DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
This is the first office action in response to Claims filed on 04/27/2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application also includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation is/are: “heating element” in Claim 140 the term “heating element” is interpreted as element 10, 103, i.e. resistance.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-14 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 L. 8-9: “a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of” should be “a ratio of any two of”;
Claims 2-12 are also objected for being dependent on an objected claim;
Claim 13 L. 8-9: “a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of” should be “a ratio of any two of”; and
Claim 14 L. 8-9: “a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of” should be “a ratio of any two of”.
Appropriate correction required and claims are interpreted as indicated above.
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.
Claims 4, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN108363432) in view of Hon (US 2017/0367410).
Regarding Claim 1: Li discloses An aerosol generating device ([0009]), configured to heat an aerosol-forming substrate ([0057]) to generate an aerosol ([0009]), comprising: a power source, configured to supply power (power source necessarily present); a thermosensitive element (“heating element”), a resistance value thereof varying depending on a heating temperature ([0009]); a sampling resistor (R18), configured to be electrically connected to the thermosensitive element to form a detection loop (sampling circuit; [0009]); and a controller (Fig. 3b), configured to determine the heating temperature according to a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of an electrical characteristic of the detection loop, an electrical characteristic of the sampling resistor, and an electrical characteristic of the thermosensitive element ([0009]).
Li is silent regarding the power source being a battery cell.
However, Hon teaches an aerosol generating device (see title) wherein the power source is a battery cell (see [0003]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Li, to have the power source being a battery cell, as taught by Hon. Such a modification would enable to have a portable power source.
Regarding Claim 2: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to detect the any two electrical characteristics ([0009] wherein the voltages are used thus detected).
Regarding Claim 3: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to obtain the heating temperature according to the ratio and pre-stored correspondence data between ratios and heating temperatures ([0020]).
Regarding Claim 4: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 3, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to query the correspondence data ([0020] to obtain the data a query is necessarily performed).
Regarding Claim 5: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the sampling resistor is connected to the thermosensitive element in series (see Fig. 3b how electricity goes from j3 passes In-1 IN-2 and then R18 in series).
Regarding Claim 6: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the electrical characteristic comprises a voltage; and the ratio comprises at least one of the following: a ratio of a voltage between two ends of the detection loop to a voltage between two ends of the sampling resistor, a ratio of the voltage between the two ends of the detection loop to a voltage between two ends of the thermosensitive element, or a ratio of the voltage between the two ends of the sampling resistor to the voltage between the two ends of the thermosensitive element (see [0010] wherein the measurement is taken across J3 and R18).
Regarding Claims 7-8: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, Hon teaches using a configuration in parallel ([0054] elements 40 and 10) using currents instead of a configuration in series using voltages (see [0054] and Fig. 1B) and thus teaches the sampling resistor is connected to the thermosensitive element in parallel, wherein the electrical characteristic comprises a current; and the ratio comprises a ratio of a current flowing through the sampling resistor to a current flowing through the thermosensitive element ([0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a parallel configuration with current measurement, since it has been held that use of suitable equivalent structures involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960)).
(In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc.v.Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
Regarding Claim 9: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, as stated above, but is silent regarding a switch tube, wherein: the controller is further configured to control the switch tube to turn on or turn off an electrical connection between the detection loop and the battery cell.
Hon further teaches a switch tube (30; Figs. 1A-1B), a controller ( controller providing control waveform, [0024]) configured to control the switch tube to turn on or turn off ([0024]) an electrical connection between a loop (heating element 10 , element being part of the detection loop in Li) and the battery cell (20; Figs. 1A-1B).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Li, to have a switch tube, wherein: the controller is further configured to control the switch tube to turn on or turn off an electrical connection between the detection loop and the battery cell, as taught by Hon. Such a modification would enable to control power providing to the heating element.
Regarding Claim 10: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 3, as stated above, and Li further discloses a heating element ([0057] element operatively connected to J3 to heat the product, see [0079] of present specification wherein thermosensitive and heating elements are the same/same function), configured to heat the aerosol-forming substrate, wherein thermosensitive element is arranged adjacent to the heating element (to heat the product they are necessarily adjacent).
Regarding Claim 11: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 3, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the thermosensitive element is configured to heat the aerosol-forming substrate ([0057]).
Regarding Claim 12: Li in view of Hon teaches all the limitations of Claim 3, as stated above, and Li further discloses wherein the aerosol-forming substrate is in a solid form or a liquid form (see [0057] where a needle or plate is used to heat therefor the product is liquid or solid).
Regarding Claim 13: Li discloses an aerosol generating device ([0009]), configured to heat an aerosol-forming substrate ([0057]) to generate an aerosol ([0009]), comprising: a power source, configured to supply power (power source necessarily present); a thermosensitive element(“heating element”), a resistance value thereof varying depending on a heating temperature ([0009]); a sampling resistor (R18), configured to be electrically connected to the thermosensitive element to form a detection loop (sampling circuit, [0009]); and a controller (Fig. 3b), configured to control a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of an electrical characteristic of the detection loop, an electrical characteristic of the sampling resistor, and an electrical characteristic of the thermosensitive element to be a preset value or fall within a preset range (see [0009] wherein the ratio is computed and thus evaluated/compared to a preset limit values ).
Li is silent regarding the power source being a battery cell.
However, Hon teaches an aerosol generating device (see title) wherein the power source is a battery cell (see [0003]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Li, to have the power source being a battery cell, as taught by Hon. Such a modification would enable to have a portable power source.
Regarding Claim 14: Regarding Claim 1: Li discloses an aerosol generating device ([0009]), configured to heat an aerosol-forming substrate ([0057]) to generate an aerosol ([0009]), comprising: a power source, configured to supply power (power source necessarily present); a heating element ([0057], J3), configured to heat an aerosol-forming substrate ([0009]) to generate an aerosol ([0009]); a sampling resistor (R18), configured to be electrically connected to the thermosensitive element to form a detection loop (sampling circuit; [0009]); and a controller (Fig. 3b), configured to determine the heating temperature according to a ratio of any two electrical characteristics of an electrical characteristic of the detection loop, an electrical characteristic of the sampling resistor, and an electrical characteristic of the thermosensitive element ([0009]).
Li is silent regarding the power source being a battery cell.
However, Hon teaches an aerosol generating device (see title) wherein the power source is a battery cell (see [0003]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Li, to have the power source being a battery cell, as taught by Hon. Such a modification would enable to have a portable power source.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see notice of references cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODOLPHE ANDRE CHABREYRIE whose telephone number is (571)272-3482. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-18:30.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached on (571) 270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RODOLPHE ANDRE CHABREYRIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
