DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The amendment filed 01/14/2026 has been received and considered. Claim 4 is cancelled. Claims 1-3 and 5-12 are pending in this application. Claims 11 and 12 have been withdrawn from further consideration. Claims 1-3 and 5-10 presented for examination.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/14/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
As to claims 5-8, their base claim has been canceled. The claims are incomplete, which renders the claims indefinite. Accordingly, the claims have not been further treated on the merits.
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Rubbert, (Rubbert hereinafter), U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20020015934 (see IDS dated 09/06/2023), taken in view of Rune Fisker, (Fisker(1) hereinafter), U.S. Patent 10743968.
Regarding claim 1, Rubbert discloses a computer-implemented method of (see Fig. 2, computer, item no. 20, with teeth model, item no. 18; Fig. 1, computer, item no. 30, and teeth model, item no. 18) designing a dental restoration (see restoration as crown, “[0368] In planning treatment for the patient, the orthodontist conceptualizes teeth as individual teeth objects that can be moved independently of each other to correct the patient's malocclusion… server workstation 28 includes interactive treatment planning software which enables the orthodontist to do this with the virtual three-dimensional model of the patient's dentition. In order to do this treatment planning, it is highly desirable therefore to process the three dimensional model resulting from a cumulative registration by separating the teeth from the gums and other anatomical structure, and presenting the just crowns of the teeth to the orthodontist”; restoration as denture, “[0396] The concept of virtual template tooth objects and user manipulation of tooth objects on a computer can also be used in the field of dentures”) at a display (see “[0019] The treatment planning apparatus can be considered an interactive, computer-based computer aided design and computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system for orthodontics), the method comprising:
providing a virtual three dimensional representation of at least a portion of a patient's dental situation; displaying, on the display, a virtual three dimensional dental restoration model in an alignment with the virtual three dimensional representation (see Fig. 6, “3-Dimensional Image Capture”, Figs. 57-63 and 69-87, 3D teeth models built based on scans of a patient’s teeth, “[0017] An interactive, orthodontic care system… based on scanning of teeth… includes a hand-held scanner and associated processing system for capturing images of the dentition of the patient and processing the images to generate a full, virtual, three-dimensional model of the dentition”, “[0019] The treatment planning apparatus can be considered an interactive, computer-based computer aided design and… CAD/CAM) system for orthodontics. The apparatus is highly interactive, in that it provides the orthodontist with the opportunity to both observe and analyze the current stage of the patient's condition and develop and specify a target or desired stage. A shortest direct path of tooth movement to the target stage can also be determined. Further, the apparatus provides for simulation of tooth movement between current and target stages”, “[0414]… virtual model of teeth comprises a set of virtual, individual three-dimensional tooth objects… obtaining the tooth objects from a scan of teeth, and obtaining other virtual objects of associated anatomical structures, e.g., gums, roots and bone… When the teeth are separated from each other and from the gums, they can be individually manipulated”);
providing a design tool selectable to deform at least a portion of the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “deform” as “morphology/morphing”, “[0420] The treatment planning software includes features enabling more accurate diagnosis. For one thing, the virtual model of the dentition can be manipulated in three dimensions at will, resulting in complete visual assessment of the model. Measurement tools are also provided by which the orthodontist can determine the distance between any two points on the model. This allows the user to quantify the patient's morphology both at initial and at target stages. Thus, treatment progress, proposed changes in appliance design, or tooth movement can be quantified precisely. By measuring the differences and changes in morphology during the care cycle, the orthodontist can quickly and accurately assess patient treatment”; '[0440] A further "morphing" tab could be provided which would animate the movement of the teeth from malocclusion to target situations based on treatment steps or limits defined by the user (explained in further detail below)'; “design tool” as “object navigational controls" and “deform” as "virtual teeth 312 and virtual brackets 400 are individual three-dimensional objects which can be selected and moved independently", "[0443]… As shown in FIG. 70, the initial placement of the virtual brackets 400 can be displayed along with the teeth… the virtual teeth 312 and virtual brackets 400 are individual three-dimensional objects which can be selected and moved independently. One way of moving objects is by entering new positional values (e.g, in terms of mm of displacement or angle of rotation, as described later). Another method provided by the software is using object navigational controls, activated by clicking the icon 353 or by accessing the function via a tools menu. The object navigation controls allow the user to move the object based on orthodontic judgment and visual feedback"),
wherein the design tool, when selected, enables a line to be drawn on a surface of the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “[0448] To use the icon 351, the user clicks on the icon, and then clicks anywhere in the 3-D view of the dentition to place markers. A straight line is drawn between two markers”; “[0415] One of the primary tools in the treatment planning apparatus is the selection and customization or a desired or target archform. Again, because the teeth are individual tooth objects, they can be moved independently of each other to define an ideal arch. This development of the target archform… can be customized by the user specifying a type of archform (e.g, Roth), and the tooth are moved onto that archform or some modification of that archform”),
wherein to deform comprises refining a shape of the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “[0462] The initial target archform presented to the user in FIG. 76 is only an initial archform. The treatment planning software allows the orthodontist to change many variables in the target situation, simply by entering new values in the slide line area 402 of the screen display. FIG. 19 shows some of the parameters by which the orthodontist can adjust the shape of the arch, including the distance between the cuspids, the distance between the rear-most molars, the center line offset, and the radius of curvature at the front of the teeth. Slide line area also permits the user to select a symmetrical archform or an asymmetrical archform, and apply corrections on the right and left quadrants as indicated. As values are entered in area 402, the shape of the archform is instantaneously modified on the screen display, allowing the user to simulate various potential archform configurations for the patient")
About Examiner's interpretation of restoration as crown, Examiner notes that the Specification reads "[0044] a restoration model such as a crown model".
While Rubbert discloses restoration as crown or as denture, Rubbert fails to expressly disclose restoration and disclose wherein each point of the line is usable by a user to move the line to deform the portion of only the three dimensional dental restoration model, wherein a shape change of the restoration model occurs more at a region that surrounds where the point is located.
Fisker(1) expressly discloses restoration (see “when the dental restoration is a crown or a bridge for a prepared set of teeth” in col. 4, lines 40-46) and discloses wherein each point of the line is usable by a user to move the line to deform the portion of only the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “If the operator prefers to adjust the restoration margin line manually he may do so using e.g. a computer mouse to drag sections of the restoration margin line according to his preferences” in col. 18, lines 41-44), wherein a shape change of the restoration model occurs more at a region that surrounds where the point is located (see "shape change… occurs more" as "the defined curve has a smaller variation than the intersection along the longitudinal axis of the teeth in the 3D representation of the unprepared teeth", “detecting a collision line from the intersection of the digital 3D representation and the digital teeth anatomies… the restoration margin line of the digital restoration design is derived from the detected collision line… when the dental restoration is a crown or a bridge for a prepared set of teeth, the restoration margin line must preferably precisely match the tooth preparation line in order to avoid e.g. a grove at the transition between the dental restoration and the prepared tooth causing discomfort and the risk of bacteria being caught. In some cases the operator may choose to make slight modifications to the derived restoration margin line but this is often not required. An example of such a modification is the smoothing of the restoration margin line to provide a smooth restoration margin line which is easier to manufacture… the restoration margin is derived at least partly from a curve defined on the digital 3D representation of the patient's unprepared teeth, where the defined curve is smoother than the intersection, i.e. the defined curve has a smaller variation than the intersection along the longitudinal axis of the teeth in the 3D representation of the unprepared teeth… The curve may be defined by an operator using a pointing tool to draw the curve on a visualization of the digital 3D representation of the unprepared teeth in a user interface” in col. 4, line 22 to in col. 5, line 1).
Rubbert and Fisker(1) are analogous art because they are related to dental/orthodontics design tools.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Fisker(1) with Rubbert, because Fisker(1) discloses that “[t]he purpose of the dental restoration may also be to improve the aesthetic appearance of the patient's set of teeth such that the target shape is directed towards an aesthetically appealing shape and arrangement of the dental restorations. A veneer is one example of such a dental restoration. In the preferred relative arrangement the digital teeth anatomies and the digital 3D representation are arranged relative to each other according to an anatomical correct arrangement” (see col. 3, lines 10-19), and as a result, Fisker(1) reports that “[t]his provides the advantage that… the digital teeth anatomies can be visualized together with the digital representation of the corresponding teeth, i.e. the teeth which the manufactured dental restoration(s) will be seated on" (see col. 6, lines 30-36).
Regarding claim 2, Fisker(1) discloses wherein a surrounding area is indicated along with the line drawn on the surface of the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “surrounding area” in “operator can decide to define a smooth curve on the digital 3D representation of the unprepared teeth following the overall shape of the intersection but avoiding the peaks and valleys in the jagged intersection”, “In step 106 the intersection between the digital 3D representation and the digital teeth anatomies is determined using computer implemented surface-surface intersection algorithms… In step 107 a restoration margin line of the digital restoration design is derived from the intersection… In some cases the operator may choose to make slight modifications to the intersection before deriving the restoration margin line. If the intersection is highly jagged the operator can decide to define a smooth curve on the digital 3D representation of the unprepared teeth following the overall shape of the intersection but avoiding the peaks and valleys in the jagged intersection… In step 109 an outer surface of the digital restoration design is formed based on the coronal portion of the digital teeth anatomies. With the outer and inner surface of the digital restoration design formed, a solid digital structure for the digital restoration design can be formed by closing any gap between the inner and outer surface at the restoration margin line, e.g. by forming a connecting surface using a computer implemented loofting algorithm” in col. 15, line 57 to col. 16, line 32).
About Examiner's interpretation of "surrounding area", “a surrounding area”, under broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the Specification as a whole, is any area at all shown around the line. Examiner notes that the Specification reads, for example, “[0037]… in Fig. 8A… A surrounding area 804 of the line 802 has also been indicated”, ‘[0009] Fig. 3 is a graphic user interface showing a line and its surrounding area generated by using the "grove" tool’, and “[0032]… where the surrounding area of the line can be a cylinder and the surrounding area covers a portion of the restoration model”.
Regarding claim 3, Fisker(1) discloses wherein the surrounding area covers at least a portion of the three dimensional dental restoration model (see “surrounding area” in “operator can decide to define a smooth curve on the digital 3D representation of the unprepared teeth following the overall shape of the intersection but avoiding the peaks and valleys in the jagged intersection”, “In step 106 the intersection between the digital 3D representation and the digital teeth anatomies is determined using computer implemented surface-surface intersection algorithms… In step 107 a restoration margin line of the digital restoration design is derived from the intersection… In some cases the operator may choose to make slight modifications to the intersection before deriving the restoration margin line. If the intersection is highly jagged the operator can decide to define a smooth curve on the digital 3D representation of the unprepared teeth following the overall shape of the intersection but avoiding the peaks and valleys in the jagged intersection… In step 109 an outer surface of the digital restoration design is formed based on the coronal portion of the digital teeth anatomies. With the outer and inner surface of the digital restoration design formed, a solid digital structure for the digital restoration design can be formed by closing any gap between the inner and outer surface at the restoration margin line, e.g. by forming a connecting surface using a computer implemented loofting algorithm” in col. 15, line 57 to col. 16, line 32).
Regarding claim 9, Rubbert discloses wherein the dental restoration model includes one or more of a posterior model and an anterior model (see Figs. 57-63 and 69-87, “[0019] The treatment planning apparatus can be considered an interactive, computer-based computer aided design and… CAD/CAM) system for orthodontics. The apparatus is highly interactive, in that it provides the orthodontist with the opportunity to both observe and analyze the current stage of the patient's condition and develop and specify a target or desired stage. A shortest direct path of tooth movement to the target stage can also be determined. Further, the apparatus provides for simulation of tooth movement between current and target stages” where the figures model both posterior and anterior aspects of a modeled mouth/teeth).
As to claim 10, this claim recites a system for performing the method of claim 1. Rubbert discloses a system (see Fig. 2, item no. 44 CPU, item no. 42 main memory RAM) for performing a method that teaches claim 1, therefore claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons given above.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the arguments with respect to the rejection under 103, Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art disclosures in the previous rejection fail to teach the newly amended limitations. Some of these features of Applicants' claims and arguments were newly added. The previous Office Action could not have pointed out disclosures of a limitation that was not claimed before. As to the amended independent claims, claims are rejected over Rubbert taken in view of Fisker(1) instead of Rubbert taken in view of Fisker, and Fisker(1) is newly cited.
Conclusion
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN CARLOS OCHOA whose telephone number is (571)272-2625. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays 9:30AM - 7:00 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, Renee Chavez can be reached on 571-270-1104. 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.
/JUAN C OCHOA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186