DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-13 are pending. Claims 1, 3, 7, and 9-12 have been amended.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (US 2019/0217028 A1, which corresponds to WO 2018/056300 A1 provided by applicant with IDS filed 8/7/2026) in view of Casselman et al. (US 2021/0345668 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nakano discloses an aerosol generating device (“flavor inhaler 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0058) comprising:
a heater (“Each atomizing unit 104 comprises, for example, a heater”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0060); and
a controller (“control unit 130”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0065) configured to calculate an accumulated power amount used by the heater during a first time period (“Next, in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098), and control a heating operating of the heater upon an expiration of the first time period (“If it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater exceeds W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 stops electric conduction to the heater in step S320”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0100; “On the other hand, if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101),
wherein the controlling of the heating operation comprises:
terminating the heating operation, if the accumulated power amount is greater than or equal to a reference power amount upon the expiration of the first time period (“If it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater exceeds W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 stops electric conduction to the heater in step S320”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0100; it is noted that “greater than or equal” is interpreted as setting forth alternatives, and as Nakano discloses terminating the heating operation if the accumulated power is greater than the reference power, the limitation is satisfied), and
continuing the heating operation beyond the first time period if the accumulated power amount is less than the reference power amount upon the expiration of the first time period (“if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101), and
wherein the first time period comprises a period during which the controller controls the heating operation of the heater while calculating a power amount used by the heater (“Next, in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098).
However, Nakano does not explicitly disclose that the controller controls the heating operation of the heater according to a predetermined temperature profile.
Casselman, in the same field of endeavor, discloses that a controller may control a heating operation of a heater according to a predetermined temperature profile (“controller may be configured to control delivery of heat to the atomizer in each respective type of vaporizer cartridge. For example, each type of vaporizer cartridge may require a same or a different heating temperature profile”, ¶ 0118). Casselman also discloses a benefit to controlling the heating operation according to a predetermined temperature profile in that it allows for varying the heating operation to account for differences in the material being aerosolized (¶ 0119). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the controller of Nakano to control the heating operation of the heater according to a predetermined temperature profile, as taught by Casselman, in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 2, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the aerosol generating device of claim 1, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the reference power amount comprises a sum of a first predetermined power amount used by the heater when there is no puff during the first time period and a second predetermined power amount used by the heater for performing a predetermined number of puffs during the first time period (the power calculations are performed “for a single inhaling action”, i.e., one puff, ¶ 0089; therefore, the reference power amount comprises a sum of a first predetermined power amount used by the heater when there is no puff during the first time period (zero) and a second predetermined amount (W1) used by the heater form performing a predetermined number of puffs (one) during the first time period).
Regarding claim 3, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the aerosol generating device of claim 1, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to check a power amount used by the heater during each of a plurality of predetermined time intervals and add up the power amount to calculate the accumulated power amount (“in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V.sup.2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098; step S316 is repeated when “the process returns to step S316” in the loop of Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101, with the time taken to perform a single iteration of the loop being considered as the predetermined time interval).
Regarding claim 4, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the aerosol generating device of claim 1, as discussed above. However, Nakano does not explicitly discuss the temperature in order to determine if the temperature of the heater is maintained during the continuation of the heating operation.
Casselman further discloses adjusting the temperature of the heater to a “desired heating temperature” (¶ 0118). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to maintaining this desired heating temperature in that it allows for consistent, uniform heating from the device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the controller of Nakano such that the continuing of the heating operation comprises maintaining a temperature of the heater at a desired temperature of the heater when the first time period expired, in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 5, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the aerosol generating device of claim 1, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the continuing of the heating operation comprises continuing the heating operation until an additional power amount used by the heater after the first time period expired reaches a difference between the accumulated power amount and the reference power amount (“if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101).
Regarding claim 6, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the aerosol generating device of claim 2, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the controller is configured to update the second predetermined power amount based on smoking pattern data acquired as a user uses the aerosol generating device (the setting for changing “total aerosol quantity p” is “performed via the user setting unit 150 by manipulation thereof by the user”, ¶ 0070, the total aerosol quantity emitted during an inhalation event constituting smoking pattern data, and the power amount is determined, i.e., updated, based on this data, as “the quantity of aerosol to be generated is usually determined based on energy applied to the aerosol source. For example, data representing relationship between the electric energy supplied to a heater for each atomizing unit 104 and the quantities of aerosol generated from the aerosol source when the heater is heated by the electric energy (hereinafter, this is referred to as aerosol generation quantity characteristic data) is stored in the memory 140 in advance. The control unit 130 obtains a value of the electric energy to be supplied to the heater, which corresponds to each of set values of the aerosol generation quantities u and v, by referring to the aerosol generation quantity characteristic data, and controls the electric energy W to be supplied from the battery 114 to the heater for each atomizing unit 104 in such a manner that the value of the electric energy W coincides with the obtained value”, ¶ 0083).
Regarding claim 7, Nakano discloses an operation method of an aerosol generating device (“flavor inhaler 100”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0058) comprising:
calculating, by a controller (“control unit 130”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0065) of the aerosol generating device, an accumulated power amount used by a heater (“each atomizing unit 104 comprises, for example, a heater”, Fig. 1, ¶ 0060) during a first time period (“Next, in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098); and
controlling, by the controller, a heating operating of the heater upon an expiration of the first time period (“If it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater exceeds W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 stops electric conduction to the heater in step S320”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0100; “On the other hand, if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101),
wherein the controlling of the heating operation comprises:
terminating the heating operation, if the accumulated power amount is greater than or equal to a reference power amount upon the expiration of the first time period (“If it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater exceeds W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 stops electric conduction to the heater in step S320”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0100; it is noted that “greater than or equal” is interpreted as setting forth alternatives, and as Nakano discloses terminating the heating operation if the accumulated power is greater than the reference power, the limitation is satisfied), and
continuing the heating operation beyond the first time period if the accumulated power amount is less than the reference power amount upon the expiration of the first time period (“if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101), and
wherein the first time period comprises a period during which the controller controls the heating operation of the heater calculating a power amount used by the heater (“Next, in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098).
However, Nakano does not explicitly disclose that the controller controls the heating operation of the heater according to a predetermined temperature profile.
Casselman, in the same field of endeavor, discloses that a controller may control a heating operation of a heater according to a predetermined temperature profile (“controller may be configured to control delivery of heat to the atomizer in each respective type of vaporizer cartridge. For example, each type of vaporizer cartridge may require a same or a different heating temperature profile”, ¶ 0118). Casselman discloses a benefit to controlling the heating operation according to a predetermined temperature profile in that it allows for varying the heating operation to account for differences in the material being aerosolized (¶ 0119). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified to configure the controller of Nakano to control the heating operation of the heater according to a predetermined temperature profile, as taught by Casselman, in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 8, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the operation method of claim 7, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the reference power amount comprises a sum of a first predetermined power amount used by the heater when there is no puff during the first time period and a second predetermined power amount used by the heater for performing a predetermined number of puffs during the first time period (the power calculations are performed “for a single inhaling action”, i.e., one puff, ¶ 0089; therefore, the reference power amount comprises a sum of a first predetermined power amount used by the heater when there is no puff during the first time period (zero) and a second predetermined amount (W1) used by the heater form performing a predetermined number of puffs (one) during the first time period).
Regarding claim 9, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the operating method of claim 7, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the calculating of the accumulated power amount comprises:
checking a power amount used by the heater during each of a plurality of predetermined time intervals and adding up the power amount to calculate the accumulated power amount (“in step S316, the control unit 130 calculates, based on the counted value tc of the electric conduction time and the voltage V applied to the heater, the electric energy supplied to the heater until that point in time, i.e., W=(V.sup.2/R)*tc”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0098; step s316 is repeated when “the process returns to step S316” in the loop of Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101, with the time taken to perform a single iteration of the loop being considered as the predetermined time interval).
Regarding claim 10, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the operating method of claim 7, as discussed above. However, Nakano does not explicitly discuss the temperature in order to determine if the temperature of the heater is maintained during the continuation of the heating operation.
Casselman further discloses adjusting the temperature of the heater to a “desired heating temperature” (¶ 0118). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to maintaining this desired heating temperature in that it allows for consistent, uniform heating from the device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the controller of Nakano such that the continuing of the heating operation comprises maintaining a temperature of the heater at a desired temperature of the heater when the first time period expired, in order to obtain this benefit.
Regarding claim 11, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses operating method of claim 7, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the continuing of the heating operation comprises continuing the heating operation until an additional power amount used by the heater after the first time period expired reaches a difference between the accumulated power amount and the reference power amount (“if it is judged as a result of judgment in step S318 that the electric energy W actually supplied to the heater does not exceed W1 (in the case that the counted value tc of electric conduction time has not yet reached the electric conduction time t), the control unit 130 judges in step S322, based on an output from the puff sensor 122, whether or not an inhaling action of the user is being continued. In the case that an inhaling action of the user is being continued, the process returns to step S316”, Fig. 3B, ¶ 0101).
Regarding claim 12, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the operating method of claim 8, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses wherein the controller is configured to update the second predetermined power amount based on smoking pattern data acquired as a user uses the aerosol generating device (the setting for changing “total aerosol quantity p” is “performed via the user setting unit 150 by manipulation thereof by the user”, ¶ 0070, the total aerosol quantity emitted during an inhalation event constituting smoking pattern data, and the power amount is determined, i.e., updated, based on this data, as “the quantity of aerosol to be generated is usually determined based on energy applied to the aerosol source. For example, data representing relationship between the electric energy supplied to a heater for each atomizing unit 104 and the quantities of aerosol generated from the aerosol source when the heater is heated by the electric energy (hereinafter, this is referred to as aerosol generation quantity characteristic data) is stored in the memory 140 in advance. The control unit 130 obtains a value of the electric energy to be supplied to the heater, which corresponds to each of set values of the aerosol generation quantities u and v, by referring to the aerosol generation quantity characteristic data, and controls the electric energy W to be supplied from the battery 114 to the heater for each atomizing unit 104 in such a manner that the value of the electric energy W coincides with the obtained value”, ¶ 0083).
Regarding claim 13, Nakano in view of Casselman discloses the operating method of claim 7, as discussed above. Nakano further discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium (“memory 140”, ¶ 0065) having recorded thereon a program for executing the method of Nakano, which in the combination of Nakano and Casselman corresponds to the method of claim 7, on a computer (“The control unit 130 is an electronic circuit module constructed as a microprocessor or a microcomputer, and is programmed to control operation of the flavor inhaler 100 according to computer-executable instructions stored in the memory 140”, ¶ 0065).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0874. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Michael H Wilson can be reached at (571)270-3882. 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.
/COURTNEY G CULBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
