CTNF 18/579,074 CTNF 85496 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 includes two bullet points labeled "I". It appears these should be separate, consecutively numbered points . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 6, 7, and 17 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. Claim 6 recites "a first subset of motorised transport" in lines 2-3 and claim 7 recites "a second subset of motorized transport" in line 2. The claims do not define what modes are included or excluded in the first/second subsets and one of ordinary skill in the art is not reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of the claim. Is this a subset within a set of classification modes defined in the processor or is this merely any subset of motorized transport? Claim 17 recites "the control processor is operable to set a first activity state that may include one or more selected from the list consisting of" in lines 3-4. It is unclear whether the recitation of "may include" is intended to be optional or required. 07-36 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. 07-36-01 AIA Claim 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 18 only recites "the aerosol delivery system of claim 1, in which:" and does not include any limitation. Claim 18 thus fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1. Examiner notes that the claims under examination are those submitted with the preliminary amendment dated 1/12/2024 . Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-7, 14, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Popplewell (US 20180263283) . Regarding claim 1, Popplewell discloses an aerosol delivery system, comprising: an aerosol delivery device (vape device 10, [0058]); at least a first motion detection sensor configured to generate motion signals in response to motion (acceleration, motion, altitude, and/or velocity sensors, [0092]); a motion classification processor configured to classify whether the motion is characteristic of a particular mode of transportation based on the generated motion signals and a control processor configured to alter one or more operational parameters of the aerosol delivery system in response to a classification by the motion classification processor of motion signals generated by the motion detection sensor (vape device has control circuit. (Popplewell discloses the application 74 can utilize motion sensors to determine if the user is within a moving vehicle or airplane and such information can be used to alter the operation of the vape device; Popplewell discloses a computing device 72 with processor and vape device 10 with microcontroller 31 on PCB 30 for operating and controlling the vape device based on operational settings; [0092-0094,0077]). Regarding claims 2 and 3, the aerosol delivery system comprises a companion device (see mobile device 72 in Fig. 3), said device can comprise motion sensor and motion classification processor, [0077,0092]). Regarding claim 4-5, Popplewell discloses the application 74 utilizes motion sensors to determine if user is within a moving vehicle or airplane ([0092]). Regarding claims 6 and 7, Popplewell discloses airplanes, which is subset of motorized transport (construed as a first or second subset), and that the vape device is placed in a restricted access or locked state ([0092]; construed as a first or second activity sate). Regarding claim 14, Popplewell discloses accelerometers and gyroscopes ([0092]). Regarding claim 17, Popplewell discloses the control processor is operable to set a first activity state in restricted access or locked mode ([0092]). The recitation of "may include" is construed as optional. That said, Popplewell does disclose the system includes dashboard for indicating operational status of the device ([0078]; indicator lights, alphanumeric display screens [0067]; thus, display a first set of information). Regarding claim 18, the claim does not further limit claim 1 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popplewell (US 20180263283) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lett (US 20220269763) and/or Rogan (US 20230134738) . Regarding claims 8-11, Popplewell discloses the motion sensors and processors determine whether a user is within a moving vehicle or airplane and that such information can be used to restrict access or lock the vape device ([0092]). While Popplewell does not expressly disclose the motion classification processor is configured to classify whether the motion is characteristic of non-motorized transportation, Examiner notes that in Popplewell the movement sensor detects movement and the processor must determine whether the movement is or is not a characteristic of a moving vehicle/airplane. For example, sustained high speeds or high altitudes would be characteristics of a motorized vehicle or airplane. Movement that did not meet this threshold would be a characteristic of non-motorized transport (i.e., low speed). In the same field of endeavor of aerosol generation devices, Lett discloses a control application for a vaporizer wherein the application restricts use of the vaporizer when the user is moving in excess of normal walking speed or potentially operating a motorized vehicle ([0107,0115]). Rogan, similarly directed toward aerosol generation devices, also discloses using movement speed to enable/disable operation of a vaporizer wherein the movement speed is used to differentiate device travel ([0096-0099]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the motion classification processor in Popplewell to classify whether motion is characteristic of non-motorized transportation or walking since (1) Popplewell discloses restricting use when determining a user is within a moving vehicle ([0092]) and (2) Lett and/or Rogan disclose using moving speed relative to walking or operating a motorized vehicle to control use of a vaporizer (Lett, [0107]; Rogan, [0096-0099]). Determining a low moving speed would be characteristic of non-motorized transportation or walking. Changing to a non-restricted access state would correspond to the first or second activity states of claims 9 and 11. Examiner notes that walking is a non-motorized mode of transportation. Regarding claim 13, Popplewell does not disclose a wireless signal receiver and the motion classification processor is configured to classify whether motion is characteristic of a particular mode of transportation based upon a classification of one or more wireless signals. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the device with a wireless receiver and to classify transportation based on wireless signals since (1) Popplewell discloses using a variety of different sensors alone or in combination to determine whether user is within a transport ([0092]) and (2) Lett and/or Rogan, each directed towards vaporizers, disclose using GPS to determine movement speed of the vaporizer and/or user thereof (see Lett, [0107,0115]; Rogan, [0095]). One would have been motivated to accurately determine a moving speed of the aerosol generating system . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popplewell (US 20180263283) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hawes (US 20170108840) . Regarding claim 10-12, Popplewell does not disclose classifying motion is characteristic of walking or user interaction with the aerosol delivery device; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the system of Popplewell to classify motion characteristic of walking or of user interaction since Hawes, similarly directed towards a vaporizer teaches configuring the device to detect and classify hand-to-mouth (HMG) gestures and transitioning the operation mode of the device based on determining whether a HMG occurred ([0006,0017,0020]) and to classify motion data representing non-HMG motions like walking ([0161]; the processor would be controlled to place the aerosol device in a non-active state since no HMG occurred) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Popplewell (US 20180263283) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gouin (WO 2021/094380) . Regarding claims 15 and 16, Popplewell does not disclose the motion classification processor as configured to estimate an emotional state of the user and the control processor as configured to alter operational parameters in response to the estimate emotional state. In the same field of endeavor of vaporizers, Gouin discloses a system for detecting a stress level of a user and based on that, control the amount of aerosol deliver to the user for inhalation (pg 1, lines 25-28). Gouin discloses the device uses a galvanometer to measure skin response and an accelerometer to detect movement (pg 1, lines 18-28; pg 2, 15-28). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the device to estimate an emotional state of the user and to alter the device operation since Gouin discloses using a galvanometer and an accelerometer to estimate the stress level of a user and to alter to amount of aerosol to deliver during inhalation based on the estimated stress level (pg 1, line 18-pg 2, line 28). As to claim 16, Gouin discloses using galvanometer to measure skin response (pg 1, lines 18-28). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C DYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST. 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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. /ROBERT C DYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 2 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 3 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 4 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 5 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 6 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 7 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 8 Art Unit: 3619 Application/Control Number: 18/579,074 Page 9 Art Unit: 3619
Prosecution Insights