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 were received on 02/09/2026. These drawings are approved.
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The section headings of the present specification are not in upper case and with underlining.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hajaligol et al (BR 9506148 A).
Hajaligol discloses a heating chamber CR for an aerosol generation device 21, the heating chamber CR comprising: (claim 1) a first open end 360; a base 49; and a side wall 300 between the first open 360 end and the base 49; wherein the base 49 is connected to the side wall 300 and provides structural support to the side wall 300; and wherein the side wall 300 is tubular and has a cross-section that reduces in size towards the first open end 360 (see Figs. 3, 4 and 10); (claim 2) wherein the side wall 300 tapers towards the first open end 360 (see Figs. 3, 4 and 10); (claim 3) wherein the side wall 300 is frustoconical; (claim 7) wherein the base 49 seals a second end 110 of the side wall, opposite the first open end 210: (claim 8) wherein the side wall 300 extends all the way around the base 49.
Regarding claim 11, Figure 8 shows the side wall being divided into a plurality of sections separated by a plurality of gaps 130 between two adjacent sections. Therefore, an inner surface of each section of the side wall is forming a plurality of engagement elements on the inner surface.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Hajaligol discloses a heating chamber CR for an aerosol generation device 23, the heating chamber CR comprising: (claim 16) a first open end 210; a base 49; and a side wall 300 between the first open end 210 and the base 49; wherein the base 49 is connected to the side wall 300 and provides structural support to the side wall 300; and wherein the side wall 300 tapers towards the first open end 210; (claim 17) wherein the side wall is frustoconical.
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.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hajaligol et al (BR 9506148 A).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, claim 4 recites that the side wall and the base are formed from the same material, wherein claim 5 recites that the material is a metal.
While Hajaligol discloses that the side wall 300 is made of a metal, but Hajaligol does not disclose the material used to for the base.
On the other hand, a person having ordinary skill in the art knows that the materials for the side wall and the base are not limited to just one material but can have many different materials such as a hard plastic, a ceramic, a glass, and a metal. Therefore, the use of the metal to form the side wall and the base only deals with the use of preferred material.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the heating chamber taught by Hajaligol such that the side wall and the base of the heating chamber being formed from the same material, a metal as taught by the instant invention because the materials for the side wall and the base are not limited to just one material but can have many different materials such as a hard plastic, a ceramic, a glass, and a metal, which deals with the use of preferred material. It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 6, while claim 6 recites the base and the side wall being formed as a single element Hajaligol discloses the base 49 and the side wall 300 being formed as two separated elements.
On the other hand, a person having ordinary skill in the art knows that elements can be made as a single element or as two separated elements without changing the functions of the elements. It has been held that forming in one piece an article, which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U. S. 164 (1893).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Claims 9-10, 12-15 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reason for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: In combination with all the limitations recited in the independent claim 19, the prior art of record does not anticipate nor render obvious an aerosol generation device comprising: a heating chamber for receiving an aerosol substrate; a heater arranged to aerosolise the aerosol substrate, the heating chamber comprising: a first open end 210; a base 49; one or more platform elements on an inner surface of the base, wherein the one or more platform elements are spaced away from a centre of the base; and a side wall between the first open end and the base; wherein the base is connected to the side wall and provides structural support to the side wall.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAE MOON HYEON whose telephone number is (571) 272-2093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Abdullah A Riyami can be reached at 571-270-3119. 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.
/hmh/
/Hae Moon Hyeon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831