Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/564,622

ATOMIZATION HEATING ASSEMBLY AND ATOMIZATION HEATING DEVICE USING SAME

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Nov 28, 2023
Examiner
YAARY, ERIC
Art Unit
1755
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Shenzhen Huachengda Precision Industry Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
627 granted / 850 resolved
+8.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
900
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 850 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 8-9 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 8-9 recite the limitation "said air guide members”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. 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, 5-7, and 14-17 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. 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 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 2, 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, reading on the claimed limitations. 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. 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 7, 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 [Fig. 10-12]. 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 2 2/23 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. 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. Claim s 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 an air guide member configured to guide air and enlarge the atomization area is arranged on the atomization surface of the magnetically conductive porous heating unit in an airflow direction. Akiyama teaches an air guide member configured to guide air and enlarge the atomization area is 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 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 increa se the amount of aerosol which is extracted as suggested by Akiyama. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ERIC YAARY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3273 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Philip Louie can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 28, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599159
ORAL PRODUCTS WITH IMPROVED BINDING OF ACTIVE INGREDIENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588707
ELECTRONIC SMOKING ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582151
METHOD AND PLANT FOR TREATING TOBACCO LEAVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575599
SMOKING CAPSULE WITH ELECTRICAL CONTACT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575612
SMOKING DEVICE WITH FLATTENING FUNCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+2.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 850 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month