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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(a), (l), and (m) because FIG 1 and FIG 2 fail to be black line drawings and are not sufficiently well defined to clearly distinguish the claimed heat dissipation element from adjacent device structure. Additionally, (m) requires any shading aids in understanding and does not reduce legibility and the drawings fail to meet this because the shading is excessively dark and reference lines and detail lines are obscured. Corrected drawings with clean, black, uniformly thick, well-defined lines with proper shading or without shading are required.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The heating element and heating tracks are absent to the drawings. Therefore, the heating element and heating tracks, including the heating element being arranged at least partially or fulling surrounding the heating chamber as claimed in claims 22-26 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: at line 2 of claim 17 the claim recites “…configured to dissipate heat less in a radial direction then in axial and tangential directions...” (emphasis added). The underlined term is interpreted to be “than” for the purposes of compact prosecution. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
page 2 line 8 recites “…heat less from the heating chamber to the directly surrounding housing…”. The phrase appears to be missing a verb.
page 3 line 23 recites “Again, heater may more uniformly be dissipated into the aerosol generating device…”. (emphasis added)
Page 5 line 4 recites “…facing The aerosol-forming…” (emphasis added)
Page 6 line 9 recites “…lungs thorough the user’s mouth…” (emphasis added)
Page 8 line lines 6-7 recites “When located in an alternating magnetic field.” (sentence appears to be a fragment)
Appropriate correction is required.
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 16-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20220079238A1) in view of Liu (US 20220072825A1).
Regarding Claim 16, Lee teaches an aerosol-generating device (see [0037] comprising:
a heating chamber (hollow of support portion 420, see also FIG 4 and [0037]); and
a heat dissipation element arranged at least partly surrounding the heating chamber (heat dissipating adhesive layer 440 which is coated on support 420 and at least partially surrounds the heating chamber, see also FIG 3 and FIG 4 and [0044], wherein
the heat dissipation element is made from a material that includes graphene (heat dissipating adhesive element 440 can include heat dissipating filler [0050] which includes graphene [0052]).
Lee expressly recognizes the need to improve heat transfer and prevent overheating in the heater portion by using the heat dissipating layer 440 between the cigarette support portion and the heater portion. [0044], [0052], [0073].
However Lee fails to explicitly disclose the heat dissipation layer entirely made from graphene.
Liu teaches graphene film heat sinks that are anisotropic (directional/in-plane increased thermal conductivity [0011]) that use the very high in plane thermal conductivity of graphene film to guide heat away from a heat source fulfilling the express need of Lee, and further Liu teaches that graphene film has a significantly higher in plane than out of plane thermal conductivity ([0011]-[0012]).
It would have been obvious to replace Lee’s heat dissipating layer with Liu’s graphene film heat sink material to significantly improve heat spreading and heat dissipation in Lees heater with significantly higher in plane than out of plane thermal conductivity as taught by Liu, thereby predictably reducing overheating while maintaining the same surrounding location around the support portion.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above.
As explained above Lee as modified by Liu teaches anisotropic (directional/in-plane increased thermal conductivity [0011]) which is inherent to graphene heat sinks [0011] and teaches the graphene heat dissipation elements dissipate heat in a preferred direction and can therefore be configured to dissipate heat less in a radial direction then in axial and tangential directions with respect to a longitudinal axis of the heating chamber. (see [0011]-[0012]) Liu additionally teaches anisotropic graphene heat sinks have advantageous and configurable properties and can be manufactured to have very high in plane thermal conductivity allowing them to be configured to guide heat away from the object to be cooled in a preferred in plane direction [0011]-[0012]). It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify this direction of the graphene plane to be an axial/tangential direction in order to guide heat away from the object to be cooled in a preferred direction.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heat dissipation element is configured as a layer (see [0036], the heat dissipating element is a layer).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches, the heat dissipation element fully surrounds the heating chamber (See FIG 3 and FIG 4, heat dissipation element layer 440 surrounds the heating chamber, see also [0037] and [0044].
Regarding Claim 20, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heat dissipation element extends over the heating chamber in a distal direction (e.g., see FIG 3, the heat dissipation element extends over the heating chamber in both the distal (e.g., right end of heating chamber in FIG 3) and proximal (e.g., left end of heating chamber in FIG 3) directions surrounding the heating chamber).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heat dissipation element is formed from a rectangular sheet. E.g., an ordinary artisan would appreciate that a film configured to surround a cylinder would be rectangular if laid flat.
Regarding Claim 22, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches further comprising a heating element (e.g., heater portion 460, [0040].)
Regarding Claim 23, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating element comprises heating tracks (e.g., Lee teaches a heat generating pattern (heating tracks) located on the surface of the support portion 420 and teaches the heating track pattern including a metal material with excellent conductivity [0043].
Regarding Claim 24, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating element consists of heating tracks (e.g., Lee teaches heater portion 460 may be a heat generating pattern (heating tracks) located on the surface of the support portion 420 and teaches the heating track pattern including a metal material with excellent conductivity [0043].
Regarding Claim 25, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating element is arranged at least partly surrounding the heating chamber. (see [0040], Lee places heater 460 outside support 420, see also FIG 3)
Regarding Claim 26, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating element (460) is arranged fully surrounding the heating chamber, see FIG 3 and [0040].
Regarding Claim 27, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating chamber is formed by a stable inner frame (support 420) of the aerosol-generating device, (see also [0037] and FIG 3, an ordinary artisan would appreciate the support 420 is dimensionally stable so it can serve to support a cigarette).
Regarding Claim 28, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating chamber is arranged abutting a proximal end of the aerosol-generating device (e.g., see FIG 1, Lee teaches an insertion hole T at one end of the case 100 [0024], the insertion end of T is the proximal end, the heating chamber abuts the proximal end).
Regarding Claim 29, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating chamber has a cylindrical shape (see [0037] and FIG 3).
Regarding Claim 30, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally, Lee teaches the heating chamber is configured to receive an aerosol-generating article comprising aerosol-forming substrate (see [0026], cigarette 10 is received into insertion hole T and aerosol generating material in cigarette 10 is heated by the heater to generate aerosol, see also FIG 2).
Regarding Claim 31, modified Lee teaches the claim limitations as set forth above. Additionally Lee teaches an aerosol-generating system comprising the aerosol-generating device according to claim 16 and an aerosol-generating article comprising aerosol-forming substrate (see [0023]-[0026] and FIG 2, cigarette 10 is received in the device to generate aerosol).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael T Fulton whose telephone number is (703)756-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 - 4:30 ET.
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.
/M.T.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/RUSSELL E SPARKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights