DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings were received on January 20, 2026. These drawings have been entered in part. Fig. 7 has not been entered because the specification does not include reference character “P.” Fig. 8 has been entered
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the pocket formed in the first surface (claim 20) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “releasable” should be “releasably” (line 14). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “releasable” should be “releasably” (line 3). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the period at the end of the line should be a comma (line 7). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: “releasable” should be “releasably” (line 9 on pg. 9). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: “releasable” should be “releasably” (line 7 on pg. 11). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 12. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Woodburn (US 2006/0005839 A1).
Claim 16. Woodburn discloses a bite block immobilization system (apparatus 10 and mask 52), comprising:
a bite block (fixation member 14) having an integral bite-block airway passage (spaces between connectors 34) extending through the bite block (note that the spaces between connectors 34 extend through the bite block because connectors 34 project from attachment portion 32 as shown in Fig. 1 and therefore the spaces extend through fixation member 14 from top to bottom), a dental interface (attachment portion 32) substantially ring-shaped and oriented parallel to a direction of bite and having a maxillary and a mandibular dental engagement when in use, releasably and directly engageable with a plurality of the maxillary and mandibular teeth of a patient when in use, and a bite-block retention mask interface (plate 40) releasably engageable with a retention mask (mask 52),
a tongue diverter receiver (connectors 34) on the bite block releasably engageable with a tongue diverter retainer (see para. 0033) on a tongue diverter (mouthpiece member 12) to releasably engage the tongue diverter and the bite block,
wherein the tongue diverter exerts a direct force on a tongue when the tongue diverter retainer is in place in use in the bite block, in a direction selected from the group of directions consisting of: to the patient's left, to the patient's right, caudally, or a combination of these (note that back side 26 of mouthpiece member 12 is capable of exerting a force on the tongue as claimed),
the retention mask (mask 52) being thermoformable (see para. 0040) and having two generally parallel opposing surfaces, a first surface (see Fig. 4) in direct contact with the skin of the patient during use, and a second surface (see Fig. 3) in direct contact with an ambient atmosphere during use,
and a retainer means (fastener plate 16 and spacer 18) cooperating with the bite block and the second surface of the retention mask to releasably secure the bite block and the retention mask (Figs. 1-5; paras. 0029-0043).
Claim 17. Woodburn discloses wherein the tongue diverter has a lingual surface shape (shape of back side 26) selected from the group of lingual surface shapes consisting of; curved to the patient's left relative to an imaginary vertical passing through the bite block (half of back side 26 is curved left), curved to the patient's right relative to the imaginary vertical passing through the bite block (half of back side 26 is curved right), and substantially orthogonal to the imaginary vertical passing through the bite block (Figs. 1-5; paras. 0029-0043).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 and 18-20 are allowable over the prior art. Note, however, the objections to claims 1, 12, 18, and 19 set forth above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 20, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the spaces between connectors 34 of Woodburn are not integrally formed with a bite block and do not extend through the bite block as they are not integrally formed with any mouth-entering part of the Woodburn device (see pgs. 14-15). The Examiner disagrees. First of all, the claim does not recite that the bite-block airway passageway is integrally formed with the bite block but merely that the bite-block airway passageway is integral to the bite block (see line 2 of claim 16). In the rejection, fixation member 14 is identified as the bite block. Fixation member 14 includes first end 28 having attachment portion 32 with connectors 34 (see para. 0033 and Fig. 1). Thus, the spaces between connectors 34 are integral to fixation member 14. Furthermore, as stated in the rejection above, the spaces between connectors 34 extend through the bite block because connectors 34 project from attachment portion 32 as shown in Fig. 1 and therefore the spaces extend through fixation member 14 from top to bottom. Finally, the claim does not recite that the bite-block airway passage is located within a patient’s mouth when in use. However, even if the claim recited such a limitation, connectors 34 and therefore the spaces between connectors 34 are located in a mouth-entering part of fixation member 14. Connectors 34 are coupled to mouthpiece member 12 (see para. 0033 and Fig. 2). Mouthpiece member 12 includes teeth-receiving portion 22 (see para. 0031) and would therefore be positioned within a patient’s mouth with a patient’s lips resting over attachment portion 32 and part of extension 36. Because attachment portion 32 is attached to mouthpiece member 12 as shown in Fig. 2, it is clear that connectors 34 and therefore the spaces between connectors 34 would be located within a patient’s mouth when in use.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIANNA N HARVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 8:00am-5:00pm EST.
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, Eduardo Robert can be reached at (571)272-4719. 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.
/JULIANNA N HARVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3773