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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments regarding claims 1, 26, 48, 71, 120, and 155, that Khakpour fails to disclose where “during use a distal end of the distal chamber is positioned over or against the treatment region of the tooth”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Further Khakpour does show the distal portion during use that is over a treatment region of the tooth as cited it the following action.
Applicant has further argued, regarding claims 1, 26, 48, and 71, that Khakpour was not pointed to any particular disclosure that the liquid stream from element 5 impinges on the portion of element 21 opposite 25, however as the cross-sectional view shows the outlet of element 5 pointed across to a portion of 21 when a jet of water would exit the outlet it would travel across 21 and initially hit/impinge upon 22. As such the structural limitation recited has be cited in Khakpour.
Applicant has further argued regarding claim 93 that Khakpour fails to provide for “a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream across the proximal chamber to impinge on an impingement member” by arguing that after the chamber of Khakpour would be filled with fluid element 5 would not be impinged by fluid, however this is not persuasive as Khakpour shows the exit of fluid stream 61 directed at element 5 and would initially hit/impinge upon the element.
Applicant has further argued regarding claim 120, that Khakpour does not provide for “a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid jet to impinge on the impingement surface at a contact point superior to a vertical center of the impingement surface” however this was cited in Khakpour in Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on surface of 220 opposite the nozzle 210 at a superior point to the center of the impingement surface that is directly opposite 210 as in paragraph [0297] lines 26-35 the jet angled proximally and thus would hit superiorly/proximally/above where it would hit which applicant has not addressed.
Applicant has further argued in regard to claim 155 that Khakpour was not cited for the limitation of “a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid jet into the proximal chamber”, however this is not persuasive as this limitation was cited in the previous action in Fig. 15/16 element 5, Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70 that is maintained in the following action.
Applicant has not provided any arguments to any depending claims or against any claims under 103.
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 1, 26, 48, 71, 93, 120, 121, 128, 138, 142, 144, 147, 155, 164, 174, 178, 179, and 182 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Khakpour et al. (US 2016/0095679 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 10a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform having a distal end adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26 having a distal/lower end) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber (Fig. 10a inside of element 21);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10 inside element 67) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10a area near 70),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between a treatment region of the tooth and the distal chamber (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987));
a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream into the proximal chamber and over at least a portion of the transition opening (Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70); and
an impingement member arranged within a path of the liquid stream (Fig. 10 portion of element 21 opposite 25), the impingement member having one or more surfaces positioned to redirect at least a portion of the liquid stream across at least a portion of the transition opening (Fig. 10 fluid 24 after being impinged on the surfaces that is directed across the transition opening 70).
Regarding claim 26, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 10a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform having a distal end adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26 having a lower/distal end) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber (Fig. 10a inside of element 21);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10 inside element 67) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10a area near 70),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between the distal chamber and a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987));
a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream into the proximal chamber and over at least a portion of the transition opening (Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70) to impinge upon an impingement member arranged within a path of the liquid stream (Fig. 10 portion of element 21 opposite 25),
wherein the proximal chamber, the liquid supply port, the distal chamber, and the impingement member are arranged relative to one another in a manner that creates a turbulent flow of liquid within the treatment region over a course of a treatment procedure. (Fig. 10 fluid 24 after being impinged on the surfaces that is directed across the transition opening 70 and into the distal chamber, past the access opening and into the treatment region, paragraph [0118] lines 9-11 disclosing the creation of turbulences within the treatment region).
Regarding claim 48, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 10a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform having a distal end adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26 having a lower/distal end) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber (Fig. 10a inside of element 21);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10 inside element 67) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10a area near 70),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between the distal chamber and a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987));
a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream into the proximal chamber and over at least a portion of the transition opening (Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70) to impinge upon an impingement member arranged within a path of the liquid stream (Fig. 10 portion of element 21 opposite 25),
the impingement member having one or more surfaces positioned to redirect at least a portion of the liquid stream across at least a portion of the transition opening to produce toroidal flow in the distal chamber (Fig. 10 fluid 24 after being impinged on the surfaces that is directed across the transition opening 70 in a toroidal flow).
Regarding claim 71, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 8a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber having a first interior geometry (Fig. 10 inside of element 21);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10a element 67) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10 area near 70),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between a treatment region of the tooth and the distal chamber (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end) and
the distal chamber having a second interior surface geometry that is different than the first interior surface geometry (Fig. 10a interior surface of 67 being different in geometry by being a tapering cone vs the rounded cylinder of 21),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987));
a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream into the proximal chamber and over at least a portion of the access opening to impinge on an impingement member (Fig. 10 element 5 sending in in a fluid stream that crosses over top of the access opening of 67 to impinge on the wall near 22 and then over/through the access opening into treatment region 13).
Regarding claim 93, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 8a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 8aa element 3/26) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber having a first interior geometry (Fig. 8a inside of element 21);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 8a inside element 26) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 8a area near 18),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the proximal chamber to provide fluid communication between a treatment region of the tooth and the distal chamber (Fig. 8a element 26 having accesses opening at its distal end) and
a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid stream across the proximal chamber to impinge on an impingement member and over at least a portion of the access opening (Fig. 8a element 6 sending in in a fluid stream that would impinge on element 5 and wall 52 and then would cross past the access opening into treatment region 11),
and non-uniform transition region between the proximal chamber and the distal chamber (Fig. 8a transition between 21 and 26 is non-uniform by the interior surface of 26 being different in shape such as matching the tooth surface and the offset lopsided transition) ;
Regarding claim 120, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth (Fig. 10a all), the apparatus comprising:
a fluid platform having a distal end adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26 having a distal/lower end) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber having a first interior surface geometry (Fig. 10a inside of element 21 being a first geometry by having a 3d shape, Fig. 15 area of element 230);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10 inside element 67, Fig. 15 area within 225) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10a area near 70, Fig. 15 transition between 230 and 231 area where tapering of 225 begins, no requirement the chambers be different is size),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between a treatment region of the tooth and the distal chamber (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end, Fig. 15 element 227),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987)),
wherein the distal chamber has a second interior surface geometry different than the first interior surface geometry (Fig. 10a element 67 having a different cross-sectional geometry and thus a different interior surface geometry that the proximal chamber surface geometry),
and a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid jet (Fig. 15/16 element 5, Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70) to impinge on the impingement surface(Fig. 10 portion of element 21 opposite 25, Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on inner surface of 220) at a contact point superior to a vertical center of the impingement surface (Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on surface of 220 opposite the nozzle 210 at a superior point to the center of the impingement surface that is directly opposite 210 as in paragraph [0297] lines 26-35 the jet angled proximally and thus would hit superiorly/proximally/above where it would hit if it was horizontal) , wherein the impingement surface is shaped to redirect at least a portion of the liquid jet within the proximal chamber from a position inferior to the vertical center of the impingement surface (Fig. 15 liquid jet redirected by the portion of the impingement surface below the area opposite the nozzle 210 when the jet travels down to the treatment region via element 23).
Regarding claim 121, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid supply port is disposed to direct the liquid jet to impinge on the impingement surface at the contact point lateral to a horizontal center of the impingement surface (fig. 16 element Ɵ).
Regarding claim 128, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid jet is disposed to impinge on the impingement surface at the contact point at a radial distance between 1% and 49% of a diameter of the impingement surface (Fig. 16 element Ɵ or δ, paragraph [0297] lines 17-20 the jet angled about 10 or 15 degrees from perpendicular and thus withing 1%-49% of the diameter of the impingement surface that is the surface opposite the nozzle outlet 5/210).
Regarding claim 138, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid supply port is disposed to direct the liquid jet along a jet axis angled superiorly to an anterior-posterior axis of the proximal chamber(Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on surface of 220 opposite the nozzle 210 at a superior point to the center of the impingement surface that is directly opposite 210 as in paragraph [0297] lines 26-35 the jet angled proximally and thus would hit superiorly/proximally/above where it would hit if it was horizontal and is thus angled superiorly/proximally to the axis of the proximal chamber).
Regarding claim 142, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid supply port is disposed to direct the liquid jet along a jet axis angled laterally relative to a superior-inferior axis of the proximal chamber (fig. 16 element Ɵ and would thus result in the jet being angled laterally to the superior-inferior/longitudinal axis of the proximal chamber).
Regarding claim 144, Khakpour further discloses wherein the impingement surface is angled at the contact point to redirect at least a portion of the liquid jet within the proximal chamber (Fig. 16 surface where impingement occurs opposite 210 is angled, there is no specific angle required and thus any angle will provide for the limitation) in the form of a second liquid jet (paragraph [0089] lines 8-10 the impinged jet forms into multiple jets and thus a second).
Regarding claim 147, Khakpour further discloses wherein the impingement surface is concave (Fig. 16 impingement area opposite 210 is concave).
Regarding claim 155, Khakpour discloses an apparatus for treating a tooth comprising:
a fluid platform having a distal end adapted to be positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 3/26 having a lower/distal end) defining a chamber comprising a proximal chamber having a first interior surface geometry (Fig. 10a inside of element 21 having a first geometry by its 3d shape shown, Fig. 15 area of element 230);
a distal chamber disposed distal the proximal chamber (Fig. 10 inside element 67, Fig. 15 area within 225) and in fluid communication with the proximal chamber by way of a transition opening (Fig. 10a area near 70, Fig. 15 transition between 230 and 231 area where tapering of 225 begins, no requirement the chambers be different is size),
the distal chamber having an access opening disposed apart from and distal to the transition opening to provide fluid communication between a treatment region of the tooth and the distal chamber (Fig. 10a element 67 having accesses opening at its distal end, Fig. 15 element 227),
wherein the distal end of the distal chamber is capable of being positioned over or against a treatment region of the tooth (Fig. 10a element 67 distal end is over a treatment region of 13. Further end 16 could be placed against any part of a tooth when in use, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987)),
wherein the distal chamber has a second interior surface geometry different than the first interior surface geometry (Fig. 10a element 67 having a different cross-sectional geometry and thus a different interior surface geometry that the proximal chamber surface geometry),
and a liquid supply port disposed to direct a liquid jet into the proximal chamber (Fig. 15/16 element 5, Fig. 10a element 5, fluid motion from proximal to distal chamber 18/70) to impinge on an impingement members surface(Fig. 10 portion of element 21 opposite 25, Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on inner surface of 220) shaped to redirect at least a portion of the liquid jet within the proximal chamber in the form of a second liquid jet (paragraph [0089] lines 8-10 the impinged jet forms into multiple jets and thus a second).
Regarding claim 164, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid jet is disposed to impinge on the impingement surface at the contact point at a radial distance between 1% and 49% of a diameter of the impingement surface (Fig. 16 element Ɵ or δ, paragraph [0297] lines 17-20 the jet angled about 10 or 15 degrees from perpendicular and thus withing 1%-49% of the diameter of the impingement surface that is the surface opposite the nozzle outlet 5/210).
Regarding claim 174, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid supply port is disposed to direct the liquid jet along a jet axis angled superiorly to an anterior-posterior axis of the proximal chamber(Fig. 15/16 jet 221 impinges on surface of 220 opposite the nozzle 210 at a superior point to the center of the impingement surface that is directly opposite 210 as in paragraph [0297] lines 26-35 the jet angled proximally and thus would hit superiorly/proximally/above where it would hit if it was horizontal and is thus angled superiorly/proximally to the axis of the proximal chamber).
Regarding claim 178, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid supply port is disposed to direct the liquid jet along a jet axis angled laterally relative to a superior-inferior axis of the proximal chamber (fig. 16 element Ɵ and would thus result in the jet being angled laterally to the superior-inferior/longitudinal axis of the proximal chamber).
Regarding claim 179, Khakpour further discloses wherein the liquid jet is disposed to impinge on the impingement surface at a contact point that is angled at the to redirect at least a portion of the liquid jet within the proximal chamber (Fig. 16 surface where impingement occurs opposite 210 is angled, there is no specific angle required and thus any angle will provide for the limitation) in the form of a second liquid jet (paragraph [0089] lines 8-10 the impinged jet forms into multiple jets and thus a second).
Regarding claim 182, Khakpour further discloses wherein the impingement surface is concave (Fig. 16 impingement area opposite 210 is concave).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claims 133 and 169 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khakpour et al. (US 2016/0095679 A1).
Regarding claims 133 and 169, Khakpour discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the impingement member is angled downwardly towards the transition opening.
However, Khakpour further discloses that the impingement surface can be angled and shaped can be adjusted to adjust the flow properties that may affect the efficiency of the procedure (paragraph [0297] lines 31-35).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the shape of the impingement member to have an angle downward towards the transition opening as obvious matter of design choice to improve procedure efficiency as taught by Khakpour([0297] lines 31-35) . A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
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 MATTHEW P SAUNDERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3250. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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 at (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.
/M.P.S/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772 03/18/2026
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772