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 are objected to because:
The name “Negotiable Pricing System” should be changed to --Vaporization System-- to match up with the specification (Fig 1C).
The Reference character “306” is not found in the specification (Fig 3).
The Reference character “606” is used to label two different steps (Fig 6).
The word “Dispesne” should be changed to --Dispense-- to correct the typographical error (607, Fig 6).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Reference character “201” is labeled as an inhaler apparatus, vaporization system, and substance cartridge (Fig 2; paragraphs 0059 and 0069).
Reference character “204” is labeled as a control system, controller, and processor (Fig 2; paragraphs 0060 and 0062).
The Reference character “401” is labeled as a vaporization inhaler apparatus and substance cartridge (Fig 5; paragraph 0064).
The phrase “panax, ginseng” should be changed to --panax ginseng-- to correct the typographical error and since these are referring to the same thing (paragraph 0059; paragraph 0064).
The phrase “gingko, biloba” should be changed to --ginkgo biloba-- to correct the typographical error and since these are referring to the same thing (paragraph 0059; paragraph 0064).
The phrase “orage” should be changed to --orange-- to correct the typographical error (paragraph 0059; paragraph 0064).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The word --a-- should be added before “quantity” to correct the grammatical error (Claim 1, Line 10).
The word --the-- should be added before “substance” to maintain consistency (Claim 4, Line 2).
A period should be added after “chambers” to correct the grammatical error (Claim 5, Line 1).
The phrase “based at least on” should be changed to --based on at least-- to correct the grammatical error (Claim 9, Line 2).
The word --the-- should be added before “cartridge” to maintain consistency (Claim 10, Lines 2-3 [three instances]).
The phrase “the cartridge is one of programmable or” should be changed to --the cartridge is programmable or-- to correct the grammatical error (Claim 12, Line 1).
The phrase “based at least on power of the apparatus, substance” should be changed to --based on at least one of the following: power of the apparatus, the substance-- to correct the grammatical error (Claim 13, Line 2).
The phrase “a selected chamber” should be changed to --the selected chamber-- to maintain consistency (Claim 17, Line 8).
The phrase “orage” should be changed to --orange-- to correct the typographical error (Claim 18, Line 3).
The phrase “gingko, biloba” should be changed to --ginkgo biloba-- to correct the typographical error and since these are referring to the same thing (Claim 18, Line 2).
The phrase “panax, ginseng” should be changed to --panax ginseng-- to correct the typographical error and since these are referring to the same thing (Claim 18, Line 2).
The phrase “a chamber” should be changed to --the selected chamber-- to maintain consistency (Claim 20, Lines 1-2).
Claims 2-3, 6-8, 11, 14-16, and 19 are objected for being dependent on objected Claims 1 and 17.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6 and 8-12 are 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.
Claim 6 states “one or more the plurality of chambers” (Line 1). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears the applicant was trying to say the claim limitation is dependent off of Claim 5. However, since this is the first time this is mentioned, it is unclear what it is referring back to. Therefore, the identity of the phrase cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as “the cartridge comprises a plurality of chambers and one or more of the plurality of chambers”.
Claim 8 states “vapor draw consumption” (Line 2). This statement is indefinite because it is unclear if this is the same as the consumption rate in Claim 1. It appears the applicant was trying to say they’re different. However, it is possible that these can mean the same thing related to vaporization. Therefore, the identity of vapor draw consumption cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as they’re different values from each other.
Claim 11 states “automatically send and charge the user” (Line 2). This statement is indefinite because it is unclear what is being sent and what is being charged. It appears the applicant was trying to say automatically send a transaction/order request and charge the user money. However, the claim limitation never identifies what is being sent and what is being charged from the user. Therefore, the identity of the object being sent and charged cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as the ordering system is sending a transaction/order request and is charging the user money.
Claim 12 states “such as” (Line 3). The phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It appears the applicant was trying to say the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. However, it is possible these limitations are merely examples. Therefore, whether or not the limitations are being claimed cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as the limitations are merely examples.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected for being dependent on rejected Claim 8.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 20 states “actuator is further configured to rotate a chamber of the plurality of chambers of the cartridge into communication with the heating element” (Lines 1-3). This claim is an improper dependent form since it fails to further limit the subject matter of Claim 17. Claim 17 already establishes that the cartridge has a plurality of chambers and that the actuator is rotating the cartridge to align a selected chamber from the plurality of chambers. Additionally, the heating element is also configured to heat the substance of the selected chamber which already implies the heating element is in communication with the selected chamber. Therefore, Claim 20 is redundant and does not add any additional claim limitations that further limit the subject matter of Claim 17.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Alarcon et al. (US 2015/0327596). It is noted that the publication of Alarcon et al. is supported by the provisional application that was filed May 13, 2014.
Regarding Claim 1, Alarcon discloses an apparatus (apparatus of Figs 1A, 1B, and 8) for vaporization (124 is a vaporization chamber, Fig 1A; smoking liquid may flow through 141, user sucks second end 104, paragraph 0037; smoking liquid may be mixed with air from air flow path and vaporized by heat from heater 146, paragraph 0040) and automatically requesting a cartridge refill (based on usage data, pack 200A may automatically send order request to vendor 340 when user needs more disposable ESDs or new supply of second bodies 100B, paragraph 0066), the apparatus comprising: a cartridge container (110, Fig 3) configured to receive a cartridge (140, Fig 3) including a substance (second body 100B may contain consumable material, such as smoking liquid, paragraph 0034; 140 may contain smoking liquid and connected to vaporizing chamber 124, paragraph 0035); a heating element (146, Fig 1A) configured to heat the substance of the cartridge to a point of vaporization to generate a vaporized form of the substance (smoking liquid may be mixed with air from air flow path and vaporized by heat from heater 146, paragraph 0040); an outlet port (126, Fig 1A) through which the vaporized form of the substance is inhalable by a person (resultant vapor may be pulled out from vaporizing chamber via smoke outlet 126 for user’s oral inhalation, paragraph 0040); a wireless transmitter (136, Fig 1A) configured to connect the apparatus to one or more networks (136 may also connect ESD 100 to a wired network and/or a wireless network, paragraph 0043); a processor (212 and/or 210, Fig 8; 212 may further include instructions to be executed by controller 210, paragraph 0063; ESD may include a controller such as a microcontroller or microprocessor, paragraph 0035; controller 170 may perform various operations such as data processing, paragraph 0047) configured to determine quantity of the substance of the cartridge and to monitor a consumption rate of the substance via vaporization (212 may include usage information like smoke liquid level in container 140, how many containers 140 have been consumed, amount of nicotine consumed, paragraph 0063; packs 200B may send usage data to healthcare service provider, may track and analyze nicotine consumption by user, usage data used to monitor how much she or he smokes and check whether she or he has been smoking less or more for a period time, paragraph 0066); and wherein if the quantity of the substance remaining in the cartridge is below a predetermined threshold (memory 212 may further include usage information including smoking liquid level in container 140, paragraph 0063; when 140 is almost empty, LED unit may blink a certain pattern, paragraph 0045; when container 140 is empty, the controller 210 may show a message on display, paragraph 0062), the processor is configured to initiate a request to order a cartridge to an ordering system via the wireless transmitter (based on usage data, pack 200A may automatically send order request to vendor 340 when user needs more disposable ESDs or new supply of second bodies 100B, paragraph 0066; a predetermined threshold must exist in order for the pack 200A to make a determination of when to automatically send an order request).
Regarding Claim 3, Alarcon discloses the cartridge comprises an identification code (data collected by ESD include flavors used, paragraph 0068; 930 can indicate current flavor profile for ESD, paragraph 0077; data comprises flavor of smoke juice used, Claim 12; an identification code must inherently exist in order to produce data regarding the flavors used).
Regarding Claim 4, Alarcon discloses the identification code identifies one or more of the following: substance and flavor identification (data collected by ESD include flavors used, paragraph 0068; 930 can indicate current flavor profile for ESD, paragraph 0077; data comprises flavor of smoke juice used, Claim 12; an identification code must inherently exist in order to produce data regarding the flavors used).
Regarding Claim 5, Alarcon discloses the cartridge comprises a plurality of chambers (container 140 may be a single container or a group of containers that are connected to or separated from each other, paragraph 0035).
Regarding Claim 7, Alarcon discloses the apparatus is further configured to position a chamber of the plurality of chambers (container 140 may be a single container or a group of containers that are connected to or separated from each other, paragraph 0035) into communication with the heating element for vaporization (140A and 140B are positioned in communication with 146 for vaporization, Fig 1A).
Regarding Claim 8, Alarcon discloses the processor is further configured to determine the burn rate based on vapor draw consumption via the outlet port to the user (controller may perform various operations such as heating parameter adjustment/control, dosage control, paragraph 0047; voltage sensor 176 and current sensor 178 may be provided to detect voltage and current of heater for heating parameter control, 132 may measure resistance of heater 146 and adjust heating parameters like input current level, heating duration, paragraph 0049; usage data to monitor how much he or she smokes and check whether she or he has been smoking less or more for a period time, paragraph 0066; 132 may send signal to dispensing device 142 to dispense a predetermined amount of smoking liquid, paragraph 0040; the burn rate is tied with dosage control and heating parameter adjustment/control since the device is capable of controlling the rate at which the dosage is provided to the user as well as track the dosage, sensors at the outlet 126 tracks activation of the device and adjusts the heater).
Regarding Claim 9, Alarcon discloses the vapor draw consumption is calculated based at least on one or more of the following parameters: heating duration (132 may measure resistance of heater 146 and adjust heating parameters like input current level, heating duration, paragraph 0049), length of draw (ESD 100 may record the number of puffs taken and length of each puff, paragraph 0071), pressure change (other types of sensors are also contemplated for detecting the user’s action for smoking including a pressure sensor, paragraph 0042).
Regarding Claim 10, Alarcon discloses the vapor draw consumption is calculated based at least one or more of the following parameters: changes in pressure in cartridge (other types of sensors are also contemplated for detecting the user’s action for smoking including a pressure sensor, paragraph 0042), temperature of cartridge (132/170 may monitor change in resistance while heater 146 is on and adjust in the current level in real time to maintain heating temperature, paragraph 0049; data comprises at least temperature of vapor produced by device, Claim 12).
Regarding Claim 11, Alarcon discloses the ordering system is further configured to automatically send and charge the user for the refill (based on usage data, pack 200A may automatically send order request to vendor 340 when user needs more disposable ESDs or new supply of second bodies 100B, paragraph 0066; smart phone app can be used to share data with vendors such as manufacturers or retailers that sell ESD, paragraph 0072; ordering from a vendor will inherently charge the user money for the refill since the ESDs or second bodies are being sold).
Regarding Claim 12, Alarcon discloses the cartridge is one of programmable (controller 170 may perform various operations such as data processing, heating parameter adjustment/control, dosage control, paragraph 0047; 132 may measure heater 146 and adjust heating parameters, 132/170 may monitor change in resistance while heater 146 is on and adjust current level in a real-time basis, paragraph 0049) or comprises memory (180, Fig 1B) communicably coupled to the processor (180 communicates with 170, Fig 1B; 180 may store instructions executed by controller 170, paragraph 0047) to provide historical information such as one or more of the following: number of prior uses, initial quantity and remaining quantity (180 may store data collected such as usage data, reference data, diagnostics data, error data, and/or the like, paragraph 0047; memory 212 may include usage information like smoking liquid level in container 140, how many containers 140 have been consumed, amount of nicotine consumed, paragraph 0063).
Regarding Claim 13, Alarcon discloses the processor is further configured to vary the consumption rate based at least on power of the apparatus (voltage sensor 176 and current sensor 178 may be provided to detect voltage and current of heater for heating parameter control, 132 may measure resistance of heater 146 and adjust heating parameters like input current level, heating duration, voltage level, paragraph 0049; 172 may be connected to 170 and battery 130C and configured to generate a power control signal such as current level signal or voltage level signal to control power supplied to heater, power control signal may be generated by controller, paragraph 0048), substance in the cartridge (temperature control screen can indicate flavor profile as well as different flavor profiles with different recommended temperatures, paragraph 0077).
Regarding Claim 15, Alarcon discloses the apparatus further comprises a location based system to determine a location of the user (ESDs can be configured to obtain and store GPS data or other location-based services data, paragraph 0070; 100 can also contain location-based services configured to relay user’s location to retailer, paragraph 0072).
Regarding Claim 16, Alarcon discloses the request comprises one or more of the following: a location of the user (based on usage data, pack 200A may automatically send order request to vendor 340 when user needs more disposable ESDs or new supply of second bodies 100B, paragraph 0066; 100 can also contain location-based services configured to relay user’s location to retailer, retailer may send coupon, promotion, or other advertisement to user encouraging user to buy more smoke juice at nearby store, paragraph 0072), date and time information (smartphone app can be used to collect data about user characteristics like when and where they smoke, who they smoke with, how often they smoke, what times of day they smoke, user characteristic data may be very valuable to manufacturers of ESDs for marketing and strategizing to drive sales, paragraph 0073), substance identifying information (ESD may record flavors of smoke juice used, data can be input into user’s pack, smartphone app can receive such data, smartphone app can use communication channels to share information with various vendors, paragraph 0071), user identification (data stored in pack 200 like usage information, product information, user information, may be shared with other devices or entities including vendors, paragraph 0064) and apparatus identification (data stored in pack 200 like usage information, product information, user information, may be shared with other devices or entities including vendors, paragraph 0064).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alarcon et al. (US 2015/0327596) as applied to Claim 1 in view of Wensley et al. (US 2014/0190496).
Regarding Claim 2, Alarcon discloses the claimed invention of Claim 1. Alarcon fails to disclose the substance comprises cannabis.
However, Wensley, of the same field of endeavor, teaches a condensation aerosol generating device (paragraph 0008) including the substance comprises cannabis (antiemetic includes cannabis, paragraph 0244; an herb can be cannabis, paragraph 0295) since this is a known substance used in vaporization devices.
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 cannabis as a substance for vaporization, as taught by Wensley, since this is a known substance used in vaporization devices.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alarcon et al. (US 2015/0327596) as applied to Claim 1 in view of Xie (English Machine Translation of CN 103960785A provided by Espacenet, 2014).
Regarding Claim 6, Alarcon discloses the claimed invention of Claim 1. Alarcon also discloses one or more the plurality of chambers (container 140 may be a single container or a group of containers that are connected to or separated from each other, paragraph 0035).
Alarcon fails to disclose one or more the plurality of chambers comprises a different substance for consumption.
However, Xie, of the same field of endeavor, teaches a multi-smoke oil bottle atomizer (Description) including one or more the plurality of chambers (4 has multiple chambers involved, Fig 1; there are four e-liquid bottles, each of which contains different flavors of e-liquid, paragraph 0021) comprises a different substance for consumption (rotatable e-liquid switch assembly has several independent e-liquid bottles, paragraph 0009; one flavor can be changed every 90 degrees of rotation, paragraph 0012; there are four e-liquid bottles, each of which contains different flavors of e-liquid, paragraph 0021) to allow for different flavors to be present (paragraph 0021) and provide a way to inhale a multi-flavored e-liquid (paragraph 0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place different substances in the different containers, as taught by Xie, to allow for different flavors to be present (Xie: paragraph 0021) and provide a way to inhale a multi-flavored e-liquid (Xie: paragraph 0007). This improvement introduces more varieties of flavors that cannot be achieved with just a single flavor and allows the user to explore more flavors that might suit their taste buds more.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alarcon et al. (US 2015/0327596) as applied to Claim 1 in view of Tunnell et al. (US 2015/0174349).
Regarding Claim 14, Alarcon discloses the claimed invention of Claim 1. Alarcon fails to disclose the predetermined threshold is configured to be adjustable based on one or more of the following: user habits, user location(s), and estimated time of delivery of order.
However, Tunnell, reasonably pertinent to the problem of refills and delivery, teaches a device for monitoring an inhaler (Abstract) including the predetermined threshold is configured to be adjustable based on one or more of the following: user habits and estimated time of delivery of order (system 280 may continually check whether refill is warranted, usage data allows system to determine number of dosages, data may be modified over time with additional usage by patient, capacity may be displayed as dosage number remaining, capacity amount remaining, estimated length of time until refill is required, paragraph 0204; notification sent when capacity is at 15%, 30%, or fixed number of uses, depending on anticipated or experienced lag time in replacement delivery, notification may be calculated to pop-up sufficiently in advance to allow delivery of refill before cartridge is anticipated to become empty, paragraph 0205) to adapt the device to calculate and estimate the particular time that a refill is required based on usage and on lag time in delivery (paragraphs 0204 and 0205).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller to adjust the indication that the smoking liquid/substance levels are low based on delivery time and usage data, as taught by Tunnell, to adapt the device to calculate and estimate the particular time that a refill is required based on usage and on lag time in delivery (Tunnell: paragraphs 0204 and 0205). This improvement ensures that the refills are ordered and delivered at the correct time and frequency and further personalizes the device to suit the user’s needs.
Claims 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie (English Machine Translation of CN 103960785A provided by Espacenet, 2014) alone.
Regarding Claim 17, Xie discloses an apparatus (apparatus of Fig 1) for vaporization of different substances using a cartridge (4, Fig 1) with a plurality of chambers (4 has multiple chambers involved, Fig 1), the apparatus comprising: a cartridge container (5, Fig 1) configured to receive a cartridge (4, Fig 1) having a plurality of chambers (4 has multiple chambers involved, Fig 1), each chamber of the plurality of chambers filled with a different substance for consumption (rotatable e-liquid switch assembly has several independent e-liquid bottles, paragraph 0009; one flavor can be changed every 90 degrees of rotation, paragraph 0012; there are four e-liquid bottles, each of which contains different flavors of e-liquid, paragraph 0021); a member (rotatable e-liquid switch assembly, paragraph 0009; 5 and 6 are combined into a rotatable e-liquid switching assembly, paragraph 0021) configured to rotate the cartridge to align a selected chamber for vaporization (the selection of 4 and release of e-liquid are performed by rotation of e-liquid switching assembly, paragraph 0021; 8 is the atomization core where selected e-liquid is atomized, Fig 1); a heating element (8, Fig 1) configured to heat a substance of a selected chamber to a point of vaporization to generate a vaporized form of the substance of the selected chamber (e-liquid flows out and enters e-liquid pool 7, paragraph 0022; e-liquid in 7 is heated by atomizing core 8 and atomized, and then sucked out from cigarette holder, paragraph 0023); an outlet port (1, Fig 1) through which the vaporized form of the substance of the selected chamber is inhalable by a user (e-liquid in 7 is heated by atomizing core 8 and atomized, and then sucked out from cigarette holder 1, paragraph 0023).
Xie fails to disclose an actuator configured to rotate the cartridge to align a selected chamber for vaporization.
However, it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to convert the manual switchable member to be an automated actuator since it has been found that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04, Section III. This change would be an obvious modification and would provide additional benefits by not requiring the user to rotate among different flavors.
Regarding Claim 19, Xie teaches the different substance within each of the chambers comprises one or more of the following: liquids (inhaling multi-flavored e-liquid, paragraph 0007).
Regarding Claim 20, Xie teaches the actuator is further configured to rotate a chamber of the plurality of chambers of the cartridge into communication with the heating element (the selection of 4 and release of e-liquid are performed by rotation of e-liquid switching assembly, paragraph 0021; e-liquid flows out and enters e-liquid pool 7, paragraph 0022; e-liquid in 7 is heated by atomizing core 8 and atomized, and then sucked out from cigarette holder, paragraph 0023).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie (English Machine Translation of CN 103960785A provided by Espacenet, 2014) as applied to Claim 17 in view of Wensley et al. (US 2014/0190496).
Regarding Claim 18, Xie teaches the claimed invention of Claim 17. Xie fails to teach the different substance within each of the chambers comprises one or more of the following: caffeine, panax, ginseng, gingko, biloba, bitter orange, cola-nut, guarana, natrum carbonicum, green tea, cocoa extract, cannabis and yerba mate.
However, Wensley, of the same field of endeavor, teaches a condensation aerosol generating device (paragraph 0008) including the different substance comprises one or more of the following: caffeine (antidepressant can be caffeine, paragraph 0241), panax (herb supplement can be panax ginseng, paragraph 0295), ginseng (herb supplement can be panax ginseng, paragraph 0295), gingko (dietary supplement can be ginkgo, paragraph 0265; a herb can be ginkgo biloba, paragraph 0295), biloba (a herb can be ginkgo biloba, paragraph 0295), bitter orange (a dietary supplement can be bitter orange, paragraph 0265), green tea (a dietary supplement can be green tea, paragraph 0265), cannabis (antiemetic includes cannabis, paragraph 0244; an herb can be cannabis, paragraph 0295) since these are known substances used in vaporization devices.
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 the listed substances above in the device for vaporization, as taught by Wensley, since these are known substances used in vaporization devices.
Conclusion
This is a Continuation of applicant's earlier Application No. 18/232,999. All claims are drawn to the same invention claimed in the earlier application and could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the earlier application. The instant claim set is identical to the claim set of applicant’s earlier Application No. 18/232,999 which was filed August 11, 2023. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action in this case. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no, however, event 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 BRIAN THAI-BINH KHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1857. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9:00 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, Kendra Carter can be reached on (571) 272-9034. 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.
/BRIAN T KHONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/PAIGE KATHLEEN BUGG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights