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 .
Priority
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.
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 1-4, 8-12, 14-20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zuber (US 2014/0373856) in view of Potter (US 2014/0261486).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Zuber teaches a method, comprising: establishing a retention medium (Fig 1, aerosol-forming substrate 7, 0053, 0056); connecting a plurality of elements together to form an aerosol-generating article (smoking article 1, 0053), the plurality of elements including a retention medium (7) directly abutting a heat diffuser (Fig 1, front plug 2, 0026, 0053, ceramic, zeolite), the heat diffuser including a porous body (0026, 0053, ceramic, zeolite) on a distal end of the aerosol-generating article, the porous body being configured to absorb heat such that the porous body heats air drawn through the porous body and the retention medium during an operational use of the aerosol-generating article (front plug 2 absorbs heat from heating element 8 to heat air drawn through the aerosol-generating article). Zuber discloses the claimed invention except for providing at least one frangible capsule that releasably contains a substrate; and inserting the at least one frangible capsule within the retention medium, the retention medium being configured to absorb and retain the substrate after the at least one frangible capsule is ruptured by an application of an external force, the retention medium being devoid of the substrate prior to a release of the substrate from the at least one frangible capsule.
However, Potter discloses providing at least one frangible capsule that releasably contains a substrate (Fig 4A, vapor-enhancing element 620, 0083, 0085, the vapor-enhancing element 620 may comprise a frangible member introduced into the filter material. The frangible member 620 may be configured to house or otherwise include an enhancement substance); and inserting the at least one frangible capsule within the retention medium (filter material 600, lumen 610, 0083), the retention medium being configured to absorb and retain the substrate after the at least one frangible capsule is ruptured by an application of an external force (0085), the retention medium being devoid of the substrate prior to a release of the substrate from the at least one frangible capsule (0085) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the retention material of Zuber silent to a frangible capsule with the providing at least one frangible capsule that releasably contains a substrate; and inserting the at least one frangible capsule within the retention medium, the retention medium being configured to absorb and retain the substrate after the at least one frangible capsule is ruptured by an application of an external force, the retention medium being devoid of the substrate prior to a release of the substrate from the at least one frangible capsule of providing an alternative form of the retention medium that allows a vapor-enhancing substance to rupture and release the substance into engagement with the filter material (0085), thereby providing an improved vapor enhancement effect.
With respect to the limitations of claims 2, 3, 4 and 16, Zuber in view of Potter discloses the establishing establishes the retention medium to be in the form of a tube that defines a lumen (Potter, Figs 4A, 4B, filter material 600, lumen 610, 0083);
the inserting inserts the at least one frangible capsule within the lumen (Potter, vapor-enhancing element 620 located within lumen 610);
the establishing establishes the retention medium such that at least part of the retention medium includes an absorbent polymeric material (Potter, filter material 600, cellulose acetate or polypropylene, 0080);
further comprising: configuring a heating element (Zuber, heating element 8) to be selectively insertable into a cavity (Potter, lumen 610) that is defined by the porous body (Potter, filter material 600), the porous body being configured to absorb heat that is emitted by the heating element.
With respect to the limitations of claims 17, 18 and 19, Zuber discloses a portion of the body is between the cavity and an outlet end (Fig 1, remaining portion of aerosol-forming substrate 7 between tip of heater 8 and outlet end of mouth-end 20). Zuber in view of Potter discloses the claimed invention except for the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between the cavity and an outlet end of the aerosol-generating article; the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between the cavity and the retention medium; the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between a tip of the heating element and the retention medium once the heating element is fully inserted into the cavity. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between the cavity and an outlet end of the aerosol-generating article; the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between the cavity and the retention medium; the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between a tip of the heating element and the retention medium once the heating element is fully inserted into the cavity, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable porous body configuration involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04)
With respect to the limitations of claims 14, 15 and 20, Zuber teaches the porous body is non-combustible (0026, 0053, ceramic, zeolite);
further comprising: configuring a heating element (Fig 1, heating element 8, where the heating element 8 is inserted through front plug 2) to be selectively connectable to the porous body, the porous body being configured to absorb the heat (0026, 0053, ceramic, zeolite) from the heating element;
the porous body at least partially includes a material of glass fiber, glass mat, ceramic, silica, alumina, carbon, and/or a mineral (0026, 0053, ceramic, zeolite).
Claims 8-12 and 21 are also rejected because they are dependent upon claim 1.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zuber (US 2014/0373856) in view of Potter (US 2014/0261486) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Boden (US 4,083,372).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Zuber disclose a piercing element and Potter discloses at least one frangible capsule that is ruptured to release the substrate. Zuber in view of Potter discloses the claimed invention except for the providing provides the at least one frangible capsule to be configured to be pierced by a piercing element to release the substrate. However, Boden discloses the providing provides the at least one frangible capsule to be configured to be pierced by a piercing element to release the substrate (Col 4, Lines 45-50, it is contemplated that each carton of inhalers would include a small hat pin, which the user can run through the air channel 22 in order to puncture the capsule 14 at point 18) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of forming an aerosol-generating article of Zuber having a piercing element and the frangible capsule of Potter silent to piercing the frangible capsule with the providing provides the at least one frangible capsule to be configured to be pierced by a piercing element to release the substrate of Boden for the purpose of providing a known alternative method for rupturing the frangible capsule to release the contained substrate.
With respect to the limitations of claim 6, Zuber teaches the connecting connects by wrapping the retention medium (aerosol-forming substrate 7) and the heat diffuser (front plug 2) using a wrapper that includes a sheet (0021, 0060, the five elements identified above are assembled by being tightly wrapped within a cigarette paper 5; 0061, additional elements and these elements may be assembled in an alternative cigarette wrapper or equivalent). Zuber in view of Potter discloses the claimed invention except for the wrapper includes a sheet of liquid-impervious material. However, Boden discloses the wrapper includes a sheet of liquid-impervious material (Fig 1, sheath 11, Col 3, Lines 8-13, polypropylene…the sheath is fluid-impermeable) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of forming an aerosol-generating article of Zuber having a wrapper silent to the wrapper being liquid-impervious material with the wrapper includes a sheet of liquid-impervious material of Boden for the purpose of using a known wrapper material that prevents the flow of liquid or air radially through its side wall.
With respect to the limitations of claim 7, Zuber in view of Potter and Boden discloses the connecting connects by wrapping the retention medium and the heat diffuser using a wrapper that is at least one of a sheet of polymeric material (Boden, Fig 1, sheath 11, Col 3, Lines 8-13, polypropylene), a sheet of treated paper, or a sheet of metallic foil.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Zuber (US 2014/0373856) in view of Potter (US 2014/0261486) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Xiu (US 2011/0005535).
With respect to the limitations of claim 13, Potter discloses the providing provides the at least one frangible capsule such that the substrate includes an aerosol former, at least one flavorant (0086, 0088, flavorant, liquid menthol, tobacco). Zuber in view of Potter discloses the claimed invention except for the at least one frangible capsule includes water between 10 weight percent and 25 weight percent. However, Xiu discloses (0011, 0068) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of forming an aerosol-generating article of Zuber having at least one frangible capsule with an aerosol former, flavorant silent to water with the at least one frangible capsule includes water between 10 weight percent and 25 weight percent of Xiu for the purpose of using a known raw material that is suitable for forming an atomizing e-liquid (0008).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1, 2 and 8 have been amended.
Claim 21 is new.
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant has argued on pages 6-7 of the Remarks about claim 1 that Zuber fails to disclose the limitations of “the porous body being configured to absorb heat such that the porous body heats air drawn through the porous body and the retention medium during an operational use of the aerosol-generating article” because the front plug 2 is an insulating material such as cellulose acetate and does not have the ability to absorb heat, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Zuber states in paragraph 0026 the “The front-plug may comprise one or more materials selected from the group comprising ceramic, polymer, biopolymer, metal, zeolite” where zeolite is a porous ceramic. The front plug made from zeolite would absorb heat from the heating element 8 and therefore fully discloses the recited claim limitations.
The applicant has argued on page 7 about claim 1 that Zuber fails to disclose the limitations of “the plurality of elements including a retention medium directly abutting a heat diffuser”, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As seen in figure 1 of Zuber, the retention medium (aerosol-forming substrate 7) is directly abutting a heat diffuser (front plug 2).
The applicant has argued on pages 7-8 about claims 15 and 16 that Zuber fails to disclose the limitations of “configuring a heating element to be selectively connectable to the porous body, the porous body being configured to absorb the heat from the heating element” because the plug 2 of Zuber is separated from the heating element 8, such that the heating element 8 cannot heat the plug 2 so that the plug 2 can absorb heat” the examiner respectfully disagrees. As seen in figure 1 of Zuber, the minimal proximity of the plug 2 (made from porous, ceramic zeolite) from the heating element 8 allows the plug 2 to absorb radiant and conductive heat from heating element 8 and therefore fully discloses the recited claim limitations.
The applicant has argued on page 8 about claim 19 that Zuber in view of Potter does not disclose the limitations of “the configuring configures such that a portion of the porous body is between a tip of the heating element and the retention medium once the heating element is fully inserted into the cavity”, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Discovering the optimum or workable porous body configuration involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
The applicant has argued on page 9 about claims 5, 7 and 13 that Zuber in view of Potter and Xiu does not cure the deficiencies of claim 1, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Zuber discloses all the limitations of claim 1 as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00].
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 4/27/2026
Prosecution Insights