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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-12 are pending and are subject to this Office Action. This is the first Office Action on the merits of the claims.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Pg. 14, Line 10: Inlet Channel 52
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Pg. 1, Line 20: "unpleasantly could when" should read "unpleasantly cold when"
Pg. 13, Line 22: "cartridge 16 is bigger" should read "cartridge 14 is bigger"
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fraser (US 20190150520 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
412
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 1, Fraser, directed to an aerosol delivery device, teaches (i) an aerosol provision system [0042] comprising a reusable part (Fig. 4: #2), meeting the claim limitation of a main unit, and a separable and reusable mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44, [0045]). (ii) The reusable part (Fig. 4: #2) receives and is coupled with a cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) for storing liquid [0066]. The cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) coupled with the reusable part (Fig. 4: #2), further comprises a heating element (Fig. 4: #14, [0042]). (iii) The mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44) comprises an opening (Fig. 4: #30), that is in fluid communication with an opening (Fig. 4: #24a) of a second primary air channel (Fig. 4: #24), for a user to receive the generated aerosol [0063].
(iv) The mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44) can engage with the reusable part (Fig. 4: #2) at a peripheral portion of the component in a snap-fit manner [0069]. (v) A first primary air channel (Fig. 4: #22) is formed between the mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44) and reusable part (Fig. 4: #2). One would find it inherent that their engagement positions allow for the air channel (Fig. 4: #22) to be formed. (vi) The first primary air channel (Fig. 4: #22) and the second primary air channel (Fig. 4: #24) form a path [0072]), from an air inlet (Fig. 4: #20) to the opening (Fig. 4: #30) through the heating element (Fig. 4: #14, [0034 & 0063]).
With regard to Claim 2, Fraser teaches wherein the airflow path from the air inlet (Fig. 4: #20) to the opening (Fig. 4: #30) is formed upon assembly of the reusable part (Fig. 4: #2) and the mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44, [0072]).
With regard to Claim 3, Fraser teaches wherein the cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) is replaceable [0045].
PNG
media_image2.png
412
617
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 4, Fraser teaches wherein a portion (Fig. 4: "P") of the airflow path from the air inlet (Fig. 4: #20) to the opening (Fig. 4: #30) is defined between the cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) and the mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44).
With regard to Claim 5, Fraser teaches wherein the cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) is tubular.
With regard to Claim 6, Fraser teaches wherein the cartridge part (Fig. 4: #4a) defines a central primary air channel (Fig. 4: #3, [0067]).
With regard to Claim 7, Fraser teaches wherein the path created by the first primary air channel (Fig. 4: #22) and the second primary air channel (Fig. 4: #24) leads through the primary air channel (Fig. 4: #3, [0034]).
With regard to Claim 9, Fraser teaches wherein the mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44) has a lateral surface (Fig. 4: "L") and a proximal end (Fig. 4: "PE").
With regard to Claim 11, Fraser teaches wherein the air inlet (Fig. 4: #20) is arranged in a lateral surface of an outer housing of the reuseable part (Fig. 4: #2, [0068]).
With regard to Claim 12, Fraser teaches wherein the mouthpiece cap (Fig. 4: #44) comprises an opening (Fig. 4: #30) at a mouthpiece end (Fig. 4: #18) to allow the user to inhale generated aerosol [0063].
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.
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fraser (US 20190150520 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Davis (US 20200221769 A1).
With regard to Claim 8, Fraser teaches all the limitations of the claims as set forth above, however modified Fraser is silent to:
Wherein the complementary structural components of the mouthpiece of the main unit comprise a hollow element that extends into the central channel of the cartridge
PNG
media_image3.png
673
284
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Davis, directed to vaporizer cartridge devices and systems, teaches a mouthpiece assembly (Fig. 2B: #201B) comprising a hollow inner stem (Fig. 2: #240) that extends into a vapor chamber (Fig. 2: #239, 0047). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the complementary structural components of Fraser to include Davis’s inner stem such that it extends into the central channel of Fraser's cartridge to provide a dedicated vapor passage and maintain fluid communication between the chamber and mouthpiece [0047], providing a more defined and controlled vapor flow path.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the complementary structures of modified Fraser to wherein the complementary structural components of the mouthpiece or the main unit comprise a hollow element that extends into the central channel of the cartridge because both Fraser and Davis are directed to improving the passage of airflow in aerosol generating devices. Davis teaches an inner stem inserted into a vapor chamber to provide a dedicated vapor passage and maintain fluid communication between the chamber and mouthpiece [0047 and this merely involves the use of a known airflow technique to improve similar aerosol generating devices in the same way.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fraser (US 20190150520 A1), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above.
PNG
media_image4.png
429
592
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
409
626
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 10, Fraser teaches wherein the air inlet (Fig. 1: #120) is arranged on a lateral surface of the detachable part (Fig. 1: #104, [0024]), wherein the detachable part has an integrally formed mouthpiece end (Fig. 1: #118, [0021]). Thus, the outer housing of the detachable part (Fig. 1: #104) constitutes the outer housing of the mouthpiece. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the Figure 4 embodiment of Fraser with the air inlet location of Figure 1, as Fraser teaches that the air inlet can be adjusted to accommodate different configurations and provide compatibility with other reusable parts [0075].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUWATOSIN O DIYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 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, Philip Louie can be reached at 571-270-1241. 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.
/O.O.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1755 /PHILIP Y LOUIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights