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 .
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 27 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.
Regarding claim 27, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claim(s) 16-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BOWEN et al. (US 2019/0158938).
Bowen teaches an aerosol-generating device for generating an aerosol from an aerosol- forming substrate comprising an indicator (para. 0147-0148) configured to indicate progress of the event as a sequence of 1st to nth different indication states, n being a number equal to or greater than 7 (para. 0150 “Though the vaporizer session are described in three segments above, a vaporizer session can be partitioned into fewer or more segments”); and a controller (105) configured to monitor progress of the event and to control the indicator to indicate in an indication state representative of the progress of the event (para. 0148-0152), wherein the indicator is a visual indicator comprising a predetermined number of discrete light emitting units, each light emitting unit being controllable to emit light in a predetermined number of different intensities (para. 0149, 0151). Bowen teaches an example with three lights but teaches that more of fewer lights are possible (para. 0149) which reads on between 4 and 24. Bowen teaches an example having a light pattern with three different intensities (para. 0148) which reads on a number between 2 and 5.
Regarding claim 17, Bowen teaches the aerosol- generating device is configured to monitor a parameter relating to the progress of the event (para. 0138, 0124-0125).
Regarding claim 18, Bowen teaches the parameter is selected from a list consisting of time (para. 0124, 0125), number of user puffs (para. 0124, 0125), cumulative number of user puffs taken during the event (para. 0124, 0125), volume of aerosol delivered (para. 0125), cumulative volume of aerosol delivered during the event (para. 0125), energy consumed (para. 0125), cumulative volume of energy consumed during the event (para. 0125), temperature (para. 0124), temperature of heating element (para. 0042), resistance of heating element (para. 0068), and user interaction.
Regarding claim 19, Bowen teaches the event is an operational phase of the aerosol-generating device (para. 0125).
Regarding claim 20, Bowen teaches the event is a usage session (para. 0149).
Regarding claim 21, Bowen teaches an example where the event comprises three sequential phases (para. 0148, 0150) but Bowen specifies in paragraph 0150 that “[t]hough the vaporizer session are described in three segments above, a vaporizer session can be partitioned into fewer or more segments” which reads on at least 7 sequential phases. Bowen teaches the controller is further configured to control the indicator to indicate a different a different indication states during each of the sequential phases (para. 0148, 0150).
Regarding claim 22, Bowen teaches each of the predetermined number of indication states represents a light intensity level of between 0% and 100% of possible emission intensity (para. 0148).
Regarding claim 23, Bowen teaches each of the discrete light emitting units is controlled to emit light in two different intensities (para. 0148).
Regarding claim 24, Bowen teaches the two different intensities are intensities of about 50% of possible emission intensity and about 100% of possible emission intensity (para. 0148).
Regarding claim 25, Bowen teaches each of the discrete light emitting units is controlled to emit light in three different intensities (para. 0149).
Regarding claim 28, Bowen teaches the discrete light emitting units are configured as on or extending through a housing of the device (para. 0147). Bowen teaches that the discrete light emitting units are part of a light array (para. 0147) which reads on a linear matrix and an annular matrix.
Regarding claim 29, Bowen teaches the indicator is a visual indicator comprising a LCD display screen (para. 0235).
Regarding claim 30, Bowen teaches the progress of the event is determined and displayed by a visual indicator (para. 0147), and wherein progression through the 1st to nth indication states involves a corresponding increase in intensity or luminance of light displayed by the visual indicator, or involves a corresponding decrease in intensity or luminance of light displayed by the visual indicator (para. 0148-0151).
Regarding claim 31, Bowen teaches the event is a first event, the aerosol-generating device further being further configured to monitor progress of and display progress in relation to a second event, the second event being different from the first event (para. 00149).
Regarding claim 32, Bowen teaches control electronics (105); and at least one visual indicator (115) comprising a plurality of light emitting units (para. 0147), wherein the control electronics are configured to independently control each one of the plurality of light emitting units in at least :i) an off state in which the light emitting unit does not emit light, ii) a first lighting state in which the light emitting unit emits light at a first static luminance level, and iii) a second lighting state in which the light emitting unit emits light at a second static luminance level that is different from the first static luminance level (para. 0148-0149), wherein the control electronics are further configured to control each one of the light emitting units to be in one of the off state, first lighting state, and the second lighting state so as to indicate progression of the event to a user as the sequence of 1st to nth different visual indication states (para. 0148-149).
Regarding claim 33, Bowen teaches the at least one visual indicator is a lighting array (para. 0147).
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.
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BOWEN et al. (US 2019/0158938).
Bowen teaches an aerosol-generating device for generating an aerosol from an aerosol- forming substrate comprising an indicator (para. 0147-0148) configured to indicate progress of the event as a sequence of 1st to nth different indication states, n being a number equal to or greater than 7 (para. 0150 “Though the vaporizer session are described in three segments above, a vaporizer session can be partitioned into fewer or more segments”); and a controller (105) configured to monitor progress of the event and to control the indicator to indicate in an indication state representative of the progress of the event (para. 0148-0152), wherein the indicator is a visual indicator comprising a predetermined number of discrete light emitting units, each light emitting unit being controllable to emit light in a predetermined number of different intensities (para. 0149, 0151). Bowen teaches an example with three lights but teaches that more of fewer lights are possible (para. 0149) which reads on between 4 and 24. Bowen teaches an example having a light pattern with three different intensities (para. 0148) which reads on a number between 2 and 5.
Regarding claim 26, Bowen teaches the light emitting units may display a first intensity/brightness level, a second intensity/brightness level higher than the first intensity, and a third intensity/brightness level higher than the second intensity (para. 0148). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try the three different intensities are intensities of about 33% of possible emission intensity, about 66% of possible emission intensity, and about 100% of possible emission intensity because Bowen teaches that each intensity is greater than the previous intensity (para. 0148).
Regarding claim 27, Bowen teaches in paragraph 0150 that “[t]hough the vaporizer session are described in three segments above, a vaporizer session can be partitioned into fewer or more segments” and teaches in paragraph 0148 that the light patterns “can include any combination of flashing lights, color, brightness, etc.” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to try the discrete light emitting units being controlled to emit light in 4 different intensities.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA SZEWCZYK whose telephone number is (571)270-5130. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10 am - 6 pm.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached at 571-270-7001. 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.
/CYNTHIA SZEWCZYK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1741
Prosecution Insights