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 .
This application is a CON of 17/283,737 04/08/2021 PAT 12,082,613.
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) 1-5, 16-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2017194763 A2.
In regard to claim 1, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses a heating chamber (29) for an aerosol generation device (1), the heating chamber (29) comprising:
an open end (20) through which a substrate carrier (21) including aerosol substrate (21c) is insertable in a direction along a length of the heating chamber (29);
a tubular wall (the inner wall of 29) defining an interior volume of the heating chamber (29);
a base (39) at an end of the heating chamber (29) opposite to the open end (20), preferably wherein the base is closed;
a platform (38) extending inwardly from the base (39); and
a plurality of engagement elements (60) each formed from a portion of the tubular wall (see figures 7-10);
wherein each of the plurality of engagement elements (60) is arranged to extend from an interior surface of the tubular wall at a different location around the tubular wall such that a cross sectional area of the interior volume of the heating chamber (29) is reduced for at least a portion of the length of the heating chamber (29).
In regard to claim 2, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses the plurality of engagement elements (60) includes a first engagement element (60) and a second engagement element (60), the first engagement element (60) and the second engagement element (60) being arranged to extend from the interior surface of the tubular wall opposite to one another (see figures 7-10).
In regard to claim 3, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses each of the plurality of engagement elements (60) comprises a deformation of the tubular wall (see fig. 9).
In regard to claim 4, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses the thickness of the tubular wall is substantially constant in a circumferential and/or axial direction (see fig. 7).
In regard to claim 5, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses at least one of the plurality of engagement elements (60) is elongate in a direction along the length of the heating chamber (29).
In regard to claim 16, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses an aerosol generation device (1), comprising:
an electrical power source (27) the heating chamber (29) according to claim 1; a heater (23) arranged to supply heat to the heating chamber (29); and
control circuitry (25) configured to control the supply of electrical power from the electrical power source (27) to the heater (23).
In regard to claim 17, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses the heating chamber (29) is removable (see page 6, lines 1-3) from the aerosol generation device (1).
In regard to claim 18, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses a system comprising the heating chamber (29) of claim 1, in combination with a substrate carrier (21), wherein the substrate carrier (21) comprises a first portion containing aerosol substrate (21c) at a first end of the substrate carrier (21), and a second portion (21a) for aerosol collection, wherein the interior volume of the heating chamber (29) has a width greater than a width of the substrate carrier (21), but a radius of the interior volume of the heating chamber (29) where the cross sectional area of the interior volume of the heating chamber (29) is reduced, is less than a radius of the substrate carrier (21).
In regard to claim 19, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses at least one of the plurality of the engagement elements (60) extend inwardly a sufficient distance to form friction fit with the substrate carrier (21).
In regard to claim 20, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses at least one of the plurality of the engagement elements (60) extends inwardly a sufficient distance to compress the aerosol substrate (21c) within the substrate carrier (21).
In regard to claim 21, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses the substrate carrier (21) comprises a tubular outer layer surrounding at least the aerosol substrate (21c) and, when the substrate carrier (21) is inserted in the heating chamber (29), the tubular outer layer is inwardly deformed
by the plurality of engagement elements (60) at the location of the plurality of engagement elements (60) and is substantially non-deformed away from the location of the plurality of engagement elements (60) such that an air gap is provided between the tubular outer layer and the heating chamber (29) away from the plurality of engagement elements (60).
In regard to claim 22, WO 2017194763 A2 discloses at least one of the plurality engagement elements (60) is shaped and sized so that a portion of such engagement elements (60) closest to the open end (20) substantially aligns with a boundary between the first portion of the substrate carrier (21) containing aerosol substrate (21c) and the second portion for aerosol collection when the substrate carrier (21) is fully inserted into the heating chamber (29).
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) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2017194763 A2.
In regard to claims 6 and 7, WO 2017194763 A2 does not disclose at least one of the plurality of engagement elements (60) has a profile in a plane parallel to the length of the heating chamber (29) that curves convexly towards the interior volume, and wherein at least one of the plurality of engagement elements (60) has a profile in a plane parallel to the length of the heating chamber (29) having at least one straight side facing into the interior volume.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of WO 2017194763 A2 by having the engagement elements with different type of configurations since applicant has presented no explanation that these particular configurations of the engagement elements are significant or are anything more than one of numerous configurations a person of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing mating surfaces between two members. A change in shape is generally recognizing as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-15 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THO D. TA whose telephone number is (571)272-2014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30PM EST.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at (571) 272-3560. 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.
Tdt
9/26/2026
/THO D TA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights