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 .
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 16-21, 23-25, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (WO 2020/249648) in view of Adams et al. (US 5,878,752) and Blandino et al. (US 20170055583 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
692
291
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 16, 19, 23, and 30 Gill discloses an aerosol-generating device with a mouthpiece (see figure 1, element 32 below), and a plate shaped aerosol generating article (24), a heating compartment (i.e. chamber, 22) and a main body (10) that has a power supply (18), and a controller (20). The heating of the aerosol generating article is accomplished by two planar induction coils (42, 44), located parallel to, and on opposite sides of the planar, plate shaped aerosol generating article.
Gill discloses a series of aerosol generating articles including an article with two strips of susceptor material that are parallel with each other and that their major faces are parallel to the major faces of the planar aerosol generating article (see figure 7b, below).
PNG
media_image2.png
150
339
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The embodiment of Gill as shown in figure 7b illustrates a first and second susceptor with an inner surface pointing towards the respective other susceptor and an opposing outer surface, and the first induction coil would be situated adjacent the outer surface of the first susceptor and the second induction coil would be situation adjacent the outer surface of the second susceptor when the article is inserted in the chamber illustrated in figure 1.
PNG
media_image3.png
311
603
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Gill does not disclose that the mouthpiece comprises the first and second planar susceptors. However, Blandino et al. discloses a similar aerosol generating device with a mouthpiece that has susceptors attached and receives aerosol generating material within the susceptor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the susceptors of Gill with the mouthpiece as disclosed by Blandino et al. because it would allow reuse of the susceptor as disclosed by Blandino et al. [0061].
Gill does not disclose that the main body containing the power supply is removably connectable to the heating compartment. However, this type of arrangement is well known in the art. For instance, Adams et al. disclose a similar aerosol generating device and illustrate that the battery pack containing rechargeable batteries is detachable from the housing of the lighter (col. 26, lines 33-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have the power supply (batteries) of Gill be removable so that they can be recharged separately as taught by Adams et al. By having more than one battery pack available as disclosed by Adams et al. users can replace a dead battery with a fully charged battery and use the device.
Regarding, claims 17 and 18, Adams et al. disclose that the power source is, “…detachable from the housing of ligher 25 in a conventional manner, e.g., via known male and female socket type electrical and mechanical contacts.” Adams et al. also disclose that components can be opened or closed using “snap-fit” components. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use snap-fit components to reversibly connect the power source, body, and mouthpiece together and allow their removal.
Regarding claim 20, Gill discloses that the controller (20) includes an inverter that converts direct current to alternating high-frequency current for the induction coils (page 16, lines 15-25).
Regarding claim 21, Gill discloses that the inductors can be activated separately by the controller (page 20, 5-13).
Regarding claim 24, the susceptors of Blandino et al. extend from the mouthpiece and partially extend into the heating chamber when the mouthpiece is connected.
Regarding claim 25, the first and second susceptors of Gill modified by Blandino et al. are adjacent the side walls of the heating chamber.
Claim(s) 22 and 27, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (WO 2020/249648) in view of Adams et al. (US 5,878,752) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Zinovik et al. (US 20170055587 A1).
Regarding claims 22 and 27, Gill and Adams et al. do not disclose sensing temperature or adjusting the heating (i.e. power) based on the temperature of an induction heating system. However, it is well-known in the art to adjust power delivered to heating induction heaters based on the temperature of the susceptor. For instance, Zinovik et al. disclose using the susceptor it self to sense temperature by using a microcontroller to measure the DC supply voltage and DC current and using them to determine the apparent ohmic resistance of the susceptor and then use that to determine the temperature of the susceptor (see abstract and [0020]-[0040]). The technique and circuit structure allows for the, “unambiguous determination of the respective temperature of the susceptor from the respective apparent ohmic resistance.” [0042].
In addition to sensing the temperature, Zinovik et al. disclose that the temperature can be controlled by stopping power when the susceptor is above a threshold or resuming generation of AC power when the determined temperature is below a preset temperature threshold [0045].
Claim(s) 28 and 29, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gill (WO 2020/249648) in view of Adams et al. (US 5,878,752) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of McGrath et al. (US 20220192261A1).
Regarding claims 28 and 29, Gill and Adams et al. do not disclose thermal insulation chambers adjacent the outer side surfaces of the heating compartment. However, it is known in the art to insulate the heating chamber of aerosol-generating devices. McGrath et al. disclose a similar aerosol-generating device and disclose that the heating chamber is surrounded along its length by a double-walled sleeve that has been evacuated region to reduce heat passing from the heater to the exterior of the apparatus and reduce power demand by reducing heat loss [0073]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention/filing to use the vacuum region (i.e. chamber) of McGrath et al. in the invention to Gill to reduce heat transfer from the heating chamber to the rest of the device and exterior and reduce power demand as disclosed by McGrath et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J FELTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4805. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Thursday-Friday 7:00-4:30, Wednesday 7:00-1:00.
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, 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.
/Michael J Felton/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights