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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: 50 (Page 14, line 19). 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. 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
“The aerosol generator20…”, recited on page 9, line 14, should read, “The aerosol generator 20…”.
“…to the end face28…”, recited on page 11, line 1, should read, “…to the end face 28…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 12 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.
Regarding claim 12, the limitations, “the airpath” and “the diameter of the first cavity”, recited in lines 2-3, lack sufficient antecedent basis rendering the claim indefinite. Regarding the recitation of “the diameter of the first cavity”, there is no requirement in the claim that the cavity is cylindrical. For examination purposes, claim 12 is interpreted as, “…wherein
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COURBAT (US20200375255A1) in view of STERN (US20170112189A).
Regarding claim 1, COURBAT teaches; An aerosol generating device system for generating an aerosol from aerosol- generating material (100— ‘aerosol-generating system’) comprising: a primary body (Figure 1, reference character 110— ‘housing’); a first auxiliary body removably mountable to the primary body (“The susceptor assembly 160 includes a base portion 170…the base portion 170 may be removably coupled to the housing 110 to allow the susceptor assembly 160 to be removed…”— [0156]/[0157]) comprising a first cavity arranged to receive at least a portion of an article containing aerosol-generating material (see Figure 3, cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the two susceptor elements—180); and a second auxiliary body removably mountable to the primary body (“…inductor assembly 260…attached to the (removable) base portion 270.”— [0161]) comprising a second cavity arranged to receive at least a portion of an article containing aerosol-generating material (see Figure 7, cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the three susceptor elements— 280); and wherein the first cavity has a first configuration and the second cavity has a second configuration, the first configuration being different to the second configuration such that a portion of an article receivable (10— ‘aerosol-generating article’) by the first cavity is different than a portion of an article receivable by the second cavity (the immediately preceding limitation is necessarily met; the cavities of the first and second auxiliary bodies comprise a different number of susceptors which necessarily requires that the portions of the receivable article (10) will be different in the first and second cavities defined by the space around the peripheral of the susceptors).
COURBAT does not explicitly teach that the first auxiliary body and second auxiliary body are arranged to be interchangeably attached to the primary body. In other words, COURBAT does not explicitly teach the above limitations are encompassed in a single, discrete, aerosol-generating system; rather, the differing auxiliary bodies and their respective components are taught as different embodiments of the invention.
STERN does however teach; a multipurpose system that comprises a plurality of differing auxiliary bodies (seen in FIGS. 5 through 7), for the express purpose of accommodating differently sized aerosol-generating articles [0013].
COURBAT and STERN are analogous to the claimed invention because they are both related to the field of products for use with aerosol-generating articles. It would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol-generating system comprising the first and second auxiliary body embodiments, as taught by COURBAT, such that they are interchangeable with each other, in the same system or kit, as taught by STERN, for the express motivation STERN outlines; to accommodate aerosol-generating articles of differing sizes—[0013], and to provide a user with options to customize their experience depending on which advantages taught by COURBAT are desired.
Regarding claim 2, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first cavity is different to the second cavity in at least one spatial aspect (the cavities differ in shape; Figure 3 shows the first cavity with an elliptical or circular cross section; Figure 7 shows the second cavity with a triangular cross section).
Regarding claim 3, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first cavity is configured to receive a different proportion of an article containing aerosol-generating material than the second cavity (the first cavity is configured to receive a larger proportion of an article containing aerosol-generating material since it is comprised of two susceptors whereas the second cavity is comprised of three susceptors).
Regarding claim 4, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1. The examiner notes that the aerosol-forming substrate (10), as taught by COURBAT, comprises an aerosol-forming segment (20) at its distal end further comprising a substrate, a plug, or former [0153].
COURBAT further teaches; the first cavity is configured to receive a first article having a first article configuration and the second cavity is configured to receive a second article having a second, different, article configuration (as shown above, COURBAT teaches one advantage of different auxiliary bodies comprising different cavities is that different quantities of substrate will be displaced once the article is inserted; the immediately preceding teaching directly corresponds to, and reads on the limitations of the first and second article configurations recited in the present claim).
Regarding claim 5, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first cavity defines a first article receiving volume and the second cavity defines a second article receiving volume, the first article receiving volume having at least one dimension different from the second article receiving volume (the cavities differ in shape; Figure 3 shows the first cavity with an elliptical cross section; Figure 7 shows the second cavity with a triangular cross section; therefore the volumes corresponding to the first and second article receiving volumes necessarily differ due to the difference in shape and number of susceptors).
Regarding claim 6, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first auxiliary body comprises a locating protrusion protruding in the first cavity (Figures 2 and 3; tip of susceptor elements 180 correspond to a locating protrusion of the first auxiliary body).
Regarding claim 7, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 6.
COURBAT further teaches that the susceptors may be, “…rod-shaped, pin-shaped…sheet…”— [0009], to, “…optimize[sed] for heating in alternating magnetic fields of different frequencies…”— [0013]. In the case where the susceptor is a sheet, the second auxiliary body is free from a locating protrusion protruding in the second cavity since it is missing the analogous guiding tip as seen with the locating protrusion in the first cavity of the first auxiliary body regarding claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 8, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 6.
COURBAT further teaches; the locating protrusion of the first auxiliary body is a first locating protrusion (Figures 2 and 3; tip of susceptor elements 180 correspond to a first locating protrusion) and the second auxiliary body comprises a second locating protrusion protruding in the second cavity (Figures 6 and 7; tip of susceptor elements 280 correspond to a second locating protrusion).
Regarding claim 9, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first cavity extends to an opening in the first auxiliary body through which an article is arranged to protrude from the aerosol generating device (cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the two susceptor elements—180 extends to 125— ‘insertion opening’).
Regarding claim 10, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the first auxiliary body comprises an airpath extending from the first cavity to an opening on a peripheral face of the first auxiliary body (“…airflow may enter the chamber 120 at the opening 125 and flow along the length of the chamber 120 between the outer walls of the aerosol-generating article 10 and the inner walls of the chamber 120.”— [0155]).
Regarding claim 11, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 10.
COURBAT further teaches; the first auxiliary body is a mouthpiece (“The housing may comprise a mouthpiece. The mouthpiece may comprise at least one air inlet and at least one air outlet.”— [0082]). The examiner further notes the applicant’s definition of ‘mouthpiece’ as the location where, “The user can draw on the device…”— page 9, line 5, and applied the broadest reasonable interpretation of ‘mouthpiece’, in light of the applicant’s specification. It would therefore be obvious to specify that the first auxiliary body, as taught by COURBAT in claim 10, is a mouthpiece, since COURBAT discloses a mouthpiece may be provided as part of the housing, which comprises the first auxiliary body.
Regarding claim 12, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; an airpath is a bore, the cavity is cylindrical and wherein the diameter of the bore is less than the diameter of the first cavity (“Ventilation holes (not shown) may be provided in the walls of the housing 110 to allow airflow…”— [0155]. The examiner notes: the ventilation holes taught by COURBAT correspond to airpaths that are bores; as noted above Regarding claim 2, and in Figure 2, the first cavity has a circular cross section corresponding to a cavity that is cylindrical). Additionally, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that a diameter of the bore is less than a diameter of the first cavity based on where the measurements are taken (inner vs outer diameter).
Regarding claim 13, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches; the device comprises a heating module, wherein the heating module is removably attached to the primary body, the primary body and the heating module being separable (“The aerosol-generating device 100 includes a susceptor assembly 160 located within the chamber 120. The susceptor assembly 160 includes a base portion 170…the chamber 120 [which] is surrounded by the inductor coil 130…the base portion 170 may be removably coupled to the housing 110 to allow the susceptor assembly 160 to be removed…”— [0156]/[0157]). The examiner notes that, the heating module disclosed by COURBAT includes all of the elements present in the immediately preceding citation.
Regarding claim 14, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 13.
COURBAT further teaches; the configuration of the first cavity (cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the two susceptor elements—180) differs from the configuration of the second cavity (cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the three susceptor elements— 280) such that a portion of a heating module receivable by the first cavity is different than a portion of a heating module receivable by the second cavity (see Figure 3 and Figure 7; the presence of an additional susceptor in Figure 7 necessarily requires that a portion of the heating module received by the first cavity is different than the portion of the hearing module receivable by the second cavity).
Regarding claim 15, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 13.
COURBAT further teaches; the heating module is configured to interchangeably extend in the first auxiliary body and the second auxiliary body (part of the heating module, the inductor coil 130, interchangeably extends, specifically longitudinally, in the first and second auxiliary body).
Regarding claim 16, COURBAT teaches; an aerosol generating device system for generating an aerosol from aerosol-generating material (100— ‘aerosol-generating system’) comprising: a first auxiliary body (“The susceptor assembly 160 includes a base portion 170…the base portion 170 may be removably coupled to the housing 110 to allow the susceptor assembly 160 to be removed…”— [0156]/[0157]) removably mountable to a primary body of an aerosol generating device (Figure 1, reference character 110— ‘housing’), the first auxiliary body comprising a first cavity arranged to receive at least a portion of an article containing aerosol-generating material (see Figure 3, cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the two susceptor elements—180)); and a second auxiliary body removably mountable to the primary body (“…inductor assembly 260…attached to the (removable) base portion 270.”— [0161]), the second auxiliary body comprising a second cavity arranged to receive at least a portion of an article containing aerosol-generating material (see Figure 7, cavity formed from the space around the peripheral of the three susceptor elements— 280); wherein the first cavity has a first configuration and the second cavity has a second configuration, the first configuration being different to the second configuration such that a portion of an article receivable (10— ‘aerosol-generating article’) by the first cavity is different than a portion of an article receivable by the second cavity (the immediately preceding limitation is necessarily met; the cavities of the first and second auxiliary bodies comprise a different number of susceptors which necessarily requires that the portions of the receivable article (10) will be different in the first and second cavities defined by the space around the peripheral of the susceptors).
COURBAT further teaches the advantages of the embodiments covering differing auxiliary bodies including: preferential heating [0006], even heating [0039], reducing inadvertent rotation of the article [0042], facilitating insertion of the article [0048], reducing quantity of displaced substrate [0061], facilitating cleaning and replacement [0091], simplifying and reducing manufacturing costs [0095], and reusing certain components [0102].
COURBAT does not explicitly teach; A kit, wherein the first auxiliary body and second auxiliary body are arranged to be interchangeably attached to the primary body. In other words, COURBAT does not explicitly teach the above limitations are encompassed in a single, discrete, aerosol-generating kit; rather, the differing auxiliary bodies and their respective components are taught as different embodiments of the invention.
STERN does however teach; a multipurpose system that comprises a plurality of differing auxiliary bodies (seen in FIGS. 5 through 7), for the express purpose of accommodating differently sized aerosol-generating articles [0013].
COURBAT and STERN are analogous to the claimed invention because they are both related to the field of products for use with aerosol-generating articles. It would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aerosol-generating system comprising the first and second auxiliary body embodiments, as taught by COURBAT, such that they are interchangeable with each other, in the same system or kit, as taught by STERN, for the express motivation STERN outlines; to accommodate aerosol-generating articles of differing sizes—[0013], and to provide a user with options to customize their experience depending on which advantages taught by COURBAT are desired.
Regarding claim 17, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
COURBAT further teaches the aerosol generating device system comprises; an article containing aerosol generating material (10— ‘aerosol-generating article’, and Figure 5).
Regarding claim 18, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 14.
COURBAT further teaches; the heating module is configured to interchangeably extend in the first auxiliary body and the second auxiliary body (part of the heating module, the inductor coil 130, interchangeably extends, specifically longitudinally, in the first and second auxiliary body).
Regarding claim 19, COURBAT in view of STERN, as shown above, teaches all the limitations of claim 16.
COURBAT further teaches the kit for an aerosol generating device system comprises; an article containing aerosol generating material (10— ‘aerosol-generating article’, and Figure 5).
PERTINENT PRIOR ART
The examiner notes that COURBAT teaches the advantages of the embodiments covering differing auxiliary bodies including: preferential heating [0006], even heating [0039], reducing inadvertent rotation of the article [0042], facilitating insertion of the article [0048], reducing quantity of displaced substrate [0061], facilitating cleaning and replacement [0091], simplifying and reducing manufacturing costs [0095], and reusing certain components [0102].
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: FERRIE (US12329201B2), discloses a smoking substitute system comprising a removable, re-scalable, first auxiliary body and heating module as best seen in FIG. 1A through FIG. 73C.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A CEFARATTI whose telephone number is (571)270-0482. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at (571) 270-5545. 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.
/JOSEPH ARTHUR CEFARATTI/Examiner, Art Unit 1749
/KATELYN W SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights