that the porous metal portion at the atomization surface serves as the primary heating element while the porous metal portion at other locations serves as a preheating element”. However, these limitations are not present in claim 1.
Applicant argues “The porous metal portion of Luo has a non-uniform thickness at the atomization surface, but such non-uniformity does not correspond to a thickness greater than that at other locations”. The Examiner disagrees. Such non-uniformity does correspond to a thickness greater than that at other locations. See, for example annotated Fig. 10 of Luo provided below. A thickness T2 of one portion is greater than thickness T1 of another portion, reading on the present limitation.
PNG
media_image1.png
180
268
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues “In Luo, the porous metal portion (102) is powered by electrodes (103) to generate heat, which constitutes a resistive heating method and is therefore fundamentally distinct from the electromagnetic induction heating method employed by the magnetically conductive porous heating unit of the present application.” However, the claims do not require the presence of a induction heater, nor are they directed to a method of using the atomization heating assembly. The material of the porous heating unit of Luo is the same as that of the instant invention. Therefore, the porous heating unit of Luo is capable of generating heat by means of the electromagnetic effect as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo (US 2022/0240582) in view of Han (US 2019/0335809) and Duque (US 2018/0177240).
Regarding claim 1, Luo teaches atomization heating assembly 100 [Fig. 1], comprising a porous ceramic portion 101 (liquid transfer unit) and a porous metal portion 102 (heating unit) [0039]. The heating unit comprises iron-nickel alloy [0015], corresponding to a magnetically conductive material of the instant invention. The heating unit of Luo is thereby interpreted as being magnetically conductive and capable of generating heat by means of the electromagnetic effect as claimed. Luo teaches wherein the porous liquid transfer unit is configured as a porous structure with micron-sized pores [0050], the magnetically conductive porous heating unit is configured as a magnetically conductive porous structure [0042], the magnetically conductive porous heating unit is at least inlaid in or attached to a surface of the porous liquid transfer unit, and an exposed surface of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit located in an atomization passage forms an atomization surface [0039, 0043, 0044]. Luo teaches a thickness of a portion, provided with the atomization surface, of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit is greater than that of other portions of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit, as shown in Fig. 10-12 where the center portion of the heating unit 102 has a greater thickness than side portions of the heating unit 102.
Luo does not teach the porous structure is formed by high-temperature sintering of an inorganic non-metallic aggregate and a binder. However, this is process of forming a porous ceramic structure is known in the art as taught by Han [0025] and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply to Luo to achieve the same, predictable result of forming a ceramic porous liquid transfer unit.
Luo does not teach the magnetically conductive porous structure is formed by direct high-temperature sintering of magnetically conductive material particles. However, this is process of forming a porous metallic heating element is known in the art as taught by Duque [0054] and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply to Luo to achieve the same, predictable result of forming a porous metallic heating element.
Regarding claim 3, Luo teaches the powder is iron-nickel alloy [0015].
Regarding claim 5, Luo teaches a portion of the surface of the porous liquid transfer unit 101 is not provided with the magnetically conductive porous heating unit 102 [Fig. 9]. Luo does not teach this portion is in contact with a sealing element. Han teaches a sealing element in contact with the liquid transfer unit [0028]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the portion of Luo in contact with a sealing element for sealing purposes. The limitation of “so as to prevent the sealing element against deformation or damage caused by continuous heating of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit, which otherwise compromises the sealing effect of the sealing element” is an intended result that does not further limit the claimed structure to distinguish from that of modified Luo.
Regarding claim 6, Luo teaches a thickness of the porous liquid transfer unit 101 is greater than that of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit 102 [Fig. 9].
Regarding claim 14, Luo [Fig. 9] teaches the porous liquid transfer unit 101 is configured as a grooved structure; the magnetically conductive porous heating unit 102 is configured as a plate structure inlaid in a middle of a side wall of the porous liquid transfer unit 101; the atomization surface of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit 102 is flush with the side surface of the porous liquid transfer unit 101.
Regarding claim 15, Luo [Fig. 9] teaches a liquid inflow surface arranged on the porous liquid transfer unit 101 is a flat surface and the atomization surface is a flat surface.
Regarding claim 16, Luo does not teach a liquid transfer hole or a liquid transfer groove is formed in a liquid inflow surface of the porous liquid transfer unit. However, this configuration is taught by Han for increasing liquid contact area and diffusion speed [0026] and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply to Luo for these reasons.
Regarding claim 17, modified Luo as applied to claim 1 teaches the atomization heating assembly. Luo teaches the atomization heating assembly is provided in an electronic cigarette (atomization heating device) [0039] but does not disclose further details. Han teaches an atomization heating device, comprising a housing 10, a mouthpiece (top of Fig. 2) and a liquid tank 12 [Fig. 2], wherein the atomization heating assembly 22/23 is arranged below the liquid tank, and a sealing element 24 is arranged between the atomization beating assembly and the liquid tank [0028]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply this configuration to the atomization heating assembly of Luo to provide a fully constructed device for use by a user.
Regarding claim 18, Luo teaches the porosity of the porous liquid transfer unit is 30%-70%, and the diameter of the micropores is 10-50 µm [0050].
Regarding claim 19, these limitations are directed to intended use of the heating assembly. They does not further limit the structure or composition of the of the heating assembly to distinguish from that of modified Luo. The heating assembly of modified Luo thereby reads on the present limitations.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo, Han, and Duque as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (US 2021/0345670).
Modified Luo teaches the magnetically conductive porous heating unit is prepared from magnetically conductive metal powder [Luo 0015; Duque 0054]. There is no disclosure of any other materials. Thus, magnetically conductive metal powder is interpreted as being 100 parts. The limitation of “the parts of ceramic powder, the sintering aid, and the paraffin are not all zero” implies that at least one of these components needs to be greater than zero. Wang teaches a sintered heating element including a sintering aid [0061]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a sintering aid with the metal powder of Wang, and furthermore to optimize the amounts thereof through routine experimentation, to achieve the desired sintering effect.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo, Han, and Duque as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stowell (US 2006/0243368).
Modified Luo does not teach the binder is a glass powder or a glaze. Stowell teaches than in forming ceramic glass particles (powder) can be used as a binder [0018]. As this is a conventional binder material known in ceramic forming, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art too use glass powder binder as the binder in modified Luo achieve the same, predictable result of forming a ceramic structure.
Claims 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo, Han, and Duque as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Akiyama (US 2023/0200447).
Modified Luo does not teach air guide members. Akiyama teaches air guide members configured to guide air and enlarge the atomization area to promote heat dissipation are arranged on the atomization surface of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit in an airflow direction, multiple columns of air guide members are arranged in the airflow direction, and gaps are reserved between the multiple columns of said air guide members, in the airflow direction, the air guide members in a same column are arranged continuously, the air guide member is arranged in parallel manner, a cross-section of the air guide member is in a polygonal shape, the air guide member is an air guide protrusion [0062; Fig. 4]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply this configuration to the assembly of Modified Luo to increase the amount of aerosol which is extracted as suggested by Akiyama.
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 ERIC YAARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/ERIC YAARY/Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights