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 .
DETAILED ACTION
2. The action is responsive to the communications filed on 8/14/2026. Claims 1, 8-21, 23-27 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 8-10, 19, 21, 23, 25 are amended. Claims 2-7, 22 are cancelled. Claim 27 is newly added. Claim 1, 8, 9 are independent claims. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Summary of claims
3. Claims 1, 8-21, 23-27 are pending,
Claims 1, 8-10, 19, 21, 23, 25 are amended,
Claims 2-7, 22 are cancelled.
Claim 27 is newly added.
Claims 1, 8, 9 are independent claims,
Claims 1, 8-21, 23-27 are rejected.
Remarks
4. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed on 8/14/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 8-21, 23-27 under 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive in view of new rejection ground(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claims 1, 8-9, 17, 21, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kerdemelidis (US Publication 20160338407 A1, hereinafter Kerdemelidis), and in view of Christopher Ellingford et al (US Publication 20210306711 A1, hereinafter Ellingford).
As for independent claim 1, Kerdemelidis discloses: An information processing apparatus (Abstract, The invention relates to a programmable vaporizer device and method that allows a user to controllably atomize a plurality of aerosol-forming substrates having different flavors in order to generate an aerosol mixture with a specific flavor profile and share that flavor profile with other users over a computer network) comprising: circuitry configured to: output information indicating a plurality of options for selecting one of a plurality of predefined heating profiles ([0073], The user may also utilize an interface that is directly on the Vape Device itself, including but not limited to a touch-enabled area, rotary encoder or push-button. The Vape Device and/or the device that is used to control the Vape Device can store a plurality of flavor profiles, and these can be selected by the user at will) of an aerosol generating apparatus that includes a heater heating an aerosol source or a flavor source ([0085], a heater element wire 302 directly connected to the coils of heat resistant wire 124 which are wrapped around an absorbent wick), receive selection of one option among the plurality of options ([0087], the touch enabled interface 524 includes a display, such that the user can see which profile is selected), in response to the selection of the one option, control to download a target hearting profile corresponding to the selected option from a server under a condition that the target profile has not been downloaded to the information processing apparatus from the server ([0021], said vaporizer device includes a communications link with a remote host operable to download a flavor profile to said programmable controller; [0095], a user may connect to a social network and share the flavor profile so that others may also download and use it on their Vape Device), change a heating profile of the aerosol generating apparatus to the target heating profile corresponding to the selected option ([0095], a user would like to change the flavor profile), and control transmission of the target heating profile to the aerosol generating apparatus ([0021], said vaporizer device includes a communications link with a remote host operable to download a flavor profile to said programmable controller and upload flavor profiles or device usage information to the remote host to share with other users);
Kerdemelidis discloses managing downloading and/or uploading a selected flavor profile to share with other users, but Kerdemelidis does not disclose determining the profile has been downloaded or not yet, in an analogous art of managing downloading object via user interface, Ellingford discloses: control to download a target hearting profile corresponding to the selected option from a server under a condition that the target profile has not been downloaded to the information processing apparatus from the server (Ellingford: [0162], the download status indicators (e.g., download status indicator 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicate the download status of the respective episode. For example, a check mark (as shown in FIG. 6C for download status indicators 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicates that the respective episode is downloaded, a download icon indicates that the respective episode is not yet downloaded; please note an object is indicated by a check mark means its status is downloaded, and an object is indicated by a download icon means its status is not yet downloaded);
Kerdemelidis and Ellingford are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, managing downloading object via user interface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kerdemelidis using the teachings of Ellingford to include displaying the download status indicator. It would provide Kerdemelidis’s device with enhanced capabilities of allowing user to easily manage downloading object so user experience is improved.
Claims 2-7 cancelled
As per claim 8, it recites features that are substantially same as those features claimed by claim 1, thus the rationales for rejecting claim 1 are incorporated herein.
As per claim 9, it recites features that are substantially same as those features claimed by claim 1, thus the rationales for rejecting claim 1 are incorporated herein.
As for claim 17, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to output download information whether the target heating profile corresponding to the selected option from the plurality of options has been downloaded to the information processing apparatus from a server (Ellingford: [0162], the download status indicators (e.g., download status indicator 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicate the download status of the respective episode. For example, a check mark (as shown in FIG. 6C for download status indicators 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicates that the respective episode is downloaded, a download icon indicates that the respective episode is not yet downloaded; please note an object is indicated by a check mark means its status is downloaded, and an object is indicated by a download icon means its status is not yet downloaded).
As for claim 21, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the heating profile based on location information of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus, the location information of the user being acquired by the information processing apparatus (Kerdemelidis: [0090], an environmental parameters sensor interface 802 may be included which receives input from the environment such as temperature, sound, location, time of day, and other Vape Devices nearby and changes the output to the atomizers in a pre-determined way).
Claim 22 cancelled
As for claim 27, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to classify the plurality of options into an option corresponding to a downloaded heating profile and an option corresponding to a hearting profile that is not downloaded, and to display the classified options on the user interface (Ellingford: [0162], the download status indicators (e.g., download status indicator 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicate the download status of the respective episode. For example, a check mark (as shown in FIG. 6C for download status indicators 616-1, 616-2, and 616-3) indicates that the respective episode is downloaded, a download icon indicates that the respective episode is not yet downloaded; please note an object is indicated by a check mark means its status is downloaded, and an object is indicated by a download icon means its status is not yet downloaded).
6. Claims 10-13, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kerdemelidis and Ellingford as applied on claim 1, and further in view of Yonghai Li et al (US Publication 20170360103 A1, hereinafter Li), and in view of Joseph Doyle et al (US Publication 20200329775 A1, hereinafter Doyle).
As for claim 10, Kerdemelidis discloses: and an option related to a smoking taste and flavor in the aerosol generating apparatus (Kerdemelidis: Abstract, allows a user to controllably atomize a plurality of aerosol-forming substrates having different flavors in order to generate an aerosol mixture with a specific flavor profile) but does not disclose an option related to a mental state of the user, Li discloses: wherein the plurality of predefined heating profiles correspond to at least one of a plurality of options including an option related to a mental state of a user of the aerosol generating apparatus (Li: [0026], the mood mode may include a melancholy mode, a happy mode, a sad mode),
Kerdemelidis and Li are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, electronic vaporization device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kerdemelidis using the teachings of Li to include the mood mode. It would provide Kerdemelidis’s device with enhanced capabilities of providing more options for user to choose to meeting user’s needs.
Further, Kerdemelidis does not clearly disclose an option related to a predetermined action or event, Doyle discloses: an option related to a predetermined action or event (Doyle: [0052], social application (such as performances, family events, etc.)),
Kerdemelidis and Li and Doyle are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, electronic vaporization device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kerdemelidis using the teachings of Doyle to include the predetermined event. It would provide Kerdemelidis’s device with enhanced capabilities of providing more options for user to choose to meeting user’s needs.
As for claim 11, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is configured to output the information indicating the plurality of options related to the mental state of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus, and the plurality of options related to the mental state of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus include a first option corresponding to a profile having a first predetermined duration of a first effect acting on the user to make a concentration state of the user, and a second option corresponding to a profile having a second predetermined duration of a second effect acting on the user to calm down an excitation state of the user (Li: [0022], The heating time may be a time duration every time when the user inhales the aerosol. The configuration of the heating power is configured (i.e., structured and arranged) for adjusting the heating temperature of the aerosol generating device; Doyle: [0008], a specified duration of time for that setting and is distinct or different from the temperature/power and time associated with the heating ramp-up or ramp-down profiles of the vaporizer).
As for claim 12, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle discloses: wherein the second option further includes a third option corresponding to a profile having the second predetermined duration of the second effect acting on the user to calm down the excitation state of the user, a fourth option corresponding to a profile having a third predetermined duration of the second effect acting on the user to calm down the excitation state of the user, the third predetermined duration being longer than the second predetermined duration, and a fifth option corresponding to a profile having a fourth predetermined duration of the second effect acting on the user to calm down the excitation state of the user, the fourth predetermined duration being shorter than the second predetermined duration (Li: [0022], The heating time may be a time duration every time when the user inhales the aerosol. The configuration of the heating power is configured (i.e., structured and arranged) for adjusting the heating temperature of the aerosol generating device; Doyle: [0008], a specified duration of time for that setting and is distinct or different from the temperature/power and time associated with the heating ramp-up or ramp-down profiles of the vaporizer; please note the different heating time duration setting may effect user’s mental state).
As for claim 13, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is configured to output the information indicating the plurality of options related to the predetermined action or event, and the plurality of options related to the predetermined action or event include at least two of a sixth option indicating a state before the predetermined action or event, a seventh option indicating a state during the predetermined action or event, and an eighth option indicating a state after the predetermined action or event (Li: [0026], the mood mode may include a melancholy mode, a happy mode, a sad mode; Doyle: TABLE 1: Elevates mood and energy. Anti-fungal/ anti-carcinogenic Eucalyptol Flavor).
As for claim 16, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is configured to output the information indicating the plurality of options related to the smoking taste and flavor, and the plurality of options related to the smoking taste and flavor include at least one of a ninth option indicating an intensity of stimulation in a smoking taste, a tenth option indicating a duration of the smoking taste, an eleventh option indicating a transition of the intensity of the stimulation in the smoking taste, and a twelfth option indicating the amount of generated aerosol (Doyle: [0035], each element of a vaporizable material may contribute to a desired pharmacological, pharma-kinetic, flavor, or other attribute of the vaporized material, employing a thermal profile specific to the vaporizable material to control the vaporization conditions can significantly impact efficacy and consumer satisfaction; [0052], level of discretion, desired size of vaporization cloud, social application (such as performances, family events, etc.), taste preferences, correlation to meals, intensity of specific elements).
7. Claims 14, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kerdemelidis, Ellingford, Li and Doyle as applied on claim 13, and further in view of Robert Francis Jacobs et al (US Publication 20220256929 A1, hereinafter Jacobs).
As for claim 14, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle discloses predetermined action including meals (Doyle: [0052], level of discretion, desired size of vaporization cloud, social application (such as performances, family events, etc.), taste preferences, correlation to meals), in addition, in another analogous art of electronic vaporization device, Jacobs discloses: wherein the predetermined action includes any one of sleep, wakefulness, eating and drinking, and exercise (Jacobs: [0058], sleep pattern, exercise profile, and diet, nutrition, and meal pattern).
Kerdemelidis and Li and Doyle and Jacobs are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, electronic vaporization device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kerdemelidis using the teachings of Jacobs to include considering user’s sleep, exercise, meal information. It would provide Kerdemelidis’s device with enhanced capabilities of adjusting operation to meet user’s specific need/preference.
As for claim 15, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Li-Doyle-Jacobs discloses: wherein the predetermined event includes a meal meeting during which an alcoholic beverage is provided (Doyle: [0052], level of discretion, desired size of vaporization cloud, social application (such as performances, family events, etc.), taste preferences, correlation to meals; Jacobs: Table 1: Alcohol decreases drinking to 1 ability to exert will drink per day).
8. Claims 18-20, 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kerdemelidis, Ellingford as applied on claim 1, and further in view of Doyle.
As for claim 18, Kerdemelidis discloses temperature data but does not clearly disclose adjusting the device based on temperature, Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to control supply of electric power to the heater by adjusting a duty ratio of the electric power supplied from a power supply portion to the heater based on a difference between a temperature of the heater and the target temperature determined by the selected heating profile (Doyle: [0032], The transient heating and cooling profiles are generally determined by the inherent thermodynamic properties of the heater 320 and the amount and rate of power being transferred to the heater 320).
Kerdemelidis and Doyle are analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor, electronic vaporization device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Kerdemelidis using the teachings of Doyle to include determining heating profiles based on temperature properties. It would provide Kerdemelidis’s device with enhanced capabilities of controlling the device more efficiently.
As for claim 19, Kerdemelidis- Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to control the temperature of the heater to increase to a first temperature in a first period immediately after the start of heating, control the temperature of the heater to once decrease to a second temperature that is lower than the first temperature in a second period after the first period, and control the temperature of the heater to increase again to a third temperature that is higher than the second temperature in a third period after the second period, so that a user can perform aerosol inhalation using the aerosol generating apparatus in the third period in after the heater reaches the third temperature (Doyle: [0032], The transient heating and cooling profiles are generally determined by the inherent thermodynamic properties of the heater 320 and the amount and rate of power being transferred to the heater 320; please note the thermal profile may include the time and temperature information).
As for claim 20, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is configured to define the plurality of predefined heating profiles by changing length of at least one of the first, second and third periods, or changing target temperature of at least one of the first, second and third temperatures (Doyle: [0032], The transient heating and cooling profiles are generally determined by the inherent thermodynamic properties of the heater 320 and the amount and rate of power being transferred to the heater 320; please note the thermal profile may include the time and temperature information).
As for claim 23, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the heating profile based on biological information of a user of the aerosol generating apparatus, the biological information of the user being acquired by the information processing apparatus (Doyle: [0055], using a specific thermal profile at a specified time or frequency, which may be based on body metrics such as heart rate, blood pressure, cardiac rhythm, or other biological or physiological conditions or measurements that are known or obtained by the inputs 270 of the vaporizer 100, an external device 700/800 such as a smart phone or watch, or from the health records of the user).
As for claim 24, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the heating profile to the target heating profile corresponding to the option related to the mental state of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus, based on the biological information of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus (Doyle: [0055], using a specific thermal profile at a specified time or frequency, which may be based on body metrics such as heart rate, blood pressure, cardiac rhythm, or other biological or physiological conditions or measurements that are known or obtained by the inputs 270 of the vaporizer 100, an external device 700/800 such as a smart phone or watch, or from the health records of the user).
As for claim 25, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the heating profile based on schedule information of a user of the aerosol generating apparatus, the schedule information of the user being acquired by the information processing apparatus (Doyle: [0055], The scheduling system may notify or otherwise remind the user to use the vaporizer 100 to inhale a specific vaporizable material using a specific thermal profile at a specified time or frequency).
As for claim 26, Kerdemelidis-Ellingford-Doyle discloses: wherein the circuitry is further configured to change the heating profile to the target heating profile corresponding to the option related to the predetermined action or event, by detecting the predetermined action or event based on the schedule information of the user of the aerosol generating apparatus (Doyle: [0052], time of day, learned usage related to time or day or date, position of device; [0055], The scheduling system may notify or otherwise remind the user to use the vaporizer 100 to inhale a specific vaporizable material using a specific thermal profile at a specified time or frequency).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hua Lu whose telephone number is 571-270-1410 and fax number is 571-270-2410. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman can be reached on 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-273-8300.
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.
/Hua Lu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights