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 .
Claims 1 -20 are presented for examination.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4).
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Claims 1- 20 are not found eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 10, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2) further in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A).
Claims 2, 6, 8-9, 11, 14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Powell; Theodore M. (US 8185224B2)
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Sabina; Michael (US 10987202 B2).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Powell; Theodore M. (US 8185224B2) further in the view of JOERNEUS LARS (WO 2013004387 A1).
This action is Non-Final rejection.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made for applicant’s claimed a PRO. Application filed on10/20/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed on 12/30/2021, 03/13/2023 and 10/08/2024 are reviewed and considered. See attached documents.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “110 ” has been used to designate both “screw channel form” and “display device”, “120” for both “screw channel form” and “network interface device”, on Fig.1 and 13. 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description all Fig. 13 reference numbers including (102 – 128), see [0037] –[0042] on specification to correct. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 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 1-20 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.
Claims 1,10 and 18 recites “ a variable height”, and it is not clear what portion of the implants variable height is used. Is it the variable height of the screw channel or the variable height of implant? Therefore the specified word creates indefiniteness to the claims. All dependent claims also rejected under the same rational since they depends on either of the independent claims. Therefore claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 112(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Step 1: Claims 1-9 are directed to a method, which is a statutory category of invention under a process. Claims 10- 17 are directed to a device, which is a statutory category of invention under a manufacture and claims 18-20 are also directed to a statutory category of invention under a manufacture.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Yes , the claims recites abstract ideas, and abstract ideas in the claims are bolded as shown below.
Claims 1,10 and 18:
generating and an angulated dental screw channel model based on the plurality of dental implant parameters and on the plurality of dental screw parameters, the angulated dental screw channel model to provide an angulated screw channel without requiring an internal angled screw channel protrusion (under a broadest reasonable interpretation this claim recites abstract idea of a mental process. The claim is not directed to a computer implemented method using any specific computer implemented tool to generate the dental screw channel model, so under BRI this model can be done using a pen and paper by observing, analyzing and making judgments on the input parameters in order to create model that fits the implant. Generally a human mind can create a model using input parameters using a pen and paper.
Step 2A Prong 2: No
The above judicially exceptions do not recite additional elements that integrate the exceptions into a practical application of the exception because the claims do not have additional elements of a combination of additional elements that apply, rely or use the judicial exception in a manner that impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Claims recites gathering data which is insignificant extra solution activity. Adding
insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea such as a step of obtaining information
about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed by an abstract
mental process, as discussed in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366,
1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)).
Claims 1, 10, and 18:
receiving a plurality of dental implant parameters, the plurality of dental implant parameters including a screw channel length and a variable height; (insignificant
extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g).)
receiving a plurality of dental screw parameters associated with a dental screw type, the plurality of dental screw parameters including a screwhead diameter and
a screwhead height; (insignificant extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g).)
outputting an angulated dental screw channel model (insignificant extra- solution activity – data gathering, such as 'outputting data'. See MPEP 2106.05(g).)
Step 2B : NO,
The claims do not cite additional elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea. On claim 10 and 18 the claims recites a device with “ a processor”, “memory” and “a non transitory computer readable storage medium” but this are just used as a tool to perform the abstract idea of generating a model using input parameters and there is no improvement on the device itself is claimed. Merely using of a computer and applying abstract ideas into a system without making improvement to the functionality of a computer is not a significantly more.
Generally the independent claims recites abstract idea based on the above
analysis and let’s see if there is any significant more claim limitations exist for the
dependent claims.
Claims 2,11 and 19:
wherein the angulated dental screw channel model includes a dental abutment baseline geometry, a dental emergence geometry, a screwhead angulation geometry, and a screw channel exit geometry (this claim limitation further defines the abstract idea by specifying the what the model includes, so other than narrowing the abstract idea no new additional element is recited)
Claims 3 and 12:
Generating instructions for a robotic dental implant milling machine
based on the angulated dental screw channel model (under its broadest reasonable interpretation a human mind can create a step-by-step instruction for the machine, so it is an abstract idea which can be done by a human mind with a pen and paper since a human can write instruction of a machine).
Claim 4:
Generating instructions for a 3D printed model based on the angulated
dental screw channel model (under its broadest reasonable interpretation a human mind can create a step-by-step instruction for 3D printer, so it is an abstract idea which can be done by a human mind with a pen and paper since a human can write instruction of printer).
Claim 5:
the plurality of dental implant parameters further including a screw channel type, the screw channel type including a conical screw channel or a parallel screw channel (it further defines the type of gathered information - insignificant extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claims 6, 14 and 20:
wherein the screwhead angulation geometry includes a non-ellipsoid long hole geometry, the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry including a radius of curvature based on the screwhead diameter (this claim limitation further defines the abstract idea by specifying the what the model includes, so other than narrowing the abstract idea no new additional element is recited).
Claims 7 and 15:
wherein the variable height is selected based on a screw length associated with a dental screw, the screwhead diameter, and the screwhead height to minimize the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry (it further defines the type of gathered information - insignificant extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claims 8 and 16:
including receiving a dental implant base geometry, wherein: generating the angulated dental screw channel model is further based on the dental implant base geometry; and the angulated dental screw channel model further includes
a dental implant rotation position (it further defines the type of gathered information used to generate the model so it is insignificant extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claims 9 and 17:
including receiving a dental implant rotation checkpoint position, wherein: the dental implant base geometry includes a n-sided polygon geometry; and the dental implant rotation position includes a first position on the n-sided polygon geometry following the dental implant rotation checkpoint position (it further defines the type of gathered information used to generate the model and it further defines the received parameter, so it is insignificant extra solution activity - data gathering such as such as 'obtaining information'. See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 13:
the operations further including causing a 3D printer to form a dental implant with an internal dental screw channel based on the angulated dental screw channel model (insignificant extra- solution activity – data gathering, such as 'outputting data'. See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Generally , based on the above claim by claim analysis and claims as a whole does not recite any additional element which is significantly more than the claimed invention. The claim is merely a mental process of creating a model using input parameters using a computer as a tool and merely using a computer is not significantly more than abstract idea since there is no improvement on any of the additional elements listed on the claims.
Therefore claims 1- 20 are not found eligible under 35 USC 101.
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, 3, 5, 10, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2) further in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A).
As of claim 1, Wrba teaches A method for generating an angulated dental screw channel model, the method comprising ([0002] The subject of the invention is the design and the virtual and real fabrication of a respective optimal screw channel in dental prosthetic restorations, as well as the prosthetic restoration encompassing the screw channel using a CAD/CAM software as well as in a CAM process).
generating and outputting an angulated dental screw channel model based on the plurality of dental implant parameters and on the plurality of dental screw parameters, the angulated dental screw channel model to provide an angulated screw channel without requiring an internal angled screw channel protrusion ( [0012] According to the invention, the screws can be used at The required fit depends on the angulation of the screw channel and the position of the screw inserted into the implant, whereby the Channel reduced in its geometry as much as possible should be designed. Such a channel corresponds to a optimal screw channel. According to the invention, the screws can therefore be adjusted as needed depending on The angulation, i.e., the angle of the screw channel, can be designed and manufactured. Thus, Screws depending on the angulation, i.e. the angle of the channel between the two lumens, The angle can be designed in a case-specific manner from > 0 to 30° in 5° or 10° steps, starting from the implant axis…[0014] The optimal screw channel can be determined according to the invention using CAD/CAM software. The software preferably has a library of screw geometries suitable for angulation. Using various mathematical calculations, the... the screw channel is determined, the target starting point The upper area can be adjusted by the customer or by the manufacturing process).
Wrba does not explicitly teach receiving a plurality of dental implant parameters, the plurality of dental implant parameters including a screw channel length and a variable height; receiving a plurality of dental screw parameters associated with a dental screw type, the plurality of dental screw parameters including a screwhead diameter and a screwhead height.
While Bilodeau teaches receiving a plurality of dental implant parameters, the plurality of dental implant parameters including a screw channel length and a variable height (Col. 7 line 50 – 55, It should be further noted that the insertion portion (20) may have a varying diameter increasing from the inlet diameter D1 to an angulation diameter D2. Both length and diameter of the insertion portion (20) are selected in accordance with the diameter and length of the screw to be inserted therein…Col. 11 line 23-26, Referring to FIG. 2 for installation with a flat heat screw, the angulation center may be positioned on the implant axis (B) at an angulation height H2 which is greater than an abutment height H1)
a screwhead diameter (col 7. Line 37-40, The inlet (16) is optionally of circular or quadric section and has an inlet diameter D1 in accordance with a diameter of the head (8) of the screw (6) to be inserted)
Wrba and Bilodeau is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since they focus on designing of a dental implant. Therefore it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Bilodeau input parameters to generate angulated screw channel model using CAD/CAM as Wrba teaches.
The motivation would have been to create optimized screw channel and preferably reduce the size so that the screws can be used at the required fit depends on the angulation of the screw channel and the position of the screw inserted into the implant (Wrba, [0012] , [0065]). It also reduce visibility thereof from outside the oral cavity and having a drop-like shape to allow freedom of angulation for the screw during fixation thereof by making the screw conduit being angulated (Bilodeau, Col.1 line 42- 48).
The modified model does not explicitly teach receiving a plurality of dental screw parameters associated with a dental screw type, the plurality of dental screw parameters including a screwhead height.
While Riera teaches receiving a plurality of dental screw parameters associated with a dental screw type, the plurality of dental screw parameters including a screwhead height (Col. 4 line 15- 22, To lock these two parts and the anchored implant together, a passing titanium screw is used, its total length being 7 mm and its thread diameter that of the implant in which is going to fit. A 2 mm diameter by 1 mm high head houses a hex hole for an Allen type wrench. During fabrication this screw is put in place between the previously described part and the one that follows).
Riera is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since it focus on designing dental implant components. Therefore it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Riera titanium screw type input parameters including the height of screw head to generate angulated screw channel model using the modified model.
The motivation would have been to create a fit dental implant for a patient and to allow the dentist to give the emergent abutment the optimal direction needed by the prosthesis, independently of the direction of the main axis of the anchored implant by making the longitudinal axis of the anchored titanium implant as its main axis. All other directions are going to be related to this axis, being it the inclination of the final prosthesis' axis or the rotation of the abutment in a plane normal to the axis: azimuth (Riera, Col. 3 line 5- 18).
Claim 10, is also in the same scope as that of claim 1 with additional elements that Wrba teaches A device for generating an angulated dental screw channel model, the device comprising: a processor; and a memory device coupled to the processor and having a program stored thereon for execution by the processor to perform operations ([0002] The subject of the invention is the design and the virtual and real fabrication of a respective optimal screw channel in dental prosthetic restorations, as well as the prosthetic restoration encompassing the screw channel using a CAD/CAM software as well as in a CAM process), as it is cited Wrba use a CAD/CAM software, so it is obvious that the software runs in a computer and a computer is also inherit a processor and a memory.
Therefore claim 10 is also rejected under the same rational as of claim 1.
Claim 18, is also in the same scope as that of claim 1, with additional elements that Wrba teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising one or more programs for execution by one or more processors of a device, the one or more programs including instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors (([0002] The subject of the invention is the design and the virtual and real fabrication of a respective optimal screw channel in dental prosthetic restorations, as well as the prosthetic restoration encompassing the screw channel using a CAD/CAM software as well as in a CAM process), as it is cited, Wrba use a CAD/CAM software , and it is obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art a CAD software consists executable instructions that stored in a storage medium, so the reference inherently teaches non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
Therefore claim 18 is also rejected under the same rational as of claim 1.
As of claim 3, the modified model teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Wrba also teaches including generating instructions for a robotic dental implant milling machine based on the angulated dental screw channel model ([0065] In order to be able to produce the screw channels optimized and preferably reduced in size according to the invention, it is necessary to preferred if at least one channel is produced in an abrasive process, by milling the screw seat of this channel from the lingual lumen and/or the crestal lumen… [0070], Simulation of a milling operation (milling tool 27) or a real milling operation of a framework body while maintaining a Channel 6 is represented).
Claim 12 is also in the same scope as that of claim 3, therefore claim 12 is rejected under the same rational as claim 3.
As of claim 5, the modified model teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and Bilodeau also teaches the plurality of dental implant parameters further including a screw channel type the screw channel type including a conical screw channel or a parallel screw channel (col 10 line 42- 51, Still referring to FIG. 2, the method further includes designing the insertion portion (20) of the drop-shaped screw conduit (12). As mentioned-above, the insertion portion (20) extends conically downwardly and outwardly from the inlet such that the insertion portion has a varying diameter increasing from the projected inlet diameter value to a second diameter D2 (corresponding to the angulation diameter). The conic shape of the insertion portion (20) may ensure guidance for advancement of the screw along the insertion axis (A) ).
Claims 2, 6, 8-9, 11, 14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Powell; Theodore M. (US 8185224B2)
As of claim 2, the modified model of Wrba -Bilodeau- Riera teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and Bilodeau also teaches , wherein the angulated dental screw channel model includes a dental abutment baseline geometry, (Col. 11 line 41-43, Given the geometry of the screw abutment seat, the angulation height H2 may be determined by different variations of a formula) a screwhead angulation geometry, and (col. 6 line 30 – 43, For example, FIGS. 1 and 2 illustrate a recess being complementary with a flat geometry of the screw head (8); and FIGS. 3 and 4 illustrate a recess being complementary with a screw head (8) having a tapered geometry) a screw channel exit geometry (col 1 line 55- 61, an aperture defining an inlet on an external surface of the base structure to enable insertion of the screw into the drop-shaped screw conduit, an insertion portion extending conically outwardly from the inlet to enable advancement of the screw along an insertion axis).
The modified model does not explicitly teach a dental emergence geometry. While Powell teaches a dental emergence geometry, (Col. 9 line 33-35, The graphical imaging software program is capable of generating a three-dimensional image of the emergence profile contours used on the healing abutment).
Powell is considered as analogous to the claimed invention since it teaches design and manufacturing of a dental component. Therefore it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Powell’s teaching of dental emergency geometry into the modified model to include in angulated dental screw channel model.
The motivation would have been to improve the accuracy of the rapid prototype of the patients mouth by eliminating the chance to introduce error into the rapid prototype to create and manufacture custom abutment, a dental implant analog position using the input data and prototype dimensional information (Powell, abstract, Col 16 line 55-60).
Claims 11 and 19 are also in the same scope as that of claim 2, therefore claims 11 and 19 are rejected under the same rational as claim 2.
As of claim 6, the modified model teaches all the limitation of claim 2, and Bilodeau also teaches wherein the screwhead angulation geometry includes a non-ellipsoid long hole geometry, the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry including a radius of curvature based on the screwhead diameter (Col.7 line 37- 47, The inlet (16) is optionally of circular or quadric section and has an inlet diameter D1 in accordance with a diameter of the head (8) of the screw (6) to be inserted… The inlet (16) is optionally of circular or quadric section and has an inlet diameter D1 in accordance with a diameter of the head (8) of the screw (6) to be inserted).
Claims 14 and 20 are also in the same scope as that of claim 6, therefore claims 14 and 20 are rejected under the same rational as claim 6.
As of claim 8, the modified model teaches all the limitations of claim 2, and Riera also teaches receiving a dental implant base geometry, wherein: generating the angulated dental screw channel model is further based on the dental implant base geometry; and the angulated dental screw channel model further includes a dental implant rotation position (Col.2 line 18 -23, The angulated abutment has a twelve-sided internal design that locks onto the hexagon on the top of the fixture. This design allows the abutment to be rotated and locked down in twelve different positions on top of the fixture (implanted anchor)…Col 3 line 21- 31, At the most a change in rotation of +-30 in a plane normal to the implant's axis is possible in some cases due to a 12-sided hollow in the base of the pre-angulated abutment that fits on the implant. The abutment design presented here allows for 30 positions at 12 azimuth angles on an implant with a six-sided recessed end, and 60 different positions with 6 in between on those having a protruding hexagon. Besides this flexibility, and given the rotational interlock between its component parts, the new abutment can be used in single-tooth treatments).
Claim 16 is also in the same scope as that of claim 8, therefore claim 16 is rejected under the same rational as claim 8.
As of claim 9, the modified model teaches all the limitations of claim 8, and Riera also teaches receiving a dental implant rotation checkpoint position, wherein the dental implant rotation position includes a first position on the n-sided polygon geometry following the dental implant rotation checkpoint position (Col. 3 line 46- 51, The version to fit on a recessed end implant has an hexagon matching the plug's end. The rotation of this part on top of the anchor during the procedures at the clinic allows for 12 different positions at 30-degree angles in one case and six positions at 60-degree angles in the other) the checkpoint position is implemented as the azimuth angles and for 12 position the checkpoint of 30 degree is used and the first position is also at the first 30 degree from the 12 different positions.
the dental implant base geometry includes a n-sided polygon geometry; (col 5 line 24- 28, finally, for a hexagon end type implant system, a gold screw is used to hold in place the prosthesis built on the gold cylinder. This is a 1.75 mm long, 1.8 mm diameter by 1 mm thread length, flat head, slotted screw).
Claim 17 is also in the same scope as that of claim 9, therefore claim 17 is rejected under the same rational as claim 9.
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Sabina; Michael (US 10987202 B2).
As of claim 4, the modified model of Wrba -Bilodeau-Riera teaches all the limitations of claim 1, but it does not explicitly teach generating instructions for a 3D printed model based on the angulated dental screw channel model.
While Sabina teaches generating instructions for a 3D printed model based on the angulated dental screw channel model (Col.6 line 66-67 and Col. 7 line 1-2, In many embodiments, the instructions can cause the one or more processors to generate output configured to control a fabrication machine to fabricate a unitary dental model corresponding to the virtual model).
Sabina is considered as analogous to the claimed invention since it focus on improved dental models for use in dental procedures. Therefore it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to generate instruction as Sabina teaches generating of instruction to output a dental model from virtual model so, by using this a person of ordinary skill can create instruction for the angulated dental screw channel model.
The motivation would have been to create improved dental models for dental procedures involving a dental implant. Ideally, such improved models would be simple to use, provide improved outcomes, include relatively few discrete parts, and provide accurate positioning and orienting of the permanent abutment (Sabina, Col. 1 line 55-60).
As of claim 13, the modified model of Wrba-Bilodeau-Riera model teaches all the limitations of claim 10, but it does not explicitly teach causing a 3D printer to form a dental implant with an internal dental screw channel based on the angulated dental screw channel model.
While Sabina teaches causing a 3D printer to form a dental implant with an internal dental screw channel based on the angulated dental screw channel model (Col. 9 line 23 – 26, In many embodiments, the model 200 includes a channel 210 formed at or near the implant site and shaped and oriented to receive an abutment. The channel 210 can be an elongate channel having a longitudinal axis 212… Col. 16 line 35 -41, The manufacturing system 715 can include a computer-controlled manufacturing system configured for manufacturing a physical dental model from a virtual model based on output from the computer system 710. Any suitable computer-controlled manufacturing system can be used, such as a manufacturing system suitable for performing stereolithography, 3D printing, CNC milling, and the like).
Sabina is considered as analogous to the claimed invention since it focus on improved dental models for use in dental procedures. Therefore it would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to generate instruction as Sabina teaches generating of instruction to cause a 3D printer to form a dental implant with an internal dental screw channel based on the modified model of the angulated dental screw channel model.
The motivation would have been to create improved dental models for dental procedures involving a dental implant. Ideally, such improved models would be simple to use, provide improved outcomes, include relatively few discrete parts, and provide accurate positioning and orienting of the permanent abutment (Sabina, Col. 1 line 55-60).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WRBA PETER (DE 102017106061 A1) in the view of Bilodeau; Jean-Pierre (US 11723755 B2), in the view of Riera; Juan C. A (US 5116225 A), further in the view of Powell; Theodore M. (US 8185224B2) further in the view of JOERNEUS LARS (WO 2013004387 A1)
As of claim 7, the modified model of Wrba- Bilodeau-Riera-Powell teaches all the limitations of claim 6 , but it does not explicitly teach wherein the variable height is selected based on a screw length associated with a dental screw, the screwhead diameter, and the screwhead height to minimize the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry.
While Joerneus teaches wherein the variable height is selected based on a screw length associated with a dental screw, the screwhead diameter, and the screwhead height to minimize the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry (Page 6, [02], Reducing the effective length of the screw ensures that the angulated screw channel can be kept as narrow as possible, advantageously improving the strength of the prosthesis, as well as minimizing the aesthetic impact at the screw channel entrance… Page 8, [01], In one embodiment, the diameter of the screw head has been reduced. As with a reduction of the screw length, a narrowing of the screw head allows the screw to pass through a narrower or more steeply angled screw channel. However, the screw head should not be narrowed so far as to weaken the fixture of the prosthesis to the implant over the lifetime of the prosthesis. In a preferred embodiment, the diameter of the screw head is equal to or smaller than 2.6 ± 0.1mm).
Joerneus is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention since it focus on angulated screw channel. Therefore it would be obvious to try for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try to select variable height based on other parameter to minimize the non-ellipsoid long hole geometry in the modified model based on Joerneus’s teaching of finding parameters of the screw depending on screw diameter and length to minimizing the aesthetic impact at the screw channel entrance.
The motivation would have been to avoid structural weakness and to improve the aesthetic appearance of the prosthesis by using a screw channel angulated away from the axis of channel and the screw channel entrance location to be positioned on a surface, such as the lingual or palatal surfaces (the surfaces nearest the tongue/palate and not visible to a third party) or palatal surface (Joerneus , page 6, [001]).
Claim 15 is also in the same scope as that of claim 7, therefore claim 15 is rejected under the same rational as claim 7.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matouk; Michel (US 10575931 B2, Date Published, 2020-03-03) this invention is similar to the claimed invention since it teaches customizable single-piece dental implant includes a preformed bone-anchorage component and an abutment component that is custom milled from a block either preoperatively, and he planned abutment shape is designed by a computer-aided design (CAD) software.
Haus; Adrian (US 10149741 B2, Date Published, 2018-12-11) this invention is similar to the claimed invention since it teaches a method of attaching a dental component having an angulated screw channel to a dental implant. The present invention also relates to a dental component having an angulated screw channel and a metal adapter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABRHAM A. TAMIRU whose telephone number is (571)272-6987. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Ryan Pitaro can be reached at 571 272 4071. 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.
/ABRHAM ALEHEGN TAMIRU/Examiner, Art Unit 2188
/RYAN F PITARO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2188
Prosecution Insights