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 .
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.
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.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should be made explicit.
EXEMPLARY RATIONALES
Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (US 8170405) in view of Blackley (US 2016/0361452A1).
Harris discloses in reference to claim:
1. A method (of dispensing scent) comprising:
receiving an input via a graphical user interface 130 to begin dispensing a first scent and a second scent from a scent dispensing device, the input including control data [The cartridge is designed to use an optional embedded chip that possesses data about the cartridge's liquid type for high performance purposes. Electrical terminals on the cartridge mate with contacts inside the liquid dispenser to convey this data from the cartridge to the liquid dispenser's controller. This data can also be used by the controller to determine how much liquid to dispense, when to dispense it and to more precisely vaporize the liquid.] indicating that the first scent should be dispensed from a first vial and the second scent should be dispensed from a second vial; [Another object of the present invention is to provide a device that can dispense different liquids from different cartridges at the same time and in any combination to create any desired output blend of fragrances.]
responsive to receiving via a computer network (wireless remote transmitter and receiver read as a computer network) the input to dispense the first scent and the second scent from the scent dispensing device, the scent dispensing device including a body with a first vial bay 60 associated with a first heating element and a second vial bay 60 associated with a second heating element, causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the first scent by sending instructions to the first heating element to heat up a first scent vial positioned in the first vial bay and causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the second scent by sending instructions to the second heating element to heat up a second scent vial positioned in the second vial bay [The present invention can use a heated reservoir for the dispensed liquid fragrance whereby applied heat can readily accelerate the atomization of liquid]; and
presenting for display on a user device, a graphical user interface indicating that the first scent and the second scent are being dispensed, [ The controller can use a display system that can allow a user better interface with the controller and can provide output data concerning the operation and performance of the device.], the scent dispenser indicating use of the scent dispensing device via the display system when users are in the room. Note that the display system by nature will indicate the general use of the scent dispensing device when the user or users are in the room, as well as indicating the general use of the scent dispensing device when users are not in the room via the remote display 130.
Harris does not explicitly disclose the steps of determining a room where the scent dispensing device is positioned, storing the room as analytic data and updating the analytic data to include the room and control data, or determining a scent dispensation behavior based on the updated analytic data including the room and the control data, and displaying the room data and the determined scent behavior, the scent dispensation behavior indicating use of the scent dispensing device when users are in the room.
Blackley discloses a room scenting device and method including a control algorithm including the steps of determining a room where the scent dispensing device is positioned, storing the room as analytic data and updating the analytic data to include the room and control data and displaying the room data.
.
The algorithm 1800 may be triggered by activation of the device at 1802, for example when a user activates a power-on switch or control. At 1804, the processor may obtain a set of test or measurement parameters, based on locally stored and/or remotely obtained data 1806, including for example (optionally) a room or area identifier, a geographic location (e.g., as determined from GPS coordinates), a user identifier, past use records including measurement location, measurement data, and materials used, and any relevant criteria. For example, the processor may select and allocate use and measurement parameters specific for a specified desired room air treatment. Additionally, at least one of vaporizable or non-vaporizable elements may be allocated to the location by an allocating and localizing component based upon the results of a sensor data analysis. The sensor data analysis is for sensing and determining the room or area identifier for allocation of specific air treatment.
Newly added limitations present a “scent dispensation behavior” which is interpreted from Applicant’s disclosure:
[0063] Example analytics data may reflect scent dispensation behaviors, such as how often users use their scent dispensers 132 (e.g., based on the usage data 178), is the use continuous or as needed (e.g., based on the usage data 178), how long is the continuous use (e.g., several hours, e.g., several days, etc., based on the usage data 178), how long does it take for consumers to change out a cartridge/refill (e.g., usage data reflects an empty vial stayed in the scent diffuser 132 for a certain timeframe, which can be averaged over many, or all users (e.g., generally, for that fragrance type, etc.)), how often are consumers purchasing refills (e.g., based on the user data 174 reflecting purchase history), preferred rooms for using scent dispenser 132 (e.g., based on the correlation between the usage data 178 and the premises data 180), use of scent dispensers 132 when users 112 are in vs. out of the premises 140 (e.g., based on the correlation between the users’ 112 user data 174 and the usage data 178), etc.
From the above disclosure by Applicant, “scent dispensation behavior” can be broadly interpreted to include “preferred rooms for using [the] scent dispenser”. It is noted that Blackley discloses the collection of data 1806 which is disclosed as including ) a room or area identifier (i.e. a preferred room) , a geographic location (e.g., as determined from GPS coordinates), a user identifier, past use records including measurement location, measurement data, and materials used, and any relevant criteria. Blackley therefore discloses collection of data of a scent dispensation behavior indicative of a “preferred room” linked to past use records of location (room identifier) and identified user, measurement data and materials used (preferred scent mix) and any relevant criteria (read as broadly incorporating other data that may be linked to a scent dispensation behavior).
Allthough Harris does not explicitly disclose the graphical display that the first and second scent are being dispensed and the room data and the scent dispensation behavior such a display would have been obvious to one of skill in the art since Harris discloses providing display of data concerning the operation and performance of the device. Harris discloses the controller can use a display system that can allow a user better interface with the controller and can provide output data concerning the operation and performance of the device. As a user of the device may wish to know which of the scents are being dispensed simultaneously such that pleasant blends of scents can be remembered for future use specific to a desired room and/or a preferred user.
PNG
media_image1.png
806
966
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. The method of claim 1, wherein first scent is different than the second scent. Note the scents are discloses as different.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the first scent and the second scent are being dispensed simultaneously. Note the scents of two or more cartridges are dispensed simultaneously.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein control data further includes a first intensity level for the first scent and a second intensity level for the second scent. Note that the control data includes at least an intensity level for each scent, even if such a level amounts to on or off.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the first intensity level and the second intensity level are different. One of skill in the art would understand that to attain a customized scent profile the intensity of individual component scents would or may need to be different and would therefore provide such an ability to the device.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the first intensity level is a first heating element setting and the second intensity level is a second heating element setting. Harris discloses If a cartridge contains a scented oil that has low volatility, the controller can calculate the use of a higher reservoir heater setting and a higher fan speed to achieve a desired fragrance output concentration; 2) The dispenser can be programmed to use "rate of vaporization" data that is downloaded from the cartridge together with the liquid dispenser's sensors that measure the ambient conditions to ensure that the liquid has time to vaporize before dispensing more liquid. For example, if the data from the cartridge describes a liquid that is highly concentrated and volatile, the liquid dispenser can then dispense a smaller amount of the liquid at one time.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the scent dispensing device may further include a controller that regulates a first temperature level of the first heating element to maintain the first heating element setting and a second temperature level of the second heating element to maintain the second heating element setting. Harris discloses If a cartridge contains a scented oil that has low volatility, the controller can calculate the use of a higher reservoir heater setting and a higher fan speed to achieve a desired fragrance output concentration; 2) The dispenser can be programmed to use "rate of vaporization" data that is downloaded from the cartridge together with the liquid dispenser's sensors that measure the ambient conditions to ensure that the liquid has time to vaporize before dispensing more liquid. One of skill would understand the Harris device to be able to separately control the vaporization of individual scents by the heater settings as may be needed.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the first scent by sending instructions to the first heating element to heat up the first scent vial positioned in the first vial bay and causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the second scent by sending instructions to the second heating element to heat up the second scent vial positioned in the second vial bay causes the first scent and the second scent to mix as the first scent and the second scent are diffused from the scent dispensing device. Harris teaches causing the first scent and the second scent to mix as the first scent and the second scent are diffused from the scent dispensing device.
9. A method comprising:
receiving an input via a graphical user interface to begin dispensing a first scent and a second scent from a scent dispensing device, the input including control data indicating that the first scent should be dispensed from a first vial and the second scent should be dispensed from a second vial, wherein the first scent contained in the first vial and the second scent contained in the second vial are different types of scents, wherein the input is a request to mix the first scent and the second scent;
responsive to receiving via a computer network the input to dispense the first scent and the second scent from the scent dispensing device, the scent dispensing device including a body with a first vial bay associated with a first heating element and a second vial bay associated with a second heating element, causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the first scent by sending instructions to the first heating element to heat up a first scent vial positioned in the first vial bay and causing the scent dispensing device to dispense the second scent by sending instructions to the second heating element to heat up a second scent vial positioned in the second vial bay;
presenting for display on a user device, a graphical user interface indicating that the first scent and the second scent are being dispensed; and
sending instructions to the scent dispensing device to activate a light 71 included in the scent dispensing device to indicate that both the first scent and the second scent are being dispensed,
determining a room where the scent dispensing device is positioned, storing the room as analytic data and updating the analytic data to include the room and control data, determining a scent dispensation behavior based on the updated analytic data including the room and the control data, and displaying the room data and the determined scent behavior.
See Claim 1, mutatis mutandis, and further note that Harris teaches a light 71 to indicate the activation of individual scents which are being dispensed.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the input is a first input and the method further comprises:
receiving a second input via the graphical user interface to stop dispensing the first scent and the second scent from the scent dispensing device, the second input including updated control data indicating that the first scent should stop being dispensed from the first vial and the second scent should stop being dispensed from the second vial;
responsive to receiving via the computer network the second input to stop dispensing the first scent and the second scent from the scent dispensing device, the scent dispensing device sending instructions to the first heating element to stop heating the first scent vial positioned in the first vial bay and sending instructions to the second heating element to stop heating the second scent vial positioned in the second vial bay;
presenting for display on the user device, an updated graphical user interface indicating that the first scent and the second scent have stopped being dispensed; and
sending instructions to the scent dispensing device to deactivate the light included in the scent dispensing device to indicate that both the first scent and the second scent have stopped being dispensed.
Note that the control, either automatic or by remote user input, would obviously include both activation and deactivation instructions in order for the device to provide its intended use.
Regarding claims 11-18, see the above with reference to Harris, mutatis mutandis, and the use of additional scent modules 60
19. The method of claim 11, wherein the input via the graphical user interface is a selection of an icon to blend the first scent, the second scent, and the third scent. Note that the Harris device suggests a programable device capable of dispensing multiple scents simultaneously, as such one of skill in the art would find it obvious to provide on the GUI 130 a start button (icon) to initiate the programmed dispensing.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the selection of the icon to blend the first scent, the second scent, and the third scent is received from a user device 130.
Note that the Harris device suggests a programable device capable of dispensing multiple scents simultaneously, as such one of skill in the art would find it obvious to provide on the GUI 130 a start button (icon) to initiate the programmed dispensing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art cited in the previous action fails to show or teach the newly added limitations of the scent dispensation behavior indicating use of the scent dispensing device when users are in the room. As stated above, Harris in view of Blackley teaches what can be considered determining a scent dispensation behavior based on the updated analytic data including the room and the control data—which may include a user identifier, and displaying (to the proximate user in the room) the room and control data and the determined scent behavior via the display system when the user is in the room. Note that the display system on the scent dispensing device is by nature is intended to relay information to the user while proximate the scent dispensing device—i.e. in the room. Further note that the remote display may also be used to relay information to the user while distant from the scent dispensing device.
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 THOR S CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4776. The examiner can normally be reached M,W-F 6:30-10:30, 12-4.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 5712705569. 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.
/THOR S CAMPBELL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
tsc
Prosecution Insights