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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to the patentability of the claims. The prior rejections of claim(s) 1-14, 16-19, 21-24, 26-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) and claims 1-7, 10-11, 19, 24, 26-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) have been withdrawn. Claims 1-7, 10-11, 19, 24, 26-27 are now rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The original rejections of claims 8-9, 12-14, 16-18 and 21-23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are maintained and updated to address the applicant’s amendments as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-13, 19, 24, and 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotte et al (US 2003/0207224) herein after Lotte.
Regarding claim 1, Lotte teaches a dental appliance system, comprising: a first dental appliance including a first shell having a number of tooth apertures configured to receive a number of teeth of a patient's upper or lower jaw (please note that either of shell 50 or 60 can be the first dental appliance, for purpose of examination the first appliance will be 60)[[0029], lines 4-7] according to a first stage of a treatment plan, the first shell (60,Fig. 5K) including a first binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the first shell (The first binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]), wherein a first specialized feature (62, Fig. 5K) is adhesively fixed to the first binding structure [0049 fifth from last sentence], wherein the first specialized feature (62) is configured to apply a first force on the patient's upper or lower jaw in accordance with the first stage of the treatment plan when the first shell is worn by the patient [0013, 0032 final sentence]; and
a second dental appliance including a second shell having a number of tooth apertures configured to receive the number of teeth of the patient's upper or lower jaw (The second dental appliance is any of the series of devices as described in [0016 lines 9-end], seen as shell 60 in Fig. 5K) according to a second stage of the treatment plan, the second shell (60, Fig. 5K) including a second binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the second shell (The second binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]. Wherein the second binding structure is any of the series of devices described in [0016 lines 9-end]), wherein a second specialized feature (62, Fig. 5K) is adhesively fixed [0049 fifth from last sentence] to the second binding structure, wherein the second specialized feature (62) is configured to apply a second force on the patient's upper or lower jaw in accordance with the second stage of the treatment plan when the second shell is worn by the patient [0016 lines 9-end].
However, Lotte does not explicitly teach first adhesive and second adhesive structures.
Lotte teaches adhesives ([0049], lines 36-44) that is used to secure the first and second specialized features (different treatment stages of 62). First binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the first shell (The first binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]) which is seen protruding from the outer occlusal surface of the first shell as seen in Fig. 5K which can be mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives or snap-fits ([0049], last two sentences) to the first specialized feature (62). Similarly, second binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the second shell (The second binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence], seen as shell 60 in Fig. 5K) on an occlusal surface of the second shell, which us seen protruding from the outer surface of the second shell as seen in Fig. 5K, which is mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives ([0049], lines 23-31 and last two sentences) to the second specialized structure (62).
Therefore, the adhesives used to bind the specialized structures (60) associated with respective stage appliances can be considered as the claimed first and second adhesive structures. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of application to utilize the adhesive structures on successive appliances in the treatment sequence to maintain controlled tooth movement across stages.
Regarding Claim 2, Lotte further discloses wherein the first dental appliance (the first of 60, Fig. 5K) is configured to, when in position in the patient's oral cavity, reposition a jaw of the patient a first incremental distance according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0032, 0049 lines 1-8].
Regarding Claim 3, Lotte further discloses wherein the first dental appliance (60) is configured to, when in position in the patient's oral cavity, reposition one or more teeth of the patient a first incremental distance according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0030 final two sentences].
Regarding Claim 4, Lotte further discloses wherein the second dental appliance (in a series of appliances as described in [0016 line 9-end]) is configured to, when in position in the patient's oral cavity, reposition the patient's upper or lower jaw a second incremental distance according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8].
Regarding Claim 5, Lotte further discloses wherein the second dental appliance (in a series of appliances as described in [0016 line 9-end]) is configured to, when in position in the patient's oral cavity, reposition one or more teeth of the patient a second incremental distance according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0030 final two sentences].
Regarding Claim 6, Lotte further discloses wherein the first specialized feature (the first of 62 in the series as described in [0049 lines 1-8]) is configured to reposition the patient's upper or lower jaw according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8, 0032], and wherein the second specialized feature (the second of 62 in the series as described in [0049 lines 1-8]) is configured to reposition the patient's upper or lower jaw according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8].
Regarding Claim 7, Lotte further discloses wherein the first shell (the first of 60 as described in [0016]) is configured to reposition one or more teeth of the patient according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0030 final two sentences], and wherein the second shell (the second of 60 as described in a series [0016]) is configured to reposition the one or more teeth of the patient according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0030 final two sentences].
Regarding Claim 8, Lotte discloses the dental appliance system of claim 1, wherein the dental appliance system further comprises a first maxillary appliance for the patient’s upper jaw (50, Fig. 5K), wherein the maxillary (50) and mandibular (60) appliances cooperate to reposition the patient’s lower jaw with respect to the patient’s upper jaw [0048]. Lotte does not teach wherein the first dental appliance with a specialized feature adhesively attached is the maxillary appliance.
However, Lotte discloses the maxillary appliance for the patient's upper jaw (50, Fig. 5K) [0029 line 6], with a specialized feature (52), and Lotte also disclose adhesively connecting the lower feature 62 to the lower tooth shell 60 [0049 fifth from last sentence].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the first appliance of Lotte to be the maxillary appliance, with the specialized feature (52) adhesively attached as doing so combines known methods for attaching specialized features to tooth shells. One of ordinary artisan would be motivated to include wherein the specialized feature 52 is adhesively fixed to the binding structure (50) as Lotte discloses utilizing an adhesive is a known method for attaching specialized features [0049 fifth from last sentence].
Regarding Claim 9, Lotte as modified further discloses wherein the first maxillary appliance (50) and the first mandibular appliance (60) cooperate to separate occlusal surfaces of the teeth of patient's upper and lower jaw according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0032, 0048].
Regarding Claim 10, Lotte discloses wherein the treatment plan includes positioning the patient's lower jaw with respect to the patient's upper jaw such that condyles of the patient's lower jaw are seated in a most posterior-superior position in temporal bone joints of the patient (in correcting the bite position and other factors as listed in [0032 first two sentences] by positioning the patient’s jaw in the desired position as described in [0048], it is understood that the device of Lotte positions the condyles of the lower jaw of a patient).
Regarding claim 11, Lotte discloses wherein the treatment plan further includes positioning the patient's lower jaw with respect to the patient's upper jaw to achieve centric occlusion of the mandibular teeth of the patient with respect to maxillary teeth of the patient (It is noted that Lotte has the claimed structure and is capable of preforming the functions as claimed. Further Lotte describes correcting the bite position of a patient [0032]).
Regarding claim 12, Lotte Fig. 5K discloses the dental appliance system of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein the first binding structure (the surface of 60 where 62 is attached) has a different shape than the second binding structure (the surface of 60 where 62 is attached on a second of a series of aligners as described in [0016 lines 9-end].
However, Lotte teaches a series of aligners with different configurations [0049] and wherein the aligners may reposition teeth with the shape of the tooth-receiving cavities [0030 final two sentences].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the binding structures of the first and second devices to be different shapes as during the series of treatment, the surface where the specialized feature is attached changes, therefore changing the area of the binding structure which is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature is attached. One of ordinary artisan would be motivated to include different shapes of the binding structure as is common in the art in applying progressive aligners.
Claim 13, Lotte Fig. 5K discloses the dental appliance system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the first specialized feature (62) has a different shape than the second specialized feature (62 of a different of the series of aligners as described in [0049].
However, Lotte Figs. 4A-4F and [0041] teaches different shapes of specialized features 62.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the progressive specialized features [Lotte 0049] to be different shapes throughout treatment since doing so depends on the physiology and needs of a patient. One of ordinary artisan would be motivated to change the shapes of the specialized feature throughout treatment as Lotte teaches that “a practitioner may modify the bite-positioning appliance” [0049], allowing specialized treatment based on the needs of a patient and professional assessment of the practitioner.
Regarding Claim 24, Lotte discloses wherein the first binding structure (the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, Fig. 5K) is made of the same material as the first shell (since the binding structure is the surface of shell 60, they are made of the same material), and wherein the second binding structure is made of the same material as the second shell (since the binding structure is the surface of shell 60, they are made of the same material).
Regarding Claim 26, Lotte further discloses wherein the first binding structure, the first shell, the second binding structure, and the second shell are made of a thermoformable polymer material [0036 second to last sentence, 0038, 301 and 88 in Fig. 2A].
Regarding Claim 27, Lotte discloses wherein the first specialized feature (62, Fig. 5K) is attached to an outer surface of the first binding structure (wherein the binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and adhesively attached [0049 fifth from last sentence]), and the second specialized feature is attached to an outer surface of the second binding structure (wherein the binding structure is the surface of 60 where the second specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and adhesively attached [0049 fifth from last sentence]).
Regarding Claim 19, Lotte teaches a dental appliance system (Fig. 5K), comprising:
a first set of dental appliances including: a first upper shell (50, Fig. 5K) having tooth apertures configured to receive [0029 line 6] and reposition upper teeth [0030 final two sentences] of a patient according to a first stage of a treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8]; a first lower shell (60, Fig. 5K) having tooth apertures [0029 lines 7-8] configured to receive and reposition lower teeth [0030 final two sentences] of the patient according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8]; and
a first specialized feature (62) attached to a first binding structure (The first binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]) of the first upper shell or the first lower shell via an attachment material [0049 fifth from last sentence], wherein the first binding structure is on an outer occlusal surface of the first upper or lower shell [0048 lines 3-4], wherein the first specialized feature (62) is configured to cooperate with an opposing first upper or lower shell to reposition a lower jaw with respect to an upper jaw of the patient according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0048](Fig. 5K); and
a second set of dental appliances including: a second upper shell (The second shell is any of the series of devices as described in [0016 lines 9-end], seen as shell 50 in Fig. 5K) having tooth apertures configured to receive [0029 line 6] and reposition the upper teeth [0030 final two sentences] of the patient according to a second stage of the treatment plan [0049 lines 1-8];
a second lower shell (The second shell is any of the series of devices as described in [0016 lines 9-end], seen as shell 60 in Fig. 5K) having tooth apertures configured to receive and reposition the lower teeth of the patient according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0030 final two sentences, 0048 lines 1-8]; and a second specialized feature (62) attached to a second binding structure (the surface of the device 60 where feature 62 is located) of the second upper shell or the second lower shell via the attachment material [0049 fifth from last sentence], wherein the second binding structure is on an outer occlusal surface of the second upper or lower shell [0048 lines 2-4], wherein the second specialized feature (62) is configured to cooperate with an opposing second upper or lower shell to reposition the lower jaw with respect to the upper jaw of the patient according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0048](Fig. 5K).
However, Lotte does not explicitly teach first second attachment materials.
Lotte teaches adhesives which corresponds to attachment materials ([0049], lines 36-44) that is used to secure the first and second specialized features (different treatment stages of 62). First binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the first shell (The first binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]) which is seen protruding from the outer occlusal surface of the first shell as seen in Fig. 5K which can be mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives or snap-fits ([0049], last two sentences) to the first specialized feature (62). Similarly, second binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the second shell (The second binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence], seen as shell 60 in Fig. 5K) on an occlusal surface of the second shell, which us seen protruding from the outer surface of the second shell as seen in Fig. 5K, which is mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives ([0049], lines 23-31 and last two sentences) to the second specialized structure (62).
Therefore, the adhesives used to bind the specialized structures (60) associated with respective stage appliances can be considered as the claimed first and second attachment materials. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of application to utilize the adhesive structures on successive appliances in the treatment sequence to maintain controlled tooth movement across stages.
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lotte et al (US 2003/0207224 A1) herein after Lotte in view of Rayek et al. (US 2016/0228286 A1) herein after Rayek.
Regarding Claim 21, Lotte discloses the dental appliance system of claim 1, wherein the binding structure is on the occlusal surface of shell 60 [0048 lines 2-4] but is silent wherein the first binding structure comprises a first occlusal planar surface that locally protrudes from the outer occlusal surface of the first shell, and wherein the second binding structure comprises a second occlusal planar surface that locally protrudes from the outer occlusal surface of the second shell.
Rayek teaches a device with a binding structure (the structure which mates with 110 as described in [0040 final sentence]) comprising a planar surface that locally protrudes from the outer surface of the tooth shell (The binding structures have a shape that mates to the inward structure 110 described as “dove-tailed” [0036 lines 7-8 and 14-15], see [0040 final sentence, 0050 final sentence]. This results in a “dove-tailed” shape projection, which include planar surfaces. See Figs. 3 and 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the occlusal surface of the shell 60 of Lotte to include a planar surface that locally protrudes from the outer surface of the first and second shells as taught by Rayek for the purpose of better securing the specialized features to the shells. One of ordinary artisan would be motivated to make this modification for the purpose of allowing a patient or practitioner to more easily assemble the device in the specific arrangement intended. One of ordinary artisan would recognize that placing the planar projections of Rayek to the occlusal surface of Lotte would adjust the mechanical stability of the connection between the binding structure and the specialized feature, accounting for the varying needs of patients.
Regarding Claim 22, Lotte/Rayek teach the dental appliance system of claim 21, the device as modified is silent wherein the first binding structure comprises a first buccal planar surface that locally protrudes from an outer buccal surface of the first shell, and wherein the second binding structure comprises a second buccal planar surface that locally protrudes from an outer buccal surface of the second shell.
Rayek teaches a positioning appliance with a first binding structure (the structure which mates with 110 as described in [0040 final sentence]) comprising a first buccal planar surface that locally protrudes from an outer buccal surface of the tooth shell (The binding structures have a shape that mates to the inward structure 110 described as “dove-tailed” [0036 lines 7-8 and 14-15], see [0040 final sentence, 0050 final sentence]. This results in a “dove-tailed” shape projection, which include planar surfaces. See Figs. 3 and 5 wherein the mating portions are on the buccal side of the device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the binding structures of Lotte/Rayek to further include buccal planar surfaces that locally protrude from the outer buccal surface of the first and second shells as doing so would increase the mechanical stability of the device. One of ordinary artisan would be motivated to make this modification for the purpose of attaching mandibular advancement structures to tooth shells according to known methods in the art.
Regarding Claim 23, Lotte teaches the dental appliance system of claim 1, but is silent wherein the first and second binding structures are shaped to mechanically lock with corresponding intruding elements of the first and second specialized features.
Rayek teaches a positioning appliance with first and second binding structures (the structure which mates 110 as described in [Rayek 0040 final sentence]) are shaped to mechanically lock with corresponding intruding elements (110, Figs. 3 and 5) of the first and second specialized features [0040 final sentence, 0050 final sentence].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the first and second binding structures of Lotte to further include mechanical locks with corresponding intruding elements of the first and second specialized features as taught by Rayek for the purpose of utilizing known methods in the art of attaching mandibular positioning pieces to tooth shells.
Claims 14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rayek et al. (US 2016/0228286 A1) herein after Rayek in view of Lotte et al (US 2003/0207224 A1) herein after Lotte.
Claim 14, Rayek discloses a dental appliance system (100), comprising:
a first dental appliance (Fig. 2, 100) including a first shell (102 or 104)[0033 lines 3-6] having tooth apertures [0031 lines 6-8] configured to receive and reposition teeth of a patient according to a first stage of a treatment plan [0032 final sentence, 0033 lines 15-17], the first shell (102 or 104) including a first specialized feature (106 or 108) which has the claimed structure and is capable of repositioning a jaw of the patient [0017 final sentence] a first incremental distance according to the first stage of the treatment plan [0030, wherein it is understood that using between 10 and 30 aligners results in one incremental distance change corresponding to one of the between 10 and 30 aligners. 0038 second sentence], wherein the first specialized feature (106 or 108) is coupled to a first binding structure (the structure which mates with 110 as described in [0040 final sentence]) of the first shell, the first binding structure including a first planar surface that on an outer side surface of the first shell, (The first specialized features 106 or 108 have an inward structure 110 described as “dove-tailed”, see (Figs. 3, 5) and [0036 lines 7-8 and 14-15]. As the binding structures have a mating shape, see [0040 final sentence, 0050 final sentence], they include a “dove-tailed” shape projection, which include planar surfaces. See Figs. 3 and 5); and
a second dental appliance (Fig. 2, 100 wherein it is the second out of between 10 to 30 appliances described in 0030 line 5) including a second shell (102 or 104)[0033 lines 3-6] having tooth apertures [0031 lines 6-8] configured to receive and reposition teeth of a patient according to a second stage of a treatment plan [0032 final sentence, 0033 lines 15-17], the second shell (102 or 104) including a second specialized feature (106 or 108) which has the claimed structure and is capable of repositioning a jaw of the patient [0017 final sentence] a second incremental distance according to the second stage of the treatment plan [0030, wherein it is understood that using between 10 and 30 aligners results in one incremental distance change corresponding to one of the between 10 and 30 aligners. 0038 second sentence], wherein the second specialized feature (106 or 108) is coupled to a second binding structure (the structure which mates with 110 as described in [0040 final sentence]) of the second shell, the second binding structure including a second planar surface on a side surface of the second shell (The second specialized features 106 or 108 have an inward structure 110 described as “dove-tailed”, see (Figs. 3, 5) and [0036 lines 7-8 and 14-15]. As the binding structures have a mating shape, see [0040 final sentence, 0050 final sentence], they include a “dove-tailed” shape projection, which include planar surfaces. See Figs. 3 and 5).
Rayek is silent regarding wherein the first and second binding structures are located on an outer occlusal surface of the first and second shells and further wherein the first and second specialized features are attached to the first and second binding structures via an attachment material.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the projections of the shells of Rayek and corresponding intrusions of the specialized features of Rayek to be on the occlusal surface as doing so is a simple rearrangement of parts, well within the skill of the ordinary artisan, In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). The dove-tail features of Rayek can be placed on any of the mating surfaces. One of ordinary artisan would recognize that placing the planar projections on the occlusal surface would adjust the mechanical stability of the connection between the binding structure and the specialized feature, accounting for the varying needs of patients. MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C).
Lotte teaches adhesives which corresponds to attachment materials ([0049], lines 36-44) that is used to secure the first and second specialized features (different treatment stages of 62). First binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the first shell (The first binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence]) which is seen protruding from the outer occlusal surface of the first shell as seen in Fig. 5K which can be mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives or snap-fits ([0049], last two sentences) to the first specialized feature (62). Similarly, second binding structure on an outer occlusal surface of the second shell (The second binding structure is the surface of 60 where the specialized feature 62 is placed, as described as on the occlusal surface [0048] and separable [0049 fifth from last sentence], seen as shell 60 in Fig. 5K) on an occlusal surface of the second shell, which us seen protruding from the outer surface of the second shell as seen in Fig. 5K, which is mechanically locked using connections such as adhesives ([0049], lines 23-31 and last two sentences) to the second specialized structure (62).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the first and second specialized features of Rayek to be attached to the first and second binding structures of Rayek with an attachment material as taught by Lotte as doing so is a simple combination of known prior art elements. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit of adhesively securing the specialized features to the shells as a secondary form of mechanical stability.
Claim 16, Rayek as modified discloses wherein the first specialized feature (106 or 108) has a different shape than the second specialized feature (106 or 108) (Figs. 2-6).
Claim 17, Rayek as modified discloses wherein the first specialized feature (106 or 108) is attached to a first location on the first shell (Fig. 2), and the second specialized feature (106 or 108) is attached to a second location on the second shell (Fig. 2), wherein the first location is different than the second location (as described in [0030-0032 and 0038], one of ordinary skill in the art can recognize that as the teeth are incrementally adjusted, the location of the specialized features 106 and 108 need to be adjusted for the new geometry of the teeth).
Claim 18, Rayek as modified discloses the device substantially as claimed but is silent wherein the first and second specialized features are made of a different material than the first and second shells.
Lotte, teaches a dental appliance (Fig. 1A) wherein the first and second specialized features (52 or 62) are made of a different material than the first and second shells (50 or 60)[0036, 0049 lines 33-50].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to cause the device of Rayek to include wherein the first and second specialized features are made of a different material than the first and second shells as disclosed by Lotte as doing so is an improvement to the similar device of Rayek. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination for the purpose of selectively creating a specialized feature which exerts a force determined by the patient’s specialized treatment plan as taught by Lotte [0038 lines 12-18]. The device of Rayek would not lose functionality with the limitations of the claimed invention as they teach a specialized feature which may be separable from the first and second shells [0038 lines 9-11].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTOL-892.
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 SARA N. SAMARASEKARA whose telephone number is (571)272-9653. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8.00 am - 4:00 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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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.
/SARA N SAMARASEKARA/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights