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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: ‘plurality of projections of insulator material’ should be changed to ‘plurality of projections of the solid insulator material’ to maintain consistency with claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-6, 8-10, are 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Moloney (US 2021/0137168 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Moloney teaches an aerosol generating article (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 200) comprising a housing (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 202) and a substrate arranged within the housing to generate an aerosol (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 210). There is also at least one heating element (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 112) arranged in the housing adjacent to the substrate that comprises a susceptor (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 306) and an insulator (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 206) comprising solid-based insulating material (Para. [0083]) that surrounds and contacts the susceptor so that the heating element can heat the substrate when an electromagnetic field is applied (Para. [0072]). The limitation ‘without damaging the housing of the article’ is a recitation of intended use and does not require any additional structure to the article that differentiates it from the article disclosed by Mooney. The recitation does not result in structural differences between the claimed invention and the prior art because Moloney discloses an article comprising the claimed structural features, including the claimed heating element, which is capable of heating the adjacent substrate without damaging the housing of the article.
Regarding claim 2, Moloney teaches that the article is an elongate shape such that an article axis is defined between two longitudinally opposing ends (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 200).
Regarding claim 3, Moloney teaches that the susceptor (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 306) has a first end (Fig. 3, left end) and a second end (Fig.3, right end), and the heating element is arranged within the housing such that the first end and the second end are axially aligned along the article axis.
Regarding claim 4, Moloney teaches that the insulator (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 206) surrounds the susceptor so that the first and the second end of the susceptor (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 306) are exposed by the insulator.
Regarding claim 5, Moloney teaches that the insulator (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 206) fully encapsulates the susceptor (Fig. 3, Ref. Num. 306).
Regarding claim 6, Moloney teaches that the susceptor is a cylindrical tube shape (Para. [0066]).
Regarding claim 8, Moloney teaches that the insulator is also a cylindrical shape (i.e., is substantially the same shape as the susceptor) (Para. [0066]).
Regarding claim 9, Moloney teaches that the insulator comprises a plurality of projections (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 208; Fig. 6, Ref. Num. 606) of insulator material extending from the heating element.
Regarding claim 10, Moloney teaches that the projections (Fig. 2, Ref. Num. 208; Fig. 6, Ref. Num. 606) extend perpendicularly from the heating element to a longitudinal axis of the article.
Regarding claim 13, Moloney teaches that the at least one heating element comprises a plurality of heating elements (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 112).
Regarding claim 14, Moloney teaches that the heating elements are sequentially arranged along a length of the article (Fig. 1. Ref. Num. 112) and are axially aligned with a longitudinal axis of the article, and the substrate (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 106) is arranged between adjacent heating elements.
Regarding claim 15, Moloney teaches the aerosol generation article of claim 1, and an aerosol generation device (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 100) comprising a heating chamber (Fig. 1, Ref. Num. 106) and at least one induction coil (Fig.1, Ref. Num. 112). The limitation ‘in use the device is configured to receive the article in the heating chamber such that the induction coil is aligned with the susceptor.’ is a recitation of intended use and does not require any additional structure to the article that differentiates it from the article disclosed by Mooney. The recitation does not result in structural differences between the claimed invention and the prior art because Moloney discloses an article comprising the claimed structural features, which is capable of receiving the article in the heating chamber so that the induction coil is aligned with the susceptor.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 2021/0137168 A1) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Rogan et al. (US 2021/0084981).
Regarding claim 7, Moloney does not teach the thickness of the susceptor’s tube walls.
In an analogous art, Rogan teaches an aerosol generating article with a tube shaped susceptor (Para. [0018]) that has a wall thickness of 50 to 500 µm (Para. [0019]), with overlaps with the claimed range of 50 to 150 µm which is a prima facie case of obviousness.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the susceptor of Moloney with Rogan to have a tube wall thickness of 50 to 150 µm. This modification will allow the susceptor to be heated quickly (Rogan; Para. [0019]).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US 2021/0137168 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cheong et al. (US 2020/0352220 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Moloney does not teach the diameter of the heating element.
In an analogous art, Cheong teaches an aerosol generation article (Fig. 4, Ref. Num. 300) that has a diameter of 5 to 9 mm and a length of 48 mm (Para. [0059]), which overlaps with the claimed range of an outer diameter of the heating element is between 5mm and 8mm, which is a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Moloney with Cheong to have the heating element have an outer diameter of 5 to 9 mm as it is a diameter that is known in the art for aerosol generating articles (Cheong; Para. [0059]).
Regarding claim 12, Moloney does not teach the length of the heating element.
In an analogous art, Cheong teaches an aerosol generation article (Fig. 4, Ref. Num. 300) that has a diameter of 5 to 9 mm and a length of 48 mm (Para. [0059]), which overlaps with the claimed range of a length of the heating element is greater than or equal to 6mm, which is a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Moloney with Cheong to have the heating element have a length of 48 mm as it is a length that is known in the art for aerosol generating articles (Cheong; Para. [0059]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS J WEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-2664. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at (571) 270-5545. 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.
/N.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1749
/SEDEF E PAQUETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights