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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-5, 7, 11-12, 17-21, 23, 25-28 and 32-33 are pending and are subject to this office action. Claims 6, 8-10, 13-16, 22, 24 and 29-31 are cancelled. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informality: "the strands of aerosol-generating are" seems to omit the word "material" and should read "the strands of aerosol-generating material are". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected because its status identifier is incorrect. The claim is identified as “(Previously Presented)” but shows markings (the deletion of “[[10]]”). A claim that shows changes must be identified as “(Currently Amended)”. See 37 CFR 1.121(c). Applicant is required to use the correct status identifier in any future amendment.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: "for an article for an article for use with" repeats words and should read "for an article for use with". Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 26 be found allowable, claim 32 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim 12 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. Claim 12 recites "wherein the article comprises a plurality of strands of the fibrous susceptor material" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the article” in the claim, because neither claim 12 nor claim 1, from which it depends, introduces an article. Claim 1 introduces only “an aerosol-generating composition.” For examination purposes, “the article” is interpreted as “the aerosol-generating composition”.
Claim 28 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. Claim 28 recites "combining an aerosol-generating composition with a fibrous susceptor material field to form a mixture." in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “field” in the claim, is not defined in the specification, and it cannot be determined what structure or material a “fibrous susceptor material field” requires or how it differs from the “fibrous susceptor material” recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, “fibrous susceptor material field” is interpreted as “fibrous susceptor material.”
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7, 17-19, 23, 25, 26, 28, 32 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sebastian et al. (US-20190261685-A1, hereinafter referred to as "Sebastian").
PNG
media_image1.png
413
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Sebastian discloses an aerosol-generating composition (aerosol-generating substrate) comprising an aerosol-generating material (a fibrous filler material and an aerosol-forming material) and a plurality of heat conducting constituents ([0006]). In one implementation, the substrate portion of an aerosol source member for an induction heated aerosol delivery device comprises the fibrous filler material, the aerosol forming material and the plurality of heat conducting constituents, wherein the plurality of heat conducting constituents may comprise a resonant receiver configured to exhibit an alternating current when exposed to an oscillating magnetic field from the resonant transmitter, and the form of the heat conducting constituents may comprise at least one of a granular form, powder form, a mesh form, and a fiber cloth form ([0011]).
Sebastian further explains that the resonant receiver is a susceptor ([0066]) and that the heat conducting constituents of the substrate portion may comprise the resonant receiver, such that an alternate current is induced in them ([0066-0067]). In the depicting implementation, the heat conducting constituents comprise a plurality of metal fibers (202, Fig.4) mixed with the other components of the substrate ([0075]). The heat conducting constituents in fiber form that comprise the resonant receiver are therefore a fibrous susceptor material.
Regarding claim 2, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the heat conducting constituents may be in a mesh form or fiber cloth form ([0006], [0011]), including a metal mesh (1202, Fig.14) laminated onto the substrate sheet ([0083]). A mesh and fiber cloth have a plurality of open spaces; therefore, they are permeable to gas.
Regarding claim 3, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the heat conducting constituents may be in fiber cloth form and may comprise a metal mesh laminate or a metal fiber cloth laminate ([0006], [0011], [0083]), i.e., the fibrous susceptor material is a woven or non-woven material.
Regarding claim 4, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the fibrous susceptor material comprises metal fibers (202, Fig.4, [0075]), and the heat conducting constituents may comprise a metal material or carbon ([0011], [0075]).
Regarding claim 5, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1 in the form of a sheet (200, Fig.4, [0006], [0069]) and in the form of a collection of intermingled pieces cut from an initial substrate sheet ([0007]), the sheet being “cut into a plurality of pieces (e.g. strips, sections, portions, etc.)” ([0085]), in example, a shredded sheet.
Regarding claim 7, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the aerosol-generating material comprises a binder (ammonium alginate, [0073]), an aerosol former (glycerin, [0072]), a filler (cellulose pulp, [0069]), and optionally flavors and tobacco ([0058], [0088]).
Regarding claim 17, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1 comprising reconstituted tobacco material ([0058], [0071]).
Regarding claim 18, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the metal fibers (202) are “randomly (or substantially random) distributed within the thickness of the substrate sheet (202)” ([0078]), thus the fibers are randomly oriented with respect to each other.
Regarding claim 19, Sebastian discloses a process for manufacturing the composition of claim 1, the process comprising blending the fibrous filler material, aerosol-forming material, binder material and the plurality of heat conducting constituents together to form a slurry, and casting the slurry onto a surface ([0078]), i.e., combining the aerosol-generating material with the fibrous susceptor material.
PNG
media_image2.png
602
850
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Sebastian discloses a component for an article for use with a non-combustible aerosol provision device (the heated end (106, Fig.2) of the aerosol source member (104), which is inserted into control body (102) of aerosol-delivery device (100)), the component comprising the composition of claim 1 (substrate portion 110, [0055], [0058]).
Regarding claim 25, Sebastian discloses the component of claim 23, wherein the component is in the form of a rod. Sebastian describes the device as “substantially rod-like or substantially tubular shaped or substantially cylindrically shaped” and states that this language may also be applied to the individual components thereof, including the control body (102) and the aerosol source member (104, [0056]).
Regarding claim 26, Sebastian discloses the component of claim 23, wherein the component is an aerosol-generating section (substrate portion (110) at the heated end (106)) for an article (aerosol source member (104)) for use with a non-combustible aerosol provision device ([0058]).
Regarding claim 28, as interpreted in the 112(b) rejection above, Sebastian discloses a process for manufacturing the component of claim 23, the process comprising combining the aerosol-generating material with the fibrous susceptor material to for a mixture (the blended slurry, [0078]; the collection of intermingled pieces, [0085]) and circumscribing the mixture with a wrapper (exterior overwrap material 112, Fig.3, [0059]) to form the component.
Regarding claim 32, Sebastian discloses the component of claim 23, wherein the component is an aerosol-generating section (substrate portion (110) at the heated end (106)) for an article (aerosol source member (104)) for use with a non-combustible aerosol provision device ([0058]).
Regarding claim 33, Sebastian discloses an article for use with a non-combustible aerosol-provision device (aerosol source member (104), for use with a control body (102), [0055]) comprising the component of claim 32 (substrate portion (110) at the heated end (106)), together with a mouth end (108) and filter (114, [0058-0059]).
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 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Black et al. (WO-2020109203-A1, hereinafter referred to as "Black").
Regarding claim 11, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the initial substrate sheet may be cut into a plurality of pieces (e.g., strips, sections, portions, etc.) that form the substrate portion ([0085]), i.e., the composition comprises a plurality of strands or aerosol-generating material.
PNG
media_image3.png
294
779
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Sebastian does not explicitly disclose that the strands of aerosol-generating material are substantially parallel to one another.
However, Black, directed to an inductively heated aerosol generating article, teaches an aerosol-generating material part comprising at least ten aerosol-generating strips (18, Figs.1a-1b) substantially oriented in a first direction constituted by the longitudinal direction of the aerosol-generating article (1), with gaps between the strips providing an airflow path through the article (page 11, lines 23-30). Black teaches that a uniform airflow through the aerosol-generating article is achieved by virtue of an air flow route provided by gaps between the aerosol-generating strips (page 3, lines 6-7; page 3, lines 14-16). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Sebastian by arranging its strands of aerosol-generating material substantially parallel to one another, as taught by Black; because both Sebastian and Black are directed to aerosol-generating articles, Black teaches that longitudinally oriented strips provide an uniform airflow through the article (page 3, lines 6-7), and this involves applying a known technique to a known product ready for improvement, to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
PNG
media_image4.png
717
493
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, as interpreted in the 112(b) rejection above, Sebastian discloses the composition of claim 1, in which the fibrous susceptor material may be a metal mesh (1202, Fig.14) laminated onto the substrate sheet ([0083]) and the sheet may be cut into strips ([0085]).
Sebastian does not explicitly disclose that the composition comprises a plurality of strands of the fibrous susceptor material that are substantially parallel to one another.
However, Black teaches a plurality of strip-shaped susceptors (20, Figs.1a-1b and 5a-5b) which, like the aerosol-generating strips (18), are substantially oriented in the first direction constituted by the longitudinal direction of the aerosol-generating article, the strip shaped susceptors (20) being foldless in the longitudinal direction to prevent hot spots in the aerosol-generating material part (page 12, lines 1-5). Black further explains that the absence of folds provides uniform heating of the aerosol-generating strips due to uniform strip resistance, thus avoiding heat concentration or hot spots (page 5, lines 26-30).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Sebastian by forming its fibrous susceptor material as a plurality of strands arranged substantially parallel to one another, as taught by Black; because both Sebastian and Black are directed to aerosol-generating compositions, Black teaches that parallel, foldless susceptor strips heat the aerosol-generating material uniformly and avoid hot spots (page 5, lines 26-30; page 12, lines 1-5), and this involves applying a known technique to a known product ready for improvement, to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian as applied to claim 23 above, in view of Black.
Regarding claim 27, Sebastian discloses the component of claim 23, wherein the substrate portion is formed from pieces cut from the initial substrate sheet ([0085]) and the aerosol source member is wrapped in an exterior overwrap material (112, Fig.3, [0059]).
PNG
media_image5.png
676
980
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Sebastian does not explicitly disclose a process for manufacturing the component consisting of inserting one or more of a plurality of discrete portions of aerosol-generating material into a wrapper, and inserting one or more of a plurality of discrete portions of fibrous susceptor material into the wrapper to form the component.
However, Black teaches a process for manufacturing an inductively heated aerosol-generating article in which an aerosol-generating sheet (52, Fig.8a) is cut by rollers (54a-54b) into a plurality of aerosol-generating strips (18, Fig.5b) that are supplied to a wrapping station (62, page 17, lines 15-27), and in which discrete, pre-cut strip-shaped susceptors (20) are supplied to the wrapping station (page 18, lines 22-28). In another embodiment, a hopper (82, Fig.9b) deposits the aerosol-generating strips (18) onto the wrapping paper (70), and a further hopper deposits strip-shaped susceptors (20) onto the aerosol-generating strips (18), before the paper is wrapped around them (page 19, lines 4-12; page 20, lines 1-14). The shell comprises a tubular paper wrapper (16, page 11, lines 16-21).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the manufacture of the component of Sebastian by inserting discrete portions of the aerosol-generating material and discrete portions of the fibrous susceptor material into a wrapper, as taught by Black; because both Sebastian and Black are directed to the manufacture of aerosol-generating components, Black teaches that this method enables aerosol-generating articles to be mass produced with relative ease (page 8, lines 26-28), and this involves applying a known technique to improve a similar product in the same way, to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(C)).
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian as applied to claim 19 above, in view of Liu et al. (WO-2020029800-A1, hereinafter "Liu", referring to the English machine translation retrieved from Espacenet).
Regarding claim 20, Sebastian discloses the process of claim 19, including forming an initial substrate sheet comprising the aerosol-generating material and the heat conducting constituents, which may comprise a metal mesh laminate or metal fiber cloth laminate, cutting the initial substrate sheet into a plurality of pieces, and forming a collection of intermingled pieces from the plurality of pieces ([0015]). In one implementation, the fibrous susceptor material is a metal mesh (1202, Fig.14) laminated onto the substrate sheet (1200, [0083]), and the sheet is cut into strips ([0085]).
Sebastian does not explicitly disclose providing a sheet of the aerosol-generating material and a sheet of the fibrous susceptor material, cutting the sheet of aerosol-generating material to form a plurality of discrete portions of aerosol-generating material, cutting the sheet of fibrous susceptor material to form a plurality of discrete portions of fibrous susceptor material, and combining the plurality of discrete portions of aerosol-generating material with the plurality of discreet portions of fibrous susceptor material to form the composition.
However, Liu, directed to an electromagnetic induction heated cigarette having a ferromagnetic metal foil susceptor (page 1, line 60 – page 2, line 6), teaches providing a tobacco sheet (page 2, lines 25-41) and separately providing a metal foil having a thickness of 0.0001 mm to 0.5 mm (page 3, lines 37-38), pressing the tobacco sheet and the metal foil together to form a composite sheet (page 4, lines 27-28), and cutting the composite sheet into shreds that are arranged in strips and rolled into a tobacco rod structure (page 2, lines 48-49). Cutting the composite sheet cuts the tobacco sheet into a plurality of discrete portions and the metal foil into a plurality of discrete portions, and those portions are combined in the shreds that form the rod. Liu further teaches that this process greatly improves the heating efficiency of the composite sheet and greatly reduces the time from heating the tobacco to atomization (page 2, lines 55-58).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Sebastian by providing the sheet of aerosol-generating material and the sheet of fibrous susceptor material separately, combining them, and cutting them intro discrete portions that are combined to form the composition, as taught by Liu; because both Sebastian and Liu are directed to the manufacture of aerosol-generating components, Liu teaches that this process greatly improves heating efficiency and reduces the time from heating to atomization (page 2, lines 55-58), and this involves applying a known technique to a known process ready for improvement, to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
Regarding claim 21, Sebastian, in view of Liu, teaches the process of claim 20. Liu further teaches that the tobacco sheet and the metal foil are pressed into a single composite sheet (page 4, lines 27-28) that is then cut intro shreds (page 2, lines 48-49), so the sheet of aerosol-generating material and the sheet of susceptor material are cut simultaneously. Sebastian likewise cuts its initial substrate, with the metal mesh laminated to it, in a single cutting step ([0015], [0083]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIO E OCANA-ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-0806. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10am-6pm.
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 Y 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.
/J.E.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights