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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 07/16/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Specifically an English translation of the Japan Patent Office Application Number 2024-520795 dated June 3, 2025 or the Korean Intellectual Property Office Application Number 10-2022-0026723, Notice of Allowance dated June 4, 2025 have not been filed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
The information disclosure statement filed 01/22/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Specifically an English translation of the Japan Patent Office Application Number 2024-520795 dated January 6, 2026 has not been filed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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.
Claims 1 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0022390 to ENGLISH.
With regard to claim 1, ENGLISH teaches a cigarette ([0003] and [0028]) comprising: a tobacco rod containing aerosol generating material ([0060]-[0061]); a wrapper surrounding the tobacco rod (peripheral layers [0045]-[0047], [0060]-[0061]); and a metal foil surrounding the tobacco rod at an inner side or an outer side of the wrapper at a position corresponding to the tobacco rod (non-combustible material layer [0032], [0047]), wherein opposite ends of the metal foil are in contact with each other in a circumferential direction to form a closed loop ([0030], [0060]-[0061]).
With regard to claim 8, ENGLISH teaches that the laminate structure that is wrapped around the aerosolizable material can be an inner paper layer, a middle metal foil and an outer paper layer ([0045]-[0047] and [0060]-[0061]). The outer paper layer reads on the instant claimed outer wrapper surrounding the wrapper and the metal foil.
With regard to claim 9, ENGLISH teaches the metal foil and the wrapper are formed of laminate ([0045]-[0047]).
With regard to claim 10, ENGLISH teaches wherein the metal foil is aluminum ([0032]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0153555 to GILL.
With regard to claim 11, GILL teaches an aerosol-generating device (92, [0104]) comprising: a body (housing, 94) comprising an insertion space (Figures 10-12) and an induction coil disposed around the insertion space (106, [0107]).
The recitation ‘configured to accommodate the cigarette of claim 1’ is merely intended use of the component. The manner in which an apparatus operates is not germane to the issue of patentability of the apparatus itself. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The insertion space of GILL would be fully capable of receiving and accommodating the cigarette of claim 1.
The recitation ‘configured to heat the metal foil’ is merely intended use of the component. The manner in which an apparatus operates is not germane to the issue of patentability of the apparatus itself. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The induction coil of GILL would be fully capable of heating the metal foil.
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.
Claims 2-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0022390 to ENGLISH in view of US 2010/0108081 to BLEVINS JOYCE ET AL.
With regard to claim 2, ENGLISH teaches that the metal foil and the wrapper circumscribe the tobacco rod [0030] and does not explicitly teach a first end of the metal foil extends past a corresponding first end of the wrapper in the circumferential direction. However, it is known in the art to have the ends of each layer overlap itself to allows the ends of each layer to secure to one another, as taught by BLEVINS JOYCE ([0012]-[0013], [0026], [0029] and [0155]), which would aid in preventing separation of the layers. BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the first end of one layer extends past a corresponding first end of a second layer in the circumferential direction (Figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the wrapping of the layers of ENGLISH to have the layers each have an overlapping seam taught by BLEVINS JOYCE with reasonable expectation of success to aid the prevention of separation of the layers. By having each end of the layer of ENGLISH overlap itself in the orientation taught by Figure 6 of BLEVINS JOYCE, the limitations of claim 2 would be met in that a first end of the metal foil would extend past a corresponding first end of the wrapper in the circumferential direction.
With regard to claim 3, ENGLISH in view of BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the cigarette according to claim 2. ENGLISH teaches the metal foil being positioned on the outside of a paper wrapper ([0045]-[0047] and [0060]-[0061], the inner paper wrapper of ENGLISH correlating to the wrapper in claim 3). The cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have each end of the layer overlap itself thus the cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have the inner surface of the first end of the wrapper contacting an outer surface of an opposite second end of the wrapper, and the inner surface of the first end of the metal foil contacting an outer surface of an opposite second end of the metal foil.
With regard to claim 4, ENGLISH in view of BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the cigarette according to claim 2. By having each end of the layer overlap itself in the cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE in the orientation taught by Figure 6 of BLEVINS JOYCE, the limitations of claim 4 would be met in that the second end of the wrapper would extend past a corresponding second end of the metal foil in a direction counter to the circumferential direction.
With regard to claim 5, ENGLISH in view of BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the cigarette according to claim 4. ENGLISH teaches the metal foil being positioned on the outside of a paper wrapper ([0045]-[0047] and [0060]-[0061], the inner paper wrapper of ENGLISH correlating to the wrapper in claim 5). The cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have each end of the layer overlap itself thus the cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have the inner surface of the first end of the wrapper contacting an outer surface of an opposite second end of the wrapper, and the inner surface of the first end of the metal foil contacting an outer surface of an opposite second end of the metal foil.
With regard to claim 6, ENGLISH in view of BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the cigarette according to claim 4. ENGLISH teaches the metal foil being positioned on the inner side of an outer paper wrapper ([0045]-[0047] and [0060]-[0061], the outer paper wrapper of ENGLISH correlating to the wrapper in claim 6). The cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have each end of the layer overlap itself thus the cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE would have the outer surface of the first end of the wrapper contacts an inner surface of the second end of the wrapper and the outer surface of the first end of the metal foil contacts an inner surface of the second end of the metal foil.
With regard to claim 7, ENGLISH in view of BLEVINS JOYCE teaches the cigarette according to claim 5. By having each end of the layer overlap itself in the cigarette of ENGLISH/BLEVINS JOYCE in the orientation taught by Figure 6 of BLEVINS JOYCE, the limitations of claim 7 would be met in that the end of the wrapper would be in contact with a corresponding end of the metal foil.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20210244079 to IADANZA which teaches wrapping laminate layers around a tobacco article ([0148]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATELYN W SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-5545. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
KATELYN W. SMITH
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1749
/KATELYN W SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights