DETAILED ACTION
In response to Amendments/Arguments filed 10/20/2025. Claims 6-23. Claims 10-15 are withdrawn without traverse. Claims 6-9 and 16-23 are examined thusly. Claim 6 was amended. Claims 22 and 23 are added as new.
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.
Claims 6-9 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “in such a way that the surface of the semi-cured section is a closed surface”. First, it is not clear which surface of the semi-cured section is considered to be “the surface” since there are a plurality of surfaces for a section. Lastly, it is not clear what is meant by “closed surface” since the term is not defined in the specification, specifically recited in the specification, or evident from the Figures. For purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner considers a section that is not patterned where material is removed to meet the instant claims. Clarification is requested. Claims 7-9 and 16-21 are rejected as being dependent upon claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 6-9 and 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 20170360534) in view of Nakamura et al. (US 5198159).
Sun discloses a 3D printed dental product. Concerning claim 6, Sun discloses a dental prosthesis comprising a part of the prosthesis fully cured and a part that is partially cured (para. 0077-0078). With respect to the limitation of each layer comprising a semi-cured and cured section adjoining each other, Figures 2E-2H show sections that can correspond to partially and fully cured sections for a multilayer dental product. The layers can each have different mechanical and physical properties and can also each be uncured, partially cured, and fully cured (para. 0049-0062). Sun also discloses that the multiple layered device has a top contact surface that is highly adjustable and the area below the contact surface is shape stable at an adjustable condition (para. 0062). This corresponds to a gradient of hardness values of each layer since the top is clearly softer than the areas below. However, Sun is silent to each layer containing a partially cured portion and fully cured portion that are adjoining each other. Given that a fully cured section would be harder than a partially cured section because of the level of curing, the resulting material would result in the fully cured section having a larger deformation resistance than the partially cured section because the partially cured section, by its very nature, would have more flow than a fully cured section. Regarding claim 8, the resins forming the resin forming the sections can be different materials that can be acrylates, methacrylates, and epoxides (para. 0094-0097).
In regards to claims 7 and 16, the partially cured area allows for ease in adjusting after trying the device (para. 0077). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed deformation resistance, in order to provide flowability for ease in adjustment after trying (para. 0077). Regarding claim 8, the resins forming the resin forming the sections can be different materials that can be acrylates, methacrylates, and epoxides (para. 0094-0097). With respect to claims 9 and 21, the dental article can be a denture, dental prosthesis and the like (para. 0077-0078).
With respect to claim 17, Sun shows embodiments that have different shading, which can correspond to different level of curing, wherein a tooth is embedded into the section (FIGS. 2E-2H; para. 0077-0078). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the claimed configuration for future embedding because Sun also states that a mixture of fully cured and partially cured sections allow for adjustments to the dental prosthetic device. Concerning claims 22 and 23, Sun discloses multiple layers being formed, wherein each layer can be in a state of uncured, partially cured, or fully cured (para. 0082-0091). As such, the disclosure of the above includes embodiments having sections with all the layers partially cured and would meet the limitations. However, Sun is silent to each layer containing a partially cured portion and fully cured portion that are adjoining each other.
Nakamura discloses that adjoining a partially cured section in each layer to a fully cured section allows for prevention of the partially cured section from flowing out (col. 12, lines 1-68). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have structure as claimed with the partially cured section adjoining the fully cured section, wherein each layer can have a different hardness values that correspond to the level of curing. Examiner notes that Sun provides the basis for producing the claimed gradient in that each layer because the top contact surface is adjustable while the layers below are shape stable at an adjustable condition since the top is clearly softer than the areas below because it is disclosed as “highly adjustable” and the areas directly below are described as being more “shape stable” than the top surface. As such, Sun provides a basis of which the structure can be a hardness gradient, wherein Nakamura teaches the process for producing structures in which partially cured and fully cured sections are done by different curing conditions to provide areas directly adjacent as having different hardness values because of the level of curing for each section. Furthermore, in order to produce a full denture with all of the teeth, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to span the prosthesis with the partially cured section. Sun discloses all the layers that are partially cured and the disclosure of Nakamura disclosing surrounding partially cured sections with fully cured sections, with the combination resulting in the claimed structure, would meet the limitations. Additionally, since there is no material removed, the combination teaches the claimed closed surface.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/20/2025 regarding the art rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that prior art is silent to the claimed “closed surface” for the partially cured section. Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes first it is unclear what surface of the semi-cured section is considered to be “the surface” since there are a plurality of surfaces for a section. Lastly, it is not clear what is meant by “closed surface” since the term is not defined in the specification, specifically recited in the specification, or evident from the Figures. For purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner considers a section that is not patterned where material is removed to meet the instant claims. Since there is no material removed in the partially cured section, the combination teaches the claimed “closed surface”.
Applicant further asserts that the combination does not teach the limitations of claims 22 and 23. Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that Sun discloses multiple layers being formed, wherein each layer can be in a state of uncured, partially cured, or fully cured (para. 0082-0091). As such, the disclosure of the above includes embodiments having sections that have all the layers that are partially cured and the disclosure of Nakamura disclosing surrounding partially cured sections with fully cured sections, with the combination resulting in the claimed structure, would meet the limitations.
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 PRASHANT J KHATRI whose telephone number is (571)270-3470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6:30PM.
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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
PRASHANT J. KHATRI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/PRASHANT J KHATRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783