DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453) in view of Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa).
Regarding Claim 1, Yasushi discloses a treatment apparatus 10; (Figures 1-4) for treating peri-implantitis (abstract), the apparatus comprising:
an application tip (22; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (Figure 4) between a screw fixture of a dental implant (42; Figure 4) and a surrounding gingiva (Figure 4), wherein a length of the application tip is capable of being at least equal to a depth of a peri- implant pocket to be treated (Figure 4), and wherein the application tip comprises one or more nozzles (22b; Figure 4 ); for jetting pressurized sterile fluid (paragraphs [0042] and [0053]) for removing bacterial biofilms from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (paragraphs [0042] and [0053]);
a handpiece (16; Figure 1) for holding and guiding the application tip (Figure 1);
a supply unit (14; Figure 1) for supplying pressurized sterile fluid;
and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0008] discloses the tip is composed of titanium, as evidenced by Niznick, “pure titanium allows more bending” as disclosed in Col. 1, line 60-Col. 2, line 10) that is configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (Figure 4), to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (paragraph [0008] discloses the tip is titanium, as evidenced by Niznick, the titanium retains its shape as disclosed in Col. 1, line 60-Col. 2, line 10).
Yasushi does not disclose the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of greater than 10 bar to the application tip and wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated.
Benetti discloses a treatment apparatus (abstract; Figure 1a-3) with a nozzle (32; Figure 2c); a handle (12; Figure 1a), and supply unit (30; Figure 3) the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip (Paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the supply unit of Yasushi by specifying the pressure supplied to the application tip is greater than 10 bar as a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close as there is no discernable difference between the two pressures. Further, the difference in pressure applied is merely a design choice to optimize the pressure. Additionally, no critically has been established by Applicant as page 7 states the amount is preferred. See MPEP 2144.05 paragraph 2.
Kuroiwa discloses a treatment apparatus (Figures 1-4; paragraph [0062]) for treating peri-implantitis (paragraph [0004] discloses the use of the device in treating periodontal disease), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (21; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (paragraph [0004]) and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0006] disclose it is a bendable metal) configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (paragraph [0035] discloses bending a portion of the tip), while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (Paragraph [0035] discloses the step of bending the tip; Paragraph [0132] discloses bending the application tip to fit in the periodontal pocket; the Examiner notes that bending the application top in the mouth of the patient is functionally recited and the end result of a bent portion is only given patentable weight.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the bendable metal material of Yasushi to have wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated as taught by Kuroiwa in order to decrease the treatment time and ensuring the application tip is correctly orientated within the periodontal pocket based on the patient’s dental structure.
Regarding Claim 2, Yasushi as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Yasushi discloses the application tip is tapered for easy and atraumatic insertion into the peri-implant pocket (Figures 4 and 8).
Regarding Claim 18, Yasushi as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Yasushi does not disclose the application tip has an outer diameter less than 1.2 mm.
Yasushi, in another embodiment, discloses the application tip has an outer diameter less than 1.2 mm (D4; Figure 8; Paragraph [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the application tip of Yasushi by replacing it with the application tip of Figure 8 in order to fit the application tip into a smaller periodontal pocket.
Regarding Claim 19, Yasushi as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 18. Yasushi does not disclose the application tip has an inner diameter of 0.6 mm or less .
Yasushi, in another embodiment, discloses the application tip has an inner diameter of 0.6 mm or less (D4; Figure 8; Paragraph [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the application tip of Yasushi by replacing it with the application tip of Figure 8 in order to fit the application tip into a smaller periodontal pocket and increase the pressure of the liquid exiting the application tip.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453) in view of Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa) further in view of Soukos et al. (US 20150030989, hereinafter Soukos).
Regarding Claim 17, Yasushi as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Yasushi does not disclose the length of the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm.
Soukos discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) with an application tip (24; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) wherein the application tip comprises one or more nozzles (26A-D; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) capable of jetting pressurized sterile fluid (“sterile fluid” of Paragraph [0006]) capable of removing bacterial biofilms (Paragraph [0006]) from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (Paragraph [0023]), where the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm (paragraph [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the length of the application tip of Yasushi by specifying the length to be between 8mm and 20 mm as taught by Soukos in order to reach both the posterior and anterior teeth within the mouth.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453) in view of Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa) further in view of Bergheim et al. (US 10420630, hereinafter Bergheim).
Regarding Claim 20, Yasushi in view of Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Yasushi does not disclose the supply unit supplies pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure in the range of 50 to 150 bars to the application tip.
Bergheim discloses an apparatus (figure 2) for liquid dispersion (“cc jet”; Figure 2; abstract)with an application tip (50; Figure 2) and the supply unit (44: Figure 8a) supplies pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure in the range of 50 to 150 bars to the application tip (column 5, lines 7-50 discloses a pressure delivered is a range from about 2,000 psi (137 bars)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the supply unit supplying pressure to the application tip as taught by Yasushi with the pressure of 50-150 bar as taught by Bergheim in order to allow the practitioner to adjust the pressure to the necessary level in order to clean the patient’s tooth (column 5, lines 7-50).
Claims 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453), in view of Soukos et al. (US 20150030989, hereinafter Soukos), Benetti (US 20210267733), Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa) and James Pring (US 20050130102).
Regarding Claim 21, Yasushi discloses a treatment apparatus 10; (Figures 1-4) for treating peri-implantitis (abstract), the apparatus comprising:
an application tip (22; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (Figure 4) between a screw fixture of a dental implant (42; Figure 4) and a surrounding gingiva (Figure 4), wherein a length of the application tip is capable of being at least equal to a depth of a peri- implant pocket to be treated (Figure 4), and wherein the application tip comprises one or more nozzles (22b; Figure 4 ); for jetting pressurized sterile fluid (paragraphs [0042] and [0053]) for removing bacterial biofilms from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (paragraphs [0042] and [0053]);
a handpiece (16; Figure 1) for holding and guiding the application tip (Figure 1);
a supply unit (14; Figure 1) for supplying pressurized sterile fluid to an application tip (figure 1); and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0008] discloses the tip is composed of titanium, as evidenced by Niznick, “pure titanium allows more bending” as disclosed in Col. 1, line 60-Col. 2, line 10) that is configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (figure 4; paragraph [0075] discloses that the tip is composed of titanium and therefore bendable) and repeatedly, at a plurality of different locations (figure 4 shows the bendable material at different locations), to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (paragraph [0008] discloses the tip is titanium, as evidenced by Niznick, the titanium retains its shape as disclosed in Col. 1, line 60-Col. 2, line 10).
Yasushi does not disclose the length of the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm, the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip, the application tip includes a plurality of markings to indicate to a user an insertion depth into the peri-implant pocket during treatment, and wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated.
Soukos discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) with an application tip (24; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) wherein the application tip comprises one or more nozzles (26A-D; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) capable of jetting pressurized sterile fluid (“sterile fluid” of Paragraph [0006]) capable of removing bacterial biofilms (Paragraph [0006]) from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (Paragraph [0023]), where the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm (paragraph [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the length of the application tip of Yasushi by specifying the length to be between 8mm and 20 mm as taught by Soukos in order to reach both the posterior and anterior teeth within the mouth.
Benetti discloses a treatment apparatus (abstract; Figure 1a-3) with a nozzle (32; Figure 2c); a handle (12; Figure 1a), and supply unit (30; Figure 3) the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip (Paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the supply unit of Yasushi by specifying the pressure supplied to the application tip is greater than 10 bar as a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close as there is no discernable difference between the two pressures. Further, the difference in pressure applied is merely a design choice to optimize the pressure. Additionally, no critically has been established by Applicant as page 7 states the amount is preferred. See MPEP 2144.05 paragraph 2.
Kuroiwa discloses a treatment apparatus (Figures 1-4; paragraph [0062]) for treating peri-implantitis (paragraph [0004] discloses the use of the device in treating periodontal disease), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (21; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (paragraph [0004]) and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0006] disclose it is a bendable metal) configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (paragraph [0035] discloses bending a portion of the tip), repeatedly while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (Paragraph [0035] discloses the step of bending the tip; Paragraph [0132] discloses bending the application tip to fit in the periodontal pocket; the Examiner notes that bending the application tip in the mouth of the patient is capable of doing such).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the bendable metal material of Yasushi to have wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated as taught by Kuroiwa in order to decrease the treatment time and ensuring the application tip is correctly orientated within the periodontal pocket based on the patient’s dental structure.
James Pring discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1-5) with an application tip (10; Figure 1; Paragraph [0020]), wherein the application tip includes a plurality of markings (16a-16d; Figure 1; paragraph [0021]) to indicate to a user an insertion depth into the peri-implant pocket during treatment (Figures 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the application tip of Yasushi by adding a plurality of markings as taught by James Pring in order to provide visual indication of the extent to which the debridement portion has penetrated the periodontal pocket, so that the end of the tip does not cause pain or injury (Paragraph [0021]).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453) in view of Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa) further in view of Sicurelli et al. (US 6162202, hereinafter Sicurelli).
Regarding Claim 22, Yasushi as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Yasushi does not disclose the bendable material is a shape memory alloy.
Sicurelli discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) for treating peri-implantitis (Column 1, Lines 9-15), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (10; Figure 1) composed of a bendable material, the bendable material is a shape memory alloy (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the material of the tip of Yasushi to be a shape memory alloy as taught by Sicurelli in order to be able to retain the desired shape when placed within the gum.
Claims 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasushi et al. (US 20160081764, hereinafter Yasushi) as evidenced by Niznick (US 4645453) in view of Soukos et al. (US 20150030989, hereinafter Soukos), Benetti (US 20210267733), Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa), James Pring (US 20050130102), further in view of Sicurelli et al. (US 6162202, hereinafter Sicurelli).
Regarding Claim 23, Yasushi as modified by Soukos, Benetti, and James Pring discloses the device of Claim 21. Yasushi does not disclose the bendable material is a shape memory alloy.
Sicurelli discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) for treating peri-implantitis (Column 1, Lines 9-15), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (10; Figure 1) composed of a bendable material, the bendable material is a shape memory alloy (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the material of the tip of Yasushi to be a shape memory alloy as taught by Sicurelli in order to be able to retain the desired shape when placed within the gum.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sicurelli et al. (US 6162202, hereinafter Sicurelli) in view of Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa).
Regarding Claim 21, Sicurelli discloses the limitations of claim 1 including a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) for treating peri-implantitis (Column 1, Lines 9-15 discloses endodontic treatment), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (10; Figure 1) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (Column 1, lines 9-15) between a screw fixture of a dental implant and a surrounding gingiva (figure 1; abstract discloses the use of the application tip in endodontics which requires a similar size device), where in the length of the application tip is capable of being at least equal to the depth of the per-implant pocket to be treated (Figure 1), and wherein the application tip comprises one of more nozzles (at 14; figure 1) for jetting pressurized sterile fluid (within 18; figure 1) for removing bacterial biofilms from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (column 4, lines 15-25b discloses the use of fluid and under pressure would remove the biofilm);
A handpiece (16 and 18; figure 1) for holding and guiding the application tip; and
A supply unit (within 18; figure 1) for supplying pressurized sterile fluid; wherein the application tip is a bendable material (abstract) that is configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (abstract discloses a flexible metal alloy and column 1, lines 9-15 discloses the device can be used in endodontics).
Sicurelli does not disclose the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip, and wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated.
Benetti discloses a treatment apparatus (abstract; Figure 1a-3) with a nozzle (32; Figure 2c); a handle (12; Figure 1a), and supply unit (30; Figure 3) the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip (Paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the supply unit of Yasushi by specifying the pressure supplied to the application tip is at least 10 bar as taught by Sicurelli in order to reduce the amount of dental prophylaxis on the teeth through a high-pressure jet spray.
Kuroiwa discloses a treatment apparatus (Figures 1-4; paragraph [0062]) for treating peri-implantitis (paragraph [0004] discloses the use of the device in treating periodontal disease), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (21; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (paragraph [0004]) and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0006] disclose it is a bendable metal) configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (paragraph [0035] discloses bending a portion of the tip), repeatedly while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (Paragraph [0035] discloses the step of bending the tip; Paragraph [0132] discloses bending the application tip to fit in the periodontal pocket; the Examiner notes that bending the application tip in the mouth of the patient is capable of doing such).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the bendable metal material of Yasushi to have wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated as taught by Kuroiwa in order to decrease the treatment time and ensuring the application tip is correctly orientated within the periodontal pocket based on the patient’s dental structure.
Regarding Claim 22, Sicurelli as modified by Benetti and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 1. Sicurelli discloses the bendable material is a shape memory alloy (abstract and summary of invention).
Claims 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sicurelli et al. (US 6162202, hereinafter Sicurelli) in view of Soukos et al. (US 20150030989, hereinafter Soukos) and Benetti (US 20210267733) and Kuroiwa et al. (US 20060223026, hereinafter Kuroiwa).
Regarding Claim 21, Sicurelli discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) for treating peri-implantitis (Column 1, Lines 9-15) discloses endodontic treatment), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (10; Figure 1) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (Column 1, lines 9-15) between a screw fixture of a dental implant and a surrounding gingiva (figure 1; abstract discloses the use of the application tip in endodontics which requires a similar size device), where in the length of the application tip is capable of being at least equal to the depth of the per-implant pocket to be treated (Figure 1), and wherein the application tip comprises one of more nozzles (at 14; figure 1) for jetting pressurized sterile fluid (within 18; figure 1) for removing bacterial biofilms from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (column 4, lines 15-25b discloses the use of fluid and under pressure would remove the biofilm);
A handpiece (16 and 18; figure 1) for holding and guiding the application tip; and
A supply unit (within 18; figure 1) for supplying pressurized sterile fluid; wherein the application tip is a bendable material (abstract) that is configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (abstract discloses a flexible metal alloy and column 1, lines 9-15 discloses the device can be used in endodontics).
Sicurelli does not disclose the length of the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm, the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip, and wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, repeatedly while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated.
Soukos discloses a treatment apparatus (Figure 1) with an application tip (24; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) wherein the application tip comprises one or more nozzles (26A-D; Figure 1; Paragraph [0047]) capable of jetting pressurized sterile fluid (“sterile fluid” of Paragraph [0006]) for removing bacterial biofilms (Paragraph [0006] and [0008]) from an outer surface of the screw fixture of the dental implant in vivo (Paragraph [0023]), where the application tip is between 8 mm and 20 mm (paragraph [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the length of the application tip of Yasushi by specifying the length to be between 8mm and 20 mm as taught by Soukos in order to reach both the posterior and anterior teeth within the mouth.
Benetti discloses a treatment apparatus (abstract; Figure 1a-3) with a nozzle (32; Figure 2c); a handle (12; Figure 1a), and supply unit (30; Figure 3) the supply unit for suppling pressurized sterile fluid with a pressure of at least 10 bar to the application tip (Paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the supply unit of Yasushi by specifying the pressure supplied to the application tip is greater than 10 bar as a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close as there is no discernable difference between the two pressures. Further, the difference in pressure applied is merely a design choice to optimize the pressure. Additionally, no critically has been established by Applicant as page 7 states the amount is preferred. See MPEP 2144.05 paragraph 2.
Kuroiwa discloses a treatment apparatus (Figures 1-4; paragraph [0062]) for treating peri-implantitis (paragraph [0004] discloses the use of the device in treating periodontal disease), the apparatus comprising: an application tip (21; Figures 1-4) that is adapted for insertion into a sub-gingival region (paragraph [0004]) and wherein the application tip is a bendable material (paragraph [0006] disclose it is a bendable metal) configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip (paragraph [0035] discloses bending a portion of the tip), repeatedly while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated (Paragraph [0035] discloses the step of bending the tip; Paragraph [0132] discloses bending the application tip to fit in the periodontal pocket; the Examiner notes that bending the application tip in the mouth of the patient is capable of doing such.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the bendable metal material of Yasushi to have wherein the application tip is a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending at least a portion of the application tip, while the application tip is in a mouth of a patient, to fit the peri-implant pocket to be treated as taught by Kuroiwa in order to decrease the treatment time and ensuring the application tip is correctly orientated within the periodontal pocket based on the patient’s dental structure.
Regarding Claim 23, Sicurelli as modified by Soukos, Benetti, and Kuroiwa discloses the device of Claim 21. Sicurelli discloses the bendable material is a shape memory alloy (abstract and summary of invention).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the newly amended claim 1, which includes that the application tip is formed of a bendable material configured to retain a shape generated by bending a at least a portion of the application tip, while the tip is in the mouth of the patient to fit the per-implant pocket to be treated, the Examiner notes that Kuroiwa is now used to teach the added limitation. In Paragraph [0032] and [0132] it is disclosed that the application tip insertion includes a step of bending. Additionally, the limitation as recited is functional due to the “configured to” language, thus the end product/ the device being capable of doing such meets the limitation. Since the tip of Kuroiwa includes a step of bending and bending the material/tip, it meets such limitation.
In regards to Applicant’s arguments that Benetti does not disclose the pressure being greater than 10 bar, the Examiner agrees, however, Benetti is modified (as according to MPEP 2144.05 second paragraph) to include up to 10.0001 which is greater than ten as a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close as there is no discernable difference between the two pressures.
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