Detailed Office 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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “substantially” in claim 24 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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.
Claim(s) 17-18, 20-22, 24-25, 29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US20210015161A1) in view of Watanabe (WO2020204039A1 (from IDS) – used US20220192263A1 for rejection below).
In regards to claim 17, Moloney discloses an aerosol-generating system comprising an aerosol-generating article (aerosol generating article 102) for producing an inhalable aerosol upon heating and an aerosol-generating device (aerosol generating device 100) and an aerosol-generating device comprising a heating chamber (heating chamber 112), the aerosol-generating article being configured to be received within the heating chamber (The apparatus 100 has a receptacle, or heating chamber 112 which is configured to receive the article 102 to be heated. [0029]) and comprising:
a rod of aerosol-generating substrate (aerosolizable medium; The article 102 in this example is an elongate cylindrical rod, although the article 102 may take any suitable shape. [0029];
wherein the aerosol-generating device (aerosol generating device 100) comprises a heater configured to externally heat the rod of aerosol-generating substrate (The heater arrangement 120 comprising a susceptor material, the apparatus 100 also comprises one or more induction elements which generate a varying magnetic field that penetrate the heater arrangement 120. The heater arrangement may be located internally or externally of the heating chamber 112 [0030]).
Moloney fails to expressly teach the details construction of the aerosol generating article comprising an air-channelling element abutting the aerosol generating substrate and having an external groove extending between upstream and downstream ends.
Moloney teaches a generic aerosolizable article and does not give details of the specific components of the article.
Watanabe teaches an aerosol generating article comprising aroma generating source 110 and the support member 300 arranged adjacent the aroma source. The support member 300 includes external channels 301A-301D extending from inlet edge 300A to outlet edge 300B for passage of aerosol ([0103-0105 & 0133-0134], Fig 5A). Watanabe teaches in [0051] an aroma cartridge (or aerosolizable article) which has a stabilized aerosol stream so that a user can readily breathe the aroma components in aerosol.
Moloney and Watanabe are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol-generating devices.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to practice the invention of Moloney by substituting the aerosol generating article (i.e. stick or aroma cartridge) of Watanabe for the generic aerosol generating article of Moloney for the advantage of using an aerosol generating article which has a stabilized aerosol stream so that a user can readily breathe the aroma components in aerosol as taught by Watanabe [0051].
Moloney teaches both internal/susceptor and external heater arrangements for heating an aerosol generating article, by indicating the external heater is a known alternative heating arrangement suitable for such articles.
In regards to claim 18, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 1, wherein the aerosol- generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises a downstream section located downstream of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate, the downstream section comprising the air channelling element (support element 300) abutting a downstream end of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate (aroma generating source 110; the support member 300 is adjacent to the downstream end of aroma source 110; the support member 300 is located in the downstream portion of the aroma cartridge 100; aroma-generating source 110 [0104] and [0105]; See annotated figure 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
544
813
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 20, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses the aerosol-generating system of claim 17, wherein the aerosol- generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises an upstream section located upstream of the rod of aerosol- generating substrate, the upstream section comprising the air channelling element (support member 300) abutting an upstream end of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate (See annotated figure 1 above).
In regards to claim 21, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses the aerosol-generating system of claim 17, wherein the aerosol-generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises an upstream section located upstream of the rod of aerosol- generating substrate and a downstream section located downstream of the rod of aerosol- generating substrate, the upstream section comprising the air channelling element (support member 300) abutting an upstream end of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate and the downstream section comprising a downstream air channelling element abutting a downstream end of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate (See figure 1, above).
In regards to claim 22, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, as discussed above. Watanabe teaches the aerosol- generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises a mouthpiece element (filter member 130; to a filter member also serving as a mouthpiece [0103]) provided downstream of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate (filter member 130 is located further away from the aroma generating source 110), wherein the air channelling element (support member 300) is located upstream of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate or between the rod of aerosol-generating substrate and the mouthpiece element (See annotated Figure 1 above).
In regards to claim 24, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, wherein a body of the air channelling element (supporting member 300) comprises a core portion (interior core of supporting member 300) and a peripheral portion (outer circumferential portion 140 of support member 300) where the groove (channels 301A-301D) is defined, wherein the core portion is substantially solid (solid interior of support member 300).
In regard to claim 25, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, wherein the air channelling element does not define an internal cavity (the airflow channels 301A-301D are on the outer circumference of the support member 300.The airflow travels along the external channels, rather than the central bore).
In regard to claim 29, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, wherein the air channelling element (support member 300) comprises at least four grooves (the number of channels is four. [0134/0135]).
In regards to claim 31, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, wherein the aerosol- generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises a wrapper (outer circumference member 140) circumscribing the air channelling element (support member 300), wherein the wrapper overlies the external air passageway defined by the groove such that the wrapper defines a boundary of the external air passageway (The outer circumference member 140 is a member wrapping the aroma cartridge 100 and is integrally formed to cover the outer circumference of the aroma cartridge 100. [0105]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US20210015161A1), in view of Watanabe (WO2020204039A1 (from IDS) – used US20220192263A1 for rejection below), and further in view of Campitelli (WO2020127107A1) (from IDS) – US20220046980A1 used for rejection).
In regard to claim 19, Moloney in view of Watanabe teaches the aerosol generating system of claim 17 as discussed above.
However, fails to disclose the wherein the aerosol- generating article further comprises a ventilation zone at a location along the air channelling element.
Campitelli teaches an aerosol-generating article comprising apertures 150 in communication with an outer longitudinal passageway 440, so that ambient air enters the article through the apertures 150 and is directed along the outer longitudinal passageway towards the aerosol-generating material [0251-0252 & 0419-0420].
Moloney, Watanabe, and Campitelli are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol generating articles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support member of Watanabe to include the ventilation apertures taught by Campitelli, to direct air through the external passageways towards the aerosol generating material and provide efficient transfer of aerosol [0248, 0251-0252].
Claim(s) 26-28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US20210015161A1) in view of Watanabe (WO2020204039A1 (from IDS) – used US20220192263A1 for rejection below), and further in view of Morris (US20210329966A1 (from IDS)).
In regards to claim 26, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17 as discussed above. Watanabe teaches the support member 300 being formed of silicon however, the material is not limited to silicone, and another material excellent in heat resistivity may be used [0106].
Watanabe does not expressly teach that the support member 300 is formed by thermoforming.
Morris teaches a cooling element having external grooves and teaches that the element may be formed from cellulose acetate by thermoforming using methods well known in the art [0018 and 0050].
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the air channeling element of Watanabe from the thermoformed cellulose acetate taught by Morris because Watanabe expressly permits the use of alternative materials for the support member and Morris teaches the thermoformed cellulose acetate as a known material for forming grooves in an air channeling element.
Additionally regarding claim 26, the claim is a product by process claim. Product by process claims are evaluated based on the structure the process imparts on the underlying product. In the instance, there is no evidence the thermoforming process claimed imparts any substantially significant structure on the air channelling element that is not already present in the support member (300) of Watanabe. Therefore, the air channelling element of Watanabe is considered to meet the present limitation regardless of how it is formed.
In regards to claim 27 and 28, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17 as discussed above. Moloney modified by Watanabe fails to disclose the depth of the groove is at least 0.5 mm, as recited by claim 27 and depth of the groove is no greater than 2 mm, as recited by claim 28. While Watanabe in [0150] teaches groove depths (groove diameter 2.2 mm or 2.5 mm), however, Watanabe does not limit the groove depth to these sizes nor disparages any other sizes.
Morris teaches an air channeling element having an external groove defining external passageways and the groove/channels has a depth of 1.8 mm [0046 & 0052].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the channels of the support member 300 of Watanabe to have the 1.8 mm groove/channel depth taught by Morris, since Morris teaches 1.8 mm as a suitable dimension for external groove/channels. This represents the combination of known prior elements, sizes of groove and air moving channels in aerosol generating articles, to yield the predictable result of an appropriate dimensioned support member with grooves of Watanabe.
In regards to claim 30, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17 as discussed above. Moloney modified by Watanabe fails to disclose the groove traces a helical path or a waveform path on the air channeling element.
Morris teaches an air channeling element having an external groove that may extend helically along the air channeling element [0012].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the support member 300 of Watanabe to follow the helical path taught by Morris since Morris teaches a helical path as a configuration for an external pathway extending along an air channeling element.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moloney (US20210015161A1), in view of Watanabe (WO2020204039A1 (from IDS) - used US20220192263A1 for rejection below), and further in view of Saettone (US20210015170A1).
In regards to claim 23, Moloney in view of Watanabe discloses an aerosol-generating system according to claim 17, as discussed above. Watanabe teaches the aerosol- generating article (aroma cartridge 100) further comprises a hollow tubular element (transporting member 120) provided downstream of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate, wherein the air channelling element (support member 300) is located upstream of the rod of aerosol-generating substrate or between the rod of aerosol-generating substrate and the hollow tubular element (See annotated Figure 2D below. The support member 300 is located between the aroma generating source 110 and the transporting member 120).
Watanabe fails to expressly teach the transporting member 120 to be a hollow tubular element.
Saettone disclose an aerosol generating article that is suitable for an aerosol generating device. Saettone teaches a transfer section that is constituted by a hollow tubular element and is made more effective as aerosol-cooling element 40 [0004]. When the aerosol generating article is in use, an aerosol formed by volatile compounds released from the aerosol-forming substrate passes over and is cooled by the aerosol-cooling element before being inhaled by a user [0021]. The aerosol-cooling element 40 is located immediately downstream of the support element 30 and abuts the support element 30 [0056]. The support element 30 is located immediately downstream of the aerosol-forming substrate 20 and abuts the aerosol-forming substrate 20 [0055].
Moloney, Watanabe, and Saettone are analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely aerosol generating articles. Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aroma cartridge of Watanabe with the transfer section/aerosol cooling section of Saettone because Saettone teaches the volatile substances may cool within the aerosol-cooling element to form an aerosol that is inhaled by the user and Saettone teaches the aerosol cooling element located next to the support element which is downstream the aerosol forming substrate.
PNG
media_image2.png
160
450
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANNAH C NNABUGWU whose telephone number is (571)272-8791. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 8:30am-5:00pm.
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 5712703882. 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.
/HANNAH CHINWE NNABUGWU/Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747
Prosecution Insights