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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 13, lines 13-14, recites, “the liquid forming substrate 26 from the liquid storage container 26”, and should read, “the liquid forming substrate 26 from the liquid storage container 24.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“…an aerosol-generating device according to claim 1…”, recited in lines 1-2, should read, “…the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1…”
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ALACRON (US20180192709A1).
Regarding claim 1, ALACRON teaches; An aerosol-generating device (FIG. 2A, reference character 100— ‘electronic smoking device’), comprising: an air inlet (FIG. 2A, reference character 120— ‘air inlet’); an air outlet (FIG. 2A, reference character 126— ‘smoke outlet’); an air flow passage extending between the air inlet and the air outlet (FIG. 2A, reference character 122— ‘air flow path’ between 120 and 126); a heating element configured to heat an aerosol-forming substrate (FIG. 6, reference character 146— ‘heater’, and [0032]—“… the heater 146… to efficiently vaporize the smoking liquid.”); a sensor assembly in communication with the air flow passage (FIG. 1A/1B, reference character 132— ‘sensor’, in communication with 122 as seen in FIG. 1A), the sensor assembly being configured to measure one or both of a flow rate and a pressure level within the air flow passage ([0036]—"…some of the air pulled in from the air inlet 120 may be moved towards the sensor 132, which may be detected by the sensor 132…Other types of sensors are also contemplated for detecting the user's action for smoking, including, for example, an acoustic sensor, a pressure sensor, a touch sensor, an optical sensor, a Hall Effect sensor, an electromagnetic field sensor, and/or the like.”); and a controller coupled to the sensor assembly and being configured to control a supply of power to the heating element (FIG. 1B, reference character 170 —‘controller’, and [0040]/[0041]—“…the controller 170 and a sensor 132A may be integrated…The controller 170 may perform various operations, such as, e.g., heater calibration, heating parameter adjustment/control…”), receive data from the sensor assembly and record when a user puffs on the aerosol-generating device ([0041]—"Further, the memory 180 may store data collected by the controller 170, such as, e.g., usage data, reference data, diagnostics data, error data, and/or the like.”), and assign a puff number to each puff which is recorded by the controller (FIG. 16 and [0044]—“…the controller 170 may look up a characterization formula (e.g., one or more time versus temperature curves or the like) or table (e.g., lookup table or the like) based on at least one of the air flow rate and the time in order to obtain COMMAND VALUE…controller 170 may then wait for a time period TIME STEP…and the TIME STEP is added to the current TIME…”. The examiner notes that the ‘COMMAND VALUE’ obtained from the process in the immediately preceding citation corresponds to ‘assign a puff number to each puff’.), wherein an amount of power supplied to the heating element for a given puff is dependent on the puff number of the given puff (FIG. 16 and [0044]—"The COMMAND VALUE may then be applied to the heater 146, and the heater 146 generates heat based on the COMMAND VALUE…”), wherein the aerosol-generating device is configured such that the puff number resets to zero after a predefined amount of time has passed since a certain numbered puff occurred (FIG. 20 and [0048] —"THE CUMULATIVE ON TIME may be a count value that indicates the total time the heater has been turned on during the produce life of the ESD 100′…When the CUMULATIVE ON TIME has reached the TOTAL TIME…the ESD 100′ may be permanently disabled…and the process 2000 may terminate…”. The examiner notes that the ‘count value’ and ‘CUMULATIVE ON TIME’, in the immediately preceding citation, correspond to ‘puff number’ and ‘predefined amount of time’, respectively).
ALACRON is analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of operating systems for aerosol-generating devices.
Although ALACRON does not teach all the limitations of claim 1 in one specific embodiment, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller of the electronic smoking device, as taught by ALACRON in the embodiment covered by FIG. 16, such that it included the feature that the puff number resets to zero after a predefined amount of time has passed since a certain numbered puff occurred, as taught by ALACRON in the embodiment covered by FIG. 20, for the explicit motivations ALACRON recites and implies; “..for safety purposes..”—[0043], to prevent overheating, and “…for limiting smoking liquid deterioration and contamination…”—[0047]).
Regarding claim 2, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches; the controller is further configured such that no power is supplied to the heating element when a given puff is occurring, if the puff number assigned to the given puff exceeds a threshold value (see FIG. 20, reference character 2060 —‘PERMANENTLY DISABLE ESD’. The examiner again notes that in ALACRON’s embodiment covered in FIG. 20, ‘CUMULATIVE ON TIME’ corresponds to ‘puff number’.).
Regarding claim 6, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches; the sensor assembly comprises at least one sensor disposed within the air flow passage (see FIG. 1A and 2A, 132 —‘sensor’ disposed in 122 —‘air flow path’).
Regarding claim 7, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 6 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches the sensor assembly further comprises multiple sensors spaced along the air flow path and that the sensors can comprise pressure sensors ([0036] —"Other types of sensors are also contemplated…a pressure sensor…”; and see FIG. 10 through FIG. 15 depicting multiple sensors disposed along the air flow path).
ALACRON does not explicitly teach that; the sensor assembly further comprises a first pressure level sensor and a second pressure level sensor spaced along the air flow passage, however, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify that the multiple sensors spaced along the air flow passage, as taught by ALACRON, were a first and second pressure sensor for the explicit motivations ALACRON implies; “…to detect the user's action for smoking, such as, e.g., sucking of the second end…” —[0034] to capture multiple and more accurate pressure measurements, and to optimize the smoking experience for the user.
Regarding claim 8, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches; the heating element comprises a mesh ([0017] —"FIG. 6 shows the solid state heater shown in FIG. 5 arranged in association with the micromesh screen shown in FIG. 4.”).
Regarding claim 9, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches; An aerosol-generating system comprising the aerosol-generating device according to claim 1, and at least one an aerosol-generating article or cartridge for the aerosol-generating device ([0028] —“The ESD 100 may have a multi-body construction…including a first body 100A and a second body 100B and/or the like, that may be easily connected to and disconnected from each other…second body 100B may contain consumable material, such as, e.g., smoking liquid and/or the like. When the consumable material is fully consumed, the second body 100B may be disconnected from the first body 100A and replaced with a new one…”. The examiner notes that the removable and replaceable body containing the consumable material (100B) corresponds to an aerosol-generating article or cartridge.).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ALACRON (US20180192709A1) in view of CAPUANO (US20130319440A1).
Regarding claim 3, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches; the controller is further configured to use a look-up table ([0044]— “…the controller 170 may look up a characterization formula… or table (e.g., lookup table or the like) …”). The lookup table, as taught by ALACRON, is used to obtain a command value that is; communicated to the heater; and used for turning the heater ON/OFF.
ALACRON does not explicitly teach that the lookup table determines a specific amount of power to be supplied to the heating element for a given puff number, wherein each power value of the look-up table is different from the other power values of the look-up table.
CAPUANO however, does teach of a controller with a lookup table that; determines an amount of power to be supplied to the heating element for a given puff number (see Figure 3, columns 1 and 3; “Mode Name” and “Output Voltage during Mode”, respectively.), the look-up table comprising a set of power values and a set of puff numbers (see Figure 3; “Mode Name” and “Output Voltage during Mode”, correspond to ‘a set of puff numbers’ and ‘a set of power numbers’ respectively.), wherein each power value of the look-up table is different from the other power values of the look-up table (see Figure 3, each voltage value supplied to the heater is different), and wherein the look-up table associates each power value with one puff number in the set of puff numbers ([0023]—“…the power control program includes the ability to compare the measured pause against the pre-set pause range of each mode, to determine which mode should be triggered for the current puff…”).
ALACRON and CAPUANO are analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of operating systems for aerosol-generating devices.
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 lookup table used by the controller, as taught by ALACRON, such that it is used to determine an amount of power to be supplied to the heating element for a given puff number, comprise a set of power values and a set of puff numbers, wherein each power value of the look-up table is different from the other power values of the look-up table, and wherein the look-up table associates each power value with one puff number in the set of puff numbers, as taught by CAPUANO, for the explicit motivations CAPUANO recites in [0024] and [0028]; to adjust thermal characteristics including heat loss, heat dissipation, and pressure changes, and to provide a dynamic yet controlled smoking experience.
Regarding claim 4, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches the controller is further configured to supply different levels of power ([0044]— “…the controller 170 may look up a characterization formula… or table (e.g., lookup table or the like) …”). The lookup table, as taught by ALACRON, is used to obtain a command value that is; communicated to the heater; and used for turning the heater ON/OFF.
ALACRON does not teach that a first level of power is for a first puff number and a second level of power is for a second puff number, wherein the first level of power is greater than the second level of power, and the first puff number is greater than the second puff number.
CAPUANO however, teaches that; the controller is further configured to supply a first level of power for a first puff number and a second level of power for a second puff number, the first level of power being greater than the second level of power, and the first puff number being greater than the second puff number (see Figure 5, “Voltage vs. Temperature”, for different modes. The examiner notes: it is clear from the graph that subsequent modes (corresponding to applicant’s limitation of first and second puff numbers), require a voltage (corresponding to applicant’s limitation of power level) less than preceding modes.).
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 controller, as taught by ALACRON according to claim 1, such that it is configured to supply a first level of power for a first puff number and a second level of power for a second puff number, the first level of power being greater than the second level of power, and the first puff number being greater than the second puff number, as taught by CAPUANO, for the explicit motivations CAPUANO recites in [0008] and [0021]; to maintain a uniform experience from the first puff to the last and to prevent overheating.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ALACRON (US20180192709A1) in view of CADIEUX (US20150245669A1).
Regarding claim 5, ALACRON teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as shown above.
ALACRON further teaches an auto shut-off and reset protocol for the aerosol-generating device (ses FIG. 19 and FIG. 20, ‘START’ and ‘END’ commands in the flow chart reasonably correspond to the controller and sensor assembly relaying a ‘reset’ command in response to a user drawing on the device.).
ALACRON does not explicitly teach that the aerosol-generating device comprises a button configured to reset the puff number to zero.
CADIEUX however, does teach of an electronic vaping device that comprises a button configured to reset the puff number to zero (“…the control circuitry 16 may include a manually operable switch…” —[0146]. The examiner notes that the ‘manually operable switch’, taught by CADIEUX, corresponds to the applicant’s limitation of ‘a button’.).
ALACRON and CADIEUX are analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of aerosol-generating devices and their respective operating systems.
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 device with reset protocol, as taught by ALACRON according to claim 1, such that it comprises a button configured to reset the puff number to zero, as taught by CADIEUX, for the explicit motivations ALACRON and CADIEUX imply; to provide a manually controlled and customizable user experience.
PERTINENT PRIOR ART
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it is related to the same field of aerosol-generating devices and overlaps with applicant’s claim scope:
THORENS (US20170318861A1); teaches an inhalation device comprising a controller that records a user’s puff signature [0035], a sensor assembly with an airflow sensor [0096], and several operational schemes shown in Figures 2-6.
LIPOWICZ (US20160088874A1); teaches an electronic inhalation device comprising a control circuit (16) in communication with a puff or pressure sensor (17), and details structural components of the inhalation device.
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