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
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, and 11-17, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damon (US 7704072) in view of Norris (WO 2017/205805), Ricketts (US 2006/0019211), and Oda (US 20100285420).
The claimed phrase “forms” is being treated as a product by process limitation; that is the product reasonably appears to be either identical with or only slightly different than a product claimed in a product-by-process claim. As set forth in MPEP 2113, product by process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. Once a product appearing to be substantially the same or similar is found, a 35 USC 102/103 rejection may be made and the burden is shifted to applicant to show an unobvious difference. MPEP 2113.
Regarding Claim 1, Damon teaches an orthodontic appliance (Figure 4) comprising:
a plurality (Figure 2) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (10; Figure 2), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising:
a bracket base (21; Figure 4) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Figures 1-2); and
a bracket body (13; Figure 4) extending from the bracket base (Figure 4);
a ligating slide (16; Figure 4), the litigating slide moveable linearly from an open position to a closed position to retain the archwire in the archwire slot of the self-ligating orthodontic bracket, wherein the ligating slide comprises a front surface (51; Figure 4), a rear surface (52; Figure 4) that is closer to the bracket base than the front surface (Figure 4), and a leading edge (53; Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) from the rear surface to the front surface (figure 4) and
a curved wire pushing portion (see illustrated Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) formed by the leading edge of the ligating slide (Figure 4), the wire pushing portion capable of aiding in seating and retaining the archwire in the archwire slot when the ligating slide is moved linearly from the open position to the closed position by the curved wire pushing portion engaging and forcing the archwire into the archwire slot (Column 10, Lines 55-70); and
wherein the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets includes a first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (Figures 1-2) and second self-ligating (Figures 1-2) orthodontic bracket, the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket having a first common design (figure 1) that is installable according to a same first prescription on a left side of an oral cavity and a right side of the oral cavity on a first row of teeth (Figures 1-2), the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket being substantially identical to the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (Figures 1-2), and wherein the first same prescription has first torque, a first tip, and a first rotation (column 7, line 65- column 8, line 15).
PNG
media_image1.png
714
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Damon does not disclose the bracket body defining an archwire slot having .020-inch slot height and .026-inch slot depth when the ligating slide is in the closed position and is adapted to retain the archwire and adapted to retain an archwire having a .019-inch wire height and a .025-inch wire depth and wherein, when in the closed position, the rear surface engages the archwire to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire; and wherein the bracket body of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the bracket body comprises a fixed universal gingival hook integrated with the bracket body.
Norris discloses, an orthodontic appliance (abstract) comprising: a plurality (Figure 2) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (Figure 2; Page 5, Line 4), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising: a bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2, Page 11, Lines 20-31) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Page 13, Lines 25-29); and a bracket body (see illustrated Figure 2) extending from the bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2), the bracket body defining an archwire slot (210) having .020-inch slot height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) depth when the ligating slide is in the closed position and is adapted to retain the archwire (figure 4) and capable of retaining an archwire having a .019-inch wire height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) and a .025-inch wire depth (Page 7, Lines 21-30).
Ricketts teaches an orthodontic bracket (abstract) where the slot depth is .026-inch (Paragraph [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Damon’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket by specifying the archwire slot height as taught by Norris and the slot depth with Rickett’s archwire slot depth in order to provide a bracket with a shallower depth, therefore able to use commonly used archwires, specifically an archwire with .0019 in x .025 in dimension, being particularly useful for reorienting second molars (Norris, Page 4, Lines 15-19; Ricketts, Paragraph [0061]).
Oda discloses an orthodontic appliance (Figures 1-6) comprising: a bracket (10; Figures 1-6), each bracket comprising: a base (34; Figure 3), bracket body (22; Figure 3), a ligating slide (14; Figure 6) having a front portion(62; Figure 5), and a rear portion (Figure 6), and wherein, when in the closed position(figure 6), the rear surface engages the archwire (18; Figure 6) to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire (paragraph [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the archwire of Damon with the rear surface engaging the archwire as taught by Oda in order to increase the rotational control of the teeth during orthodontic treatment (paragraph [0039]).
Norris, in an alternate embodiment, discloses an orthodontic bracket (300, Figure 3) comprising a fixed universal gingival hook (320, Figure 3), wherein the universal gingival hook of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a first fixed hook integrated with the bracket body (figure 3) of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 3) and is and the universal gingival hook of the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a second fixed hook integrated with the bracket body of the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 3; column 11, lines 20-31 discloses a bracket system with multiple brackets).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified each orthodontic bracket of Damon by adding the gingival hook of Norris in an alternate embodiment in order to give the bracket a torsional play value or range that produces mechanical properties suited to finishing the treatment (Page 11, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 16, Damon teaches an orthodontic appliance (Figure 4) comprising: a plurality (Figure 2) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (10; Figure 2), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising: a bracket base (21; Figure 4) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Figures 1-2); and a bracket body (13; Figure 4) extending from the bracket base (Figure 4); a ligating slide (16; Figure 4), the litigating slide moveable linearly from an open position to a closed position to retain the archwire in the archwire slot of the self-ligating orthodontic bracket, wherein the ligating slide comprises a front surface (51; Figure 4), a rear surface (52; Figure 4) that is closer to the bracket base than the front surface (Figure 4), and a leading edge (53; Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) from the rear surface to the front surface (figure 4) and a curved wire pushing portion (see illustrated Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) formed by the leading edge of the ligating slide (Figure 4), the wire pushing portion capable of aiding in seating and retaining the archwire in the archwire slot when the ligating slide is moved linearly from the open position to the closed position by the curved wire pushing portion engaging and forcing the archwire into the archwire slot (Column 10, Lines 55-70); and wherein the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets includes a first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (Figures 1-2) and second self-ligating (Figures 1-2) orthodontic bracket, the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket having a first common design (figure 1) that is installable according to a same first prescription on a left side of an oral cavity and a right side of the oral cavity on a first row of teeth (Figures 1-2), the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket being substantially identical to the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (Figures 1-2), and wherein the first same prescription has first torque, a first tip, and a first rotation (column 7, line 65- column 8, line 15).
Damon does not disclose the bracket body defining an archwire slot having .020-inch slot height and .026-inch slot depth when the ligating slide is in the closed position and is adapted to retain the archwire and adapted to retain an archwire having a .019-inch wire height and a .025-inch wire depth and wherein, when in the closed position, the rear surface engages the archwire to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire; and wherein the bracket body of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the bracket body of the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket each comprise a universal gingival hook.
Norris discloses, an orthodontic appliance (abstract) comprising: a plurality (Figure 2; Column 7, Line 21) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (Figure 2; Page 5, Line 4), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising: a bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2, Page 11, Lines 20-31) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Page 13, Lines 25-29); and a bracket body (see illustrated Figure 2) extending from the bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2), the bracket body defining an archwire slot (210) having .020-inch slot height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) and capable of retaining an archwire having a .019-inch wire height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) and a .025-inch wire depth (Page 7, Lines 21-30).
Ricketts teaches an orthodontic bracket (abstract) where the slot depth is .026-inch (Paragraph [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Norris’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket by specifying the archwire slot height as taught by Norris and the slot depth with Rickett’s archwire slot depth in order to provide a bracket with a shallower depth, therefore able to use commonly used archwires, specifically an archwire with .0019 in x .025 in dimension, being particularly useful for reorienting second molars (Norris, Page 4, Lines 15-19; Ricketts, Paragraph [0061]).
Oda discloses an orthodontic appliance (Figures 1-6) comprising: a bracket (10; Figures 1-6), each bracket comprising: a base (34; Figure 3), bracket body (22; Figure 3), a ligating slide (14; Figure 6) having a front portion(62; Figure 5), and a rear portion (Figure 6), and wherein, when in the closed position(figure 6), the rear surface engages the archwire (18; Figure 6) to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire (paragraph [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the archwire of Damon with the rear surface engaging the archwire as taught by Oda in order to increase the rotational control of the teeth during orthodontic treatment (paragraph [0039]).
Norris, in an alternate embodiment, discloses an orthodontic bracket (300, Figure 3) comprising a fixed universal gingival hook (320, Figure 3), wherein the universal gingival hook of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a first fixed hook integrated with the bracket body (figure 3) of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 3) and is and the universal gingival hook of the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a second fixed hook integrated with the bracket body of the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 3; column 11, lines 20-31 discloses a bracket system with multiple brackets).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified each orthodontic bracket of Damon by adding the gingival hook of Norris in an alternate embodiment in order to give the bracket a torsional play value or range that produces mechanical properties suited to finishing the treatment (Page 11, Lines 1-2).
Regarding Claims 2 and 17, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda as claimed in Claims 1 and 16, respectively. Damon does not disclose each self-ligating orthodontic bracket from the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets has a total torsional play of less than twenty-six degrees.
Norris discloses disclose each self-ligating orthodontic bracket from the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets has a total torsional play of less than twenty-six degrees (Page 9, Lines 4-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the bracket of Damon to have the specific torsional play of less than 26 degrees as taught by Norris in order to produce mechanical properties suited to finishing treatment (Page 9, lines 4-15).
Regarding Claim 11, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon discloses that the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (10; Figures 1-2) includes a third self-ligating orthodontic bracket (10; figures 1-2) having the first common design (figure 1) and a fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket (10; Figures 1-2) having the first common design (figures 1-2), wherein the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the third self-ligating orthodontic bracket, and the fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket are installable on four different teeth on the first row of teeth using the first same prescription (figure 1-2).
Regarding Claim 12, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 11. Damon does not disclose the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the third self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket are premolar brackets.
Norris discloses the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket, the third self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket are premolar brackets (Figure 2; Page 14, Lines 30-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracket location of Damon by specifying the brackets are premolar brackets as taught by Norris in order to correct the orientation of the teeth.
Regarding Claim 13, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon discloses wherein the plurality of self- ligating orthodontic brackets includes a third self-ligating orthodontic bracket (10; Figures 1-2) and a fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket (10; Figures 1-2), the third self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket sharing a second common design that is installable on the left side of the oral cavity on the first row of teeth (figures 1-2) and on the right side of the oral cavity on a second row of teeth according to a second same prescription that is different from the first same prescription (figures 1-2 shows a second prescription on the bottom teeth), wherein the second same prescription has a second torque, a second tip, and a second rotation (Figures 1-2).
Regarding Claim 14, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 14. Damon discloses the third self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the fourth self-ligating orthodontic bracket are cuspid brackets (Figures 1-2).
Regarding Claim 15, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon does not disclose the archwire has a rectangular cross-section with rounded corners.
Oda teaches an archwire (18, Figure 2) has a rectangular cross-section with rounded corners (Figure 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the arch wire of Damon with the rounded archwire of Oda to reduce the amount of tolerance on the archwire so that the clinician can more precisely predict and control tooth movement.
Regarding Claim 20, Damon teaches a method of providing an orthodontic appliance (abstract) that comprises a plurality (Figure 2) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (10; Figure 2), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising: a bracket base (21; Figure 4) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Figures 1-2); and a bracket body (13; Figure 4) extending from the bracket base (Figure 4) defining an archwire slot for receiving an archwire (figure 4); a ligating slide (16; Figure 4), the litigating slide moveable linearly from an open position to a closed position to retain the archwire in the archwire slot of the self-ligating orthodontic bracket, wherein the ligating slide comprises a front surface (51; Figure 4), a rear surface (52; Figure 4) that is closer to the bracket base than the front surface (Figure 4), and a leading edge (53; Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) from the rear surface to the front surface (figure 4) and a curved wire pushing portion (see illustrated Figure 4; Column 10, Lines 55-70) formed by the leading edge of the ligating slide (Figure 4), the wire pushing portion capable of aiding in seating and retaining archwires in the archwire slot when the ligating slide is moved linearly from the open position to the closed position by the curved wire pushing portion engaging and forcing the archwire into the archwire slot (Column 10, Lines 55-70); and wherein the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets includes a first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (Figures 1-2) and second self-ligating (Figures 1-2) orthodontic bracket, the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket and the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket having a common design (figures 1-2) installable according to a same prescription on a left side of an oral cavity and a right side of the oral cavity on a first row of teeth (Figures 1-2).
PNG
media_image1.png
714
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Damon does not disclose the bracket body defining an archwire slot having .020-inch slot height and .026-inch slot depth and adapted to retain an archwire having a .019-inch wire height and a .025-inch wire depth and wherein, when in the closed position, the rear surface engages the archwire to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire and a universal gingival hook, wherein the universal gingival hook is a fixed integrated with the bracket body.
Norris discloses, an orthodontic appliance (abstract) comprising: a plurality (Figure 2; Column 7, Line 21) of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (Figure 2; Page 5, Line 4), each self-ligating orthodontic bracket of the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets comprising: a bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2, Page 11, Lines 20-31) capable of bonding the self-ligating orthodontic bracket to a respective tooth (Page 13, Lines 25-29); and a bracket body (see illustrated Figure 2) extending from the bracket base (see illustrated Figure 2), the bracket body defining an archwire slot (210) having .020-inch slot height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) and capable of retaining an archwire having a .019-inch wire height (Page 4, Lines 15-19) and a .025-inch wire depth (Page 7, Lines 21-30).
Ricketts teaches an orthodontic bracket (abstract) where the slot depth is .026-inch (Paragraph [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Norris’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket by specifying the archwire slot height as taught by Norris and the slot depth with Rickett’s archwire slot depth in order to provide a bracket with a shallower depth, therefore able to use commonly used archwires, specifically an archwire with .0019 in x .025 in dimension, being particularly useful for reorienting second molars (Norris, Page 4, Lines 15-19; Ricketts, Paragraph [0061]).
Norris, in an alternate embodiment, discloses an orthodontic bracket (300, Figure 3) comprising a universal gingival hook (320, Figure 3), , wherein the universal gingival hook is a fixed integrated with the bracket body (figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified each orthodontic bracket of Damon by adding the gingival hook of Norris in an alternate embodiment in order to give the bracket a torsional play value or range that produces mechanical properties suited to finishing the treatment (Page 11, Lines 1-2).
Oda discloses an orthodontic appliance (Figures 1-6) comprising: a bracket (10; Figures 1-6), each bracket comprising: a base (34; Figure 3), bracket body (22; Figure 3), a ligating slide (14; Figure 6) having a front portion(62; Figure 5), and a rear portion (see illustrated Figure 6), and wherein, when in the closed position(figure 6), the rear surface engages the archwire (18; Figure 6) to form an intimate fit of the archwire and the archwire slot defined by the bracket body to reduce play between the bracket body and the archwire (paragraph [0039]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the archwire of Damon with the rear surface engaging the archwire as taught by Oda in order to increase the rotational control of the teeth during orthodontic treatment (paragraph [0039]).
Claim 7- 10, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damon (US 7704072) in view of Norris (WO 2017/205805), Ricketts (US 2006/0019211), and Oda (US 20100285420) and further in view of Viazis (US 20170065375).
Regarding Claim 7, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon does not disclose the first and second self-ligating orthodontic brackets are universal maxillary premolar brackets.
Viazis teaches a first orthodontic bracket (6c-6d) and a second self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 6c-6d) are universal maxillary premolar brackets (Figure 6c-6d).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Damon’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket with the placement of Viazis brackets that are maxillary premolar brackets in order to orient the teeth into the correct alignment (Figure 6c-6d).
Regarding Claim 8, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon does not disclose the first and second self-ligating orthodontic brackets are universal mandibular premolar brackets.
Viazis teaches a first orthodontic bracket (6c-6d) and a second self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figure 6c-6d) are universal mandibular premolar brackets (Figure 6c-6d).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Damon’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket with the placement of Viazis brackets that are mandibular premolar brackets in order to orient the teeth into the correct alignment (Figure 6c-6d).
Regarding Claim 9, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon does not disclose the bracket body of the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket comprises: a mesial gingival tie wing; a distal gingival tie wing; and a gingival wall extending between the mesial gingival tie wing and the distal gingival tie wing, the universal gingival hook extending from the gingival wall between the mesial gingival tie wing and the distal gingival tie wing.
Viazis teaches a bracket body (Figures 9-11, Paragraphs [0042-0044]) of the orthodontic bracket (100; Figure 9) comprises: a mesial gingival tie wing (132; Figure 10; Paragraph [0077]); a distal gingival tie wing (134; Figure 10; Paragraph [0077]); and a gingival wall (112; Figure 9) extending between the mesial gingival tie wing and the distal gingival tie wing (Paragraph [0077]), a universal gingival hook (138; Figure 9) extending from the gingival wall between the mesial gingival tie wing and the distal gingival tie wing (Figure 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Damon/Norris self-ligating orthodontic bracket with tie wings with the shape of Viazis’s tie wings to aid in the attachment of ligatures, elastics, coils, or other force transmitting members (Paragraph [0076]).
Regarding Claim 10, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 9. Damon does not disclose that the universal gingival hook is a straight ball hook.
Norris discloses the universal gingival hook is a straight ball hook (Norris Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified each orthodontic bracket of Damon by adding the gingival hook of Norris in an alternate embodiment in order to give the bracket a torsional play value or range that produces mechanical properties suited to finishing the treatment (Page 11, Lines 1-2).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Damon (US 7704072) in view of Norris (WO 2017/205805), Ricketts (US 20060019211), and Oda (US 20100285420) further in view of Viazis (US 20170065375) and Oda (US 20090004619) .
Regarding Claim 21, Damon as modified by Norris, Ricketts, and Oda discloses the invention as claimed in Claim 1. Damon discloses that the plurality of self-ligating orthodontic brackets (10; Figures 1-2) includes a third self-ligating orthodontic bracket (10; figures 1-2) having the first common design (figure 1), wherein the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket (figures 1-2), the second orthodontic self-ligating orthodontic bract (figures 1-2), the third self-ligating bracket (figures 1-2), and the first common design is installable on four different teeth on the first row of teeth using the first same prescription (figure 1-2).
Damon does not disclose a first cuspid bracket for installation on the left side of the oral cavity on the first row of teeth and a second cuspid bracket for installation on the right side of the oral cavity on a second row of teeth, the first cuspid bracket and the second cuspid bracket having a second same design installable on the left side of the oral cavity on the first row of teeth and on the right side of the oral cavity on the second row of teeth according to a second same prescription, wherein the second same prescription is different from the first same prescription and wherein the second same design is different from the first same design and wherein the first cuspid bracket and the second cuspid bracket have a non- universal gingival hook according to the second same design; a first incisor bracket for installation on the left side of the oral cavity and a second incisor bracket for installation on the right side of the oral cavity, the first incisor bracket and the second incisor bracket being mirror images of each other, wherein the first incisor bracket and the second incisor brackets each have a design that is different from the first same design and the second same design; and a first molar bracket for installation on the left side of the oral cavity and a second first molar bracket for installation on the right side of the oral cavity, the first molar bracket having an L-shaped hook and the second first molar bracket being a mirror image of the first molar bracket, wherein the first molar bracket and the second molar bracket each have a design that is different from the first same design, the second same design, the design of the first incisor bracket, the design of the second incisor bracket, the design of the first cuspid bracket and the design of the second cuspid bracket; and the first self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a first premolar bracket and the second self-ligating orthodontic bracket is a second premolar bracket.
Viazis teaches a first cuspid bracket (18, see illustrated Figure 5) capable of installation on the left side of the oral cavity (Figure 5A) on the first row of teeth and a second cuspid bracket (18, see illustrated Figure 5A) for installation on the right side of the oral cavity on a second row of teeth (Figure 6C), the first cuspid bracket and the second cuspid bracket having a second same design installable (both are 18; figure 5a and 6c) on the left side of the oral cavity on the first row of teeth (Figure 5a) and on the right side of the oral cavity (Figure 5a) on the second row of teeth according to a second same prescription (the orientation of the brackets 18 vary; Figure 5a) and wherein the second same design is different from the first same design(figure 5a) and wherein the first cuspid bracket and the second cuspid bracket have a non- universal gingival hook according to the second same design (paragraph [0093] discloses the use of brackets from figures 9-13; paragraph [0078] discloses that 136 (the hook) is optional and therefore the second design need not include it), wherein the second same prescription is different from the first same prescription (both brackets are 18 but the orientation varies; figure 6c); a first incisor bracket (see illustrated Figure 5A) for installation on the left side of the oral cavity (Figure 5A) and a second incisor bracket (see illustrated Figure 5A) for installation on the right side of the oral cavity (Figure 5A), the first incisor bracket and the second incisor bracket being mirror images of each other (both are bracket 18, Figure 5A), wherein the first incisor bracket and the second incisor brackets each have a design that is different from the first same design and the second same design (paragraphs [0078] and [0093]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Damon’s self-ligating orthodontic bracket with orientation and prescription of the brackets of Viazis’s to aid in transmitting different forces upon the teeth (Paragraph [0076]).
PNG
media_image2.png
359
625
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Oda, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a first molar bracket (410; Figure 18) for installation on the left side of the oral cavity (Paragraph [0110]) and a second first molar bracket for installation on the right side of the oral cavity (Paragraph [0110]), the first molar bracket (Paragraph [0110]) having an L-shaped hook (433; Figure 18) and the second first molar bracket being a mirror image of the first molar bracket (Paragraph [0110]), and wherein the first molar bracket and the second molar bracket each have a design that is different from the first same design (paragraph [0110] discloses using different orientations), the second same design, the design of the first incisor bracket, the design of the second incisor bracket, the design of the first cuspid bracket and the design of the second cuspid bracket (paragraph [0110]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified each orthodontic bracket of Damon by adding Oda’s L-shaped hook to aid in the attachment force transmitting members in order to move teeth into the correct position.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/24/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to Applicant arguments that Damon does not disclose a gingival hook, the Examiner notes that Damon is not being used to teach such limitation and Norris is used to teach such. Additionally Damon does teach a removable hook but not a fixed hook and it is known in the art to use such hooks on brackets. It is well known within the art that the gingival hook can be either removable or fixed and the addition of the hook as taught by Norris would not change the bracket design for installation as taught by Damon, the brackets would still be attached as needed by prescription.
Further. Applicant argues that Damon does not disclose having the same common design according to a first and second position on the right and left sides of the cavity, the Examiner notes that figures 1-2 of Damon depicts the installation of the brackets on either side of the oral cavity and both types of brackets have been modified in the same way to be identical.
It is further noted that the recitation of which teeth the devices are placed on is an intended use of the brackets. The Office action sets forth that it would be obvious to produce two brackets of the same design, but with the same fixed hook in the same location. Such a set of appliances are of a structure that would allow them to be used on either a right or left side of the mouth, regardless of whether one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize them as desirable for the respective side of the mouth or not.
In regards to Applicant’s arguments that Damon fails to provide a torsional play value; the Examiner agrees. The Examiner notes that any bracket having force exerted upon it will have a torsional play value. Such value is taught by Norris. The Examiner suggests amending the claim to explicitly disclose what torsional play value is being claimed on what structure in order to overcome the prior art of record.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Sydney J Pulvidente whose telephone number is (571)272-8066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m..
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, Eric Rosen can be reached on (571) 270-7855. 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.
/SYDNEY J PULVIDENTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772