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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 16 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 16, this claim is drawn to a method of locating an aerosol provision system but lacks any corresponding hardware/structure necessary for performing the method steps. Specifically, it is unclear where a request is received, which element or hardware determines an identifier, which element or hardware broadcasts an identification request, where a response is received and which element or hardware determines whether the lost aerosol provision system is within a broadcast range. The structure and functionality of a device/system for performing the method of location an aerosol provision system is unclear. As such, the overall method is indefinite. The examiner suggests amending the claim to positively recite the hardware/structure that performs each of the claimed method steps.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “A method of locating an aerosol provision system comprising: receiving a request to locate a lost aerosol provision system; determining an identifier for the lost aerosol provision system; broadcasting an identification request; receiving, from one or more aerosol provision systems, a response comprising an identifier for the aerosol provision system; and determining, by comparing the received identifiers to the identifier for the lost aerosol provision system, whether the lost aerosol provision system is within a broadcast range.” The steps of receiving, determining, receiving and determining can be performed by mental process using routine comparison and calculations
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim only recites on additional step of broadcasting. However, as noted above, the step of broadcasting includes no corresponding structure and is claimed with a high-level of generality (i.e, generic computing processing). Accordingly, this additional step does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as noted above, the claim does not include hardware/structure necessary for executing the claimed method. Therefore, all of the claimed steps can be performed via mental process or via routine, generic computing function.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Grobler et al. (hereafter Grobler)(US PgPub 2022/0132937).
Regarding claim 16, Grobler discloses a method of locating an aerosol provision system (Figure 8) comprising: receiving a request to locate a lost aerosol provision system (Figure 8, Element 802 and Paragraph 0112 where a user device detects a request to locate a vaporizer device); determining an identifier for the lost aerosol provision system (Paragraphs 0077 and 0082 where the user device stores identification data of a previously paired vaporizer device); broadcasting an identification request (Figure 8, Element 810 and Paragraph 0115 where the user device broadcasts the request to find the vaporizer device); receiving, from one or more aerosol provision systems, a response comprising an identifier for the aerosol provision system (Figure 8, Element 818 and Paragraphs 0077, 0082 and 0118 where the information transmitted between the vaporizer device and user device include previously determined identification data); and determining, by comparing the received identifiers to the identifier for the lost aerosol provision system, whether the lost aerosol provision system is within a broadcast range (Figure 8, Elements 818, 820, 822 and Paragraphs 0077, 0082, 0118, 0119 and 0120 where the user device determines that the vaporizer device corresponds to the previously paired vaporizer device and determines a location of the vaporizer device within the broadcast range).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 are allowed.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest a refilling device for an article of an aerosol provision system comprising: a communications interface; and control circuitry configured to: receive a request to locate a lost aerosol provision system; determine an identifier for the lost aerosol provision system; broadcast, via the communications interface, an identification request; receive, from one or more aerosol provision systems via the communications interface, a response comprising an identifier for the aerosol provision system; and determine, by comparing the received identifiers to the identifier for the lost aerosol provision system, whether the lost aerosol provision system is within a broadcast range of the refilling device. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest a refilling device that performs the lost aerosol provision system process as claimed. The prior art discloses locating a lost aerosol provision system using a smartphone or the like but does not disclose a refilling device that locates a lost aerosol provision system as claimed.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest a refilling device for an article of an aerosol provision system comprising: a communications interface; and control circuitry configured to: receive, via the communications interface, a location request to locate a lost aerosol provision system from a connected device, the request comprising an identifier for the lost aerosol provision system; broadcast, via the communications interface, an identification request; receive, from one or more aerosol provision systems via the communications interface, a response comprising an identifier for the aerosol provision system; determine, by comparing the received identifiers to the identifier for the lost aerosol provision system, whether the lost aerosol provision system is within the
broadcast range of the refilling device; and send, to the connected device via the communications interface, an indication whether the lost aerosol provision system is within the broadcast range of the refilling device based on the determining. Specifically, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest a refilling device that performs the lost aerosol provision system process as claimed. The prior art discloses locating a lost aerosol provision system using a smartphone or the like but does not disclose a refilling device that locates a lost aerosol provision system as claimed.
Dependent claims 2-12 and 14-15 are allowed with their base claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS D ALUNKAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/THOMAS D ALUNKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686