DETAILED ACTION
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.
Status of the Claims
Claims 7, 9-25, and 27-28 are pending. Claims 16 are withdrawn. Claims 7, 16 have been amended. Claim 28 is new.
Response to Amendments
The Examiner acknowledges Applicant's response filed on 12/12/2025 containing amendments and remarks to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant amended claim 7 to add new limitations regarding the cartridge side wall. This amendment overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 7 over Webski in view of Chen provided in the Office Action mailed 9/15/2025. However, Webski discloses a different “side wall” which conforms to Applicant’s newly added limitations, as discussed in the new grounds of rejection for claim 7 below. Applicant’s amendments necessitated these new grounds of rejection.
Applicant further amended claims 7 and 25 to require that the first and second cartridges are connected by a non-threaded connector. Applicant argues that Webski does not disclose this feature. This argument is not persuasive because this feature is an obvious modification of Webski, as Webski discloses that threaded connectors may be interchanged with non-threaded connectors (see rejections below).
Applicant further argues against the obvious modification of Webski to have the first and second cartridges connected by a non-threaded connector by stating that battery-cartridge connections and cartridge-cartridge connections are “different” because the cartridge-cartridge connection “must simultaneously conduct electricity, transfer vapor through aligned channels, and maintain air-tight seals” and that “snap fit connections . . . creates a risk of vapor bypass around an imperfect snap engagement.” This argument is not persuasive as Webski discloses that snap connections are suitable for electrical connections (as Webski discloses using snap connections for connecting a cartridge to the battery), and Applicant has presented no evidence that the alleged “risk” of “an imperfect snap engagement” would impact the vapor transfer or the extent of air-tightness to such a degree that would it deter a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed from using a snap connection. Arguments presented by the applicant cannot take the place of evidence in the record (In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965) and In re De Blauwe, 736 F.2d 699, 705, 222 USPQ 191, 196 (Fed. Cir. 1984), MPEP § 716.01(c)).
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the vaporizer device has a longitudinal axis” should be removed, as the limitation is already present in claim 7 from which claim 28 depends. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 7, 9, 11, 22-24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webski (US 2021/0161206 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0225403 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Webski discloses a vaporizer device (“portable vaporizer (200)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0040), comprising:
a first cartridge (“primary cartridge (203)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0040) including a first vaporizable material (“first vaporizing liquid”, ¶ 0066);
a second cartridge (“One or more secondary cartridges (207)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0043) removably connected to the first cartridge (“Secondary cartridges (207) may be removably attached to primary cartridge (203)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0043), and including a second vaporizable material (“second vaporizing liquid”, ¶ 0066); and
a battery module (“power source such as a battery”, ¶ 0035) removably coupled to the first cartridge (¶ 0035) and configured to provide heat energy to the first cartridge and the second cartridge to vaporize the first vaporizable material to produce a first vapor and vaporize the second vaporizable material to produce a second vapor (“When electricity is provided from a power source . . . the electricity may be delivered to the heating element, generating heat and vaporizing the vaporizing material from the primary cartridge”, ¶ 0039, “two heating elements can be powered using a single power source (201)”, ¶ 0076, “heating element may be also vaporizing the vaporizing liquid in the secondary cartridge (207)”, ¶ 0078);
wherein the vaporizer device has a longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis shown in Fig. 2);
wherein the first cartridge includes:
a bottom portion (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner) configured to be received into a pocket of and attach to the battery module (¶ 0047);
a remainder portion separate from the bottom portion (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner);
a cartridge housing having:
a cartridge bottom wall (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner);
a cartridge top wall (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner);
a cartridge side wall (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner) that is non-stepped, surrounds the longitudinal axis, and overhangs the cartridge top wall to form a second pocket (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner);
a step (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner) between the cartridge bottom wall and the cartridge side wall such that the bottom portion has a smaller diameter than the remainder portion (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner); and
a first set of electrodes (“distal contact (301)” and “heating element (317)”, Figs. 4A-B, ¶ 0047, 0065) configured to interact with electrodes of the battery to transmit heat energy from the battery module to the first vaporizable material (¶ 0065);
wherein the first cartridge receives the second cartridge within the second pocket so that the first cartridge and the second cartridge are disposed in series (¶ 0047);
wherein the first cartridge further comprises a second set of electrodes (“insulated wire (318)” and “chimney contact connector (314)”, Figs. 4A-B, ¶ 0072) configured to transmit heat energy received in the first cartridge at the first set of electrodes to the second cartridge so that the first cartridge and the second cartridge are connected in series to the battery module (¶ 0072-0073, 0076).
PNG
media_image1.png
578
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 16 Annotated by Examiner
However, Webski does not disclose the details of the battery module.
Chen, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a battery module (“control device 200”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0075)
wherein the battery module includes:
a housing (“housing 202”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076) having a side wall (“outer wall 204”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076) and a bottom wall (“end cap 224”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076);
wherein the housing defines an opening (opening at bottom of “outer wall 204” of “housing 202” in Fig. 3) and the bottom wall includes a tab (see Fig. 3 below, annotated by examiner) configured to be received in the opening to connect the side wall and the bottom wall (Fig. 5B);
a support structure (“lower frame 212”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076) situated in the side wall and engaged with the bottom wall (Fig. 5B);
wherein the side wall overhangs the support structure to form a pocket (Figs. 3 and 5B);
a rechargeable battery cell (“battery 216”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076) situated in the support structure (Fig. 5B);
a first plurality of electrodes (“pair of conductive pins 236A, 236B”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0082) configured to transmit energy from the rechargeable battery cell (¶ 0082); and
at least one seal (“pin seal 222”, Fig. 3, ¶ 0076) situated between the rechargeable battery cell and the bottom wall (Fig. 5B) and configured for limiting airflow through the battery module (¶ 0085).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a battery module as taught by Chen in that it provides structural protection to the battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used a battery module as taught by Chen in the vaporizer device taught by Webski in order to obtain this benefit.
PNG
media_image2.png
197
446
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 3 Annotated by Examiner
Webski does not explicitly disclose that the connection between the first cartridge and the second cartridge can be a non-threaded connector instead of a threaded connector. However, Webski discloses using a snappable connection as alternative to a threaded connection in cartridges (“snap fit” connection between the first cartridge and the battery module, ¶ 0035). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a snap fit connection in that it allows for a quicker connection between cartridges than screwing on a threaded connection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a snappable connection between the first and second cartridge instead of a threaded connection in order to obtain this benefit. In the resulting configuration, the first cartridge has a non-threaded connector that is configured to removably connect the first cartridge and the second cartridge.
Regarding claim 9, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the first and second vaporizable materials are different flavors (¶ 0007-0008, 0066).
Regarding claim 11, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the first and second vaporizable materials include different active ingredients (¶ 0007, 0009, 0078).
Regarding claim 22, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Chen further discloses wherein the side wall defines the opening therein (the opening being the horizontal bottom hole bounded by the side wall), and the tab is configured to be received in and fill the opening (i.e., it is put into the opening) to connect the side wall and the bottom wall.
Regarding claim 23, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the second pocket is disposed between and defined by the cartridge side wall and the cartridge top wall (see Fig. 16 above, annotated by examiner).
Regarding claim 24, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the first cartridge has a stepped portion (see Fig. 16 below, annotated by examiner) configured to be received into the pocket of the battery module so that, in the device of the combination, the support structure of the battery module faces the cartridge bottom wall.
PNG
media_image3.png
573
501
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 16 Annotated by Examiner
Regarding claim 28, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the battery module, the first cartridge, and the second cartridge are removably connected together in series along the longitudinal axis (see Fig. 2) and that the battery module and the first cartridge are removably snappable together (“snap fit”, ¶ 0035).
Webski does not explicitly disclose that the connection between the first cartridge and the second cartridge can be a snappable connection instead of a threaded connection. However, Webski discloses using a snappable connection as alternative to a threaded connection in cartridges (“snap fit” connection between the first cartridge and the battery module, ¶ 0035). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a snap fit connection in that it allows for a quicker connection between cartridges than screwing on a threaded connection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a snappable connection between the first and second cartridge instead of a threaded connection in order to obtain this benefit.
In the resulting configuration,
the first cartridge is connectable to the second cartridge and the battery module without twisting the first cartridge about the longitudinal axis with respect to the second cartridge and the battery module;
the second cartridge is connectable to the first cartridge without twisting the second cartridge about the longitudinal axis with respect to the first cartridge; and
the battery module is connectable to the first cartridge without twisting the battery module about the longitudinal axis with respect to the first cartridge.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webski (US 2021/0161206 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0225403 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Chung et al. (US 2024/0268459 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. However, Webski does not explicitly disclose wherein the first and second vaporizable materials are different scents.
Chung, in the same field of endeavor, teaches first and second cartridges (“first cartridge part 221” and “second cartridge part 222”, ¶ 0084) with respective first and second vaporizable materials (“first liquid fragrance” and “second liquid fragrance”, ¶ 0084) that are different scents (“a variety of flavors or scents”, ¶ 0084). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a variety of scents in that it enables the user to customize the aromatic experience when using the device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made the first and second vaporizable materials taught by Webski different scents, as taught by Chung, in order to achieve this benefit.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webski (US 2021/0161206 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0225403 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Harrison et al. (US 2021/0030977 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Webski in view of Chen teaches the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. However, Webski does not explicitly disclose wherein the first cartridge is removably connected to the battery module by at least one magnet.
Harrison, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that magnets may be used to securely attach cartridges (“magnets to secure the cartridge in place”, ¶ 0036). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using magnets in that it increases the strength of the connection to the cartridge. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have removably connected the first cartridge and battery module taught by Webski in view of Chen by at least one magnet, as taught by Harrison, in order to achieve this benefit.
Regarding claim 13, Webski, in view of Chen and Harrison, teaches the vaporizer device of claim 12, as stated above. However, Webski does not explicitly disclose wherein the second cartridge is removably connected to the first cartridge by at least one magnet.
Harrison teaches that magnets may be used to securely attach cartridges (“magnets to secure the cartridge in place”, ¶ 0036). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using magnets in that it increases the strength of the connection between the cartridges. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have removably connected the second cartridge and first cartridge taught by Webski by at least one magnet, as taught by Harrison, in order to achieve this benefit.
Regarding claim 14, Webski, in view of Chen and Harrison, teaches the vaporizer device of claim 13, as stated above. Webski also discloses that the device further comprises a mouthpiece (“mouthpiece (208)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0044) configured to receive suction from a user (“a user inhales from mouthpiece (208)”, ¶ 0044), whereby a user draws air through the first and second cartridges such that the mouthpiece is operable to receive the first vapor from the first cartridge and the second vapor from the second cartridge to form a mixed vaporizable material and provide the mixed vaporizable material together with air to the user (“The air and vapor mixture may then be drawn through filter (204) and internal chimney (206), through any secondary cartridges (207) attached to the first end (232) of primary cartridge (203), and through mouthpiece (208), to the user's mouth”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0044).
Regarding claim 15, Webski, in view of Chen and Harrison, teaches the vaporizer device of claim 14, as stated above. However, Webski does not explicitly disclose wherein the mouthpiece is connected to one of the first and second cartridges by at least one magnet.
Harrison, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that magnets may be used to securely attach cartridges (“magnets to secure the cartridge in place”, ¶ 0036). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using magnets in that it increases the strength of the connection to the cartridge. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have connected the mouthpiece and one of the first and second cartridges taught by Webski by at least one magnet, as taught by Harrison, in order to achieve this benefit.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webski (US 2021/0161206 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0225403 A1) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Daugherty et al. (US 2023/0276858 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Webski in view of Chen discloses the vaporizer device of claim 7, as stated above. However, Chen does not disclose that the battery module further includes a microphone configured to play a sound when the first plurality of electrodes does not transmit energy from the rechargeable battery cell.
Daugherty, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a battery module that includes a microphone configured to play a sound when a first plurality of electrodes does not transmit energy from a rechargeable battery cell (“one or more sounds which may be provided by the aerosol delivery system to notify the user of, for example, a low battery state”, ¶ 0051).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to including a microphone in the battery module in that it provides an audible alert to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included a microphone configured to play a sound when the first plurality of electrodes does not transmit energy from the rechargeable battery cell, as taught by Daugherty, in the battery module taught by Webski in view of Chen, in order to obtain this benefit. In addition, as stated by Applicant, this feature is “well known” (¶ 0022 of Applicant’s Specification).
Claims 25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webski (US 2021/0161206 A1).
Regarding claim 25, Webski discloses a vaporizer device (“portable vaporizer (200)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0040), comprising:
a first cartridge (“primary cartridge (203)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0040) including a first vaporizable material (“first vaporizing liquid”, ¶ 0066);
a second cartridge (“One or more secondary cartridges (207)”, Fig. 2, ¶ 0043) including a second vaporizable material (“second vaporizing liquid”, ¶ 0066); and
a battery module (“power source such as a battery”, ¶ 0035) removably snappable onto the first cartridge (“snap fit”, ¶ 0035) and configured to provide heat energy to both the first cartridge and the second cartridge to vaporize the first vaporizable material to produce a first vapor and vaporize the second vaporizable material to produce a second vapor (“When electricity is provided from a power source . . . the electricity may be delivered to the heating element, generating heat and vaporizing the vaporizing material from the primary cartridge”, ¶ 0039, “two heating elements can be powered using a single power source (201)”, ¶ 0076, “heating element may be also vaporizing the vaporizing liquid in the secondary cartridge (207)”, ¶ 0078).
Webski does not explicitly disclose that the connection between the first cartridge and the second cartridge can be a non-threaded connector instead of a threaded connector. However, Webski discloses using a snappable connection as alternative to a threaded connection in cartridges (“snap fit” connection between the first cartridge and the battery module, ¶ 0035). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a snap fit connection in that it allows for a quicker connection between cartridges than screwing on a threaded connection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a snappable connection between the first and second cartridge instead of a threaded connection in order to obtain this benefit. In the resulting configuration, the first cartridge has a non-threaded connector that is configured to removably connect the first cartridge and the second cartridge.
Regarding claim 27, Webski teaches the vaporizer device of claim 25, as stated above. Webski further discloses wherein the vaporizer device has a longitudinal axis (long axis in Fig. 2) wherein the battery module, the first cartridge, and the second cartridge are removably connected together in series along the longitudinal axis (see Fig. 2) and that the battery module and the first cartridge are removably snappable together (“snap fit”, ¶ 0035).
Webski does not explicitly disclose that the connection between the first cartridge and the second cartridge can be a snappable connection instead of a threaded connection. However, Webski discloses using a snappable connection as alternative to a threaded connection in cartridges (“snap fit” connection between the first cartridge and the battery module, ¶ 0035). One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that there was a benefit to using a snap fit connection in that it allows for a quicker connection between cartridges than screwing on a threaded connection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a snappable connection between the first and second cartridge instead of a threaded connection in order to obtain this benefit.
In the resulting configuration,
the first cartridge is connectable to the second cartridge and the battery module without twisting the first cartridge about the longitudinal axis with respect to the second cartridge and the battery module;
the second cartridge is connectable to the first cartridge without twisting the second cartridge about the longitudinal axis with respect to the first cartridge; and
the battery module is connectable to the first cartridge without twisting the battery module about the longitudinal axis with respect to the first cartridge.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0874. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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 (571)270-3882. 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.
/C.G.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1747
/Michael H. Wilson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1747