Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/713,102

ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES WITH EDGE PROFILES FOR OPTIMIZED TOOTH MOVEMENT AND METHODS FOR FORMING THE SAME

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Apr 04, 2022
Examiner
HUYNH, COURTNEY NGUYEN
Art Unit
3772
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Align Technology, INC.
OA Round
6 (Final)
43%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 43% of resolved cases
43%
Career Allow Rate
41 granted / 96 resolved
-27.3% vs TC avg
Strong +48% interview lift
Without
With
+47.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
144
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.1%
+7.1% vs TC avg
§102
15.0%
-25.0% vs TC avg
§112
32.2%
-7.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 96 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 Objections Claims 1 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Examiner suggests amending claim 1 lines 6-7 to “toward Examiner suggests amending claim 10 lines 2-3 to “[[the]]a net repositioning force vector”. Appropriate correction is required. 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, 6, 9-12, 14-16, and 30 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 1 recites the limitation "wherein the at least the portion of the gingival edge" in lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claim 1 does not recite the limitation “an at least a portion of the gingival edge” prior to claim 1 lines 10-11, though claim 1 does recite the limitation “at least a first portion of a gingival edge” in liens 5-6. For purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret claim 1 lines 10-11 as "wherein the at least the first portion of the gingival edge" and suggests amending to clarify. Claims 6, 9-12, 14-16, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, for their dependence on one or more rejected base and/or intervening claims. 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, 6, 9-12, 14-16, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopelman (WO 2017007964 A1) in view of Chang (KR 102202863 B1 and translated PDF). PNG media_image1.png 343 376 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 840 568 media_image2.png Greyscale In regard to claim 1, Kopelman discloses a method of forming a dental aligner (Figs. 1A-1C, 5B and 38-39), comprising: determining a first orientation and a second orientation of a tooth of a virtual model of a patient's teeth as part of a treatment plan (3810 in Fig. 38, paras. 00323-00325); forming a virtual dental aligner for moving the tooth from the first orientation to the second orientation (3830 in Fig. 38, paras. 00328 and 00332-00334), wherein forming the virtual dental aligner includes adjusting at least a portion of a gingival edge of a virtual shell (512 in Fig. 5B, paras. 00124, 00328 and 00332-00334) in a direction away from a dental arch (Fig. 5B and para, 00124), the gingival edge defining a gingival edge profile around the virtual shell (Fig. 1A), wherein the at least the portion of the gingival edge extends along at least one of an outer side of the tooth (Figs. 1A and 5B, para. 00124), and forming the dental aligner based on the virtual dental aligner with the adjusted gingival edge (Fig. 39, paras. 00337-00340). Kopelman does not disclose adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge in a direction toward a root apex of the tooth to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva, wherein forming the virtual dental aligner further comprises adjusting at least a second portion of the gingival edge in a direction toward a root apex of a second tooth to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva. Chang teaches an apparatus (Figs. 9-10) comprising a dental aligner (10 in Fig. 9, para. 0061) wherein at least a first portion of a gingival edge of a shell (portion 1 in annotated Fig. 9) is adjusted in a direction toward a root apex of the tooth to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061), the gingival edge defining a gingival edge profile around the virtual shell (Fig. 9, para. 0061), wherein the at least the first portion of the gingival edge extends along at least one of an outer side of the tooth (Fig. 9), wherein forming the dental aligner further comprises adjusting at least a second portion of the gingival edge of the shell (portion 2 in annotated Fig. 9) in a direction toward a root apex of a second tooth to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061). The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental aligners. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kopelman by specifying the method further includes adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge in a direction toward a root apex of the tooth to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva, and further comprises adjusting at least a second portion of the gingival edge in a direction toward a root apex of a second tooth to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva as taught by Chang in order to allow for prevention of muscle interference of the cheeks with the gums and teeth in order to induce expansion and growth of the maxillary arch (Chang para. 061). In regard to claim 6, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 1. Kopelman further discloses wherein moving the tooth from the first orientation to the second orientation is in accordance with a stage of the treatment plan (para. 0071). In regard to claim 9, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 1. Kopelman further discloses further comprising forming at least one attachment feature (106 in Fig. 1A) within the virtual dental aligner (paras. 00328 and 00332-00334) that is shaped and sized to accept a corresponding at least one dental attachment (104 in Fig. 1A) attached to the tooth (Fig. 1A, para. 0069). In regard to claim 10, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 9. Kopelman further discloses wherein interaction of the at least one dental attachment (104 in Fig. 1A, para. 0069) with the at least one attachment feature (106 in Fig. 1A, para. 0069) modifies a net repositioning force vector applied by the virtual dental aligner to the tooth (para. 00116 and 00332-00334; any repositioning forces exerted will have a net repositioning force vector). In regard to claim 11, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 1. Kopelman does not disclose further comprising forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge of the dental aligner at a gumline of the virtual model. Chang further teaches forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge (portion 3 in annotated Fig. 9) of the dental aligner at a gumline of the model (Fig. 9, para. 0062). The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental aligners. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kopelman in view of Chang by specifying the method further includes forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge of the dental aligner at a gumline of the model as taught by Chang in order to allow for forward growth of the maxilla and treatment of Class 3 malocclusion (Chang para. 062). In regard to claim 12, Kopelman discloses a method of forming a dental aligner (Figs. 1A-1C, 5B and 38-39), comprising: determining a first orientation and a second orientation of a first tooth of a virtual model of a patient's teeth as part of a treatment plan (3810 in Fig. 38, paras. 00323-00325); forming a virtual dental aligner for moving the first tooth from the first orientation to the second orientation (3830 in Fig. 38, paras. 00328 and 00332-00334), wherein forming the virtual dental aligner includes adjusting at least a portion of a gingival edge of a virtual shell (512 in Fig. 5B, paras. 00124, 00328 and 00332-00334) in a direction away from a dental arch (Fig. 5B and para, 00124), wherein the at least the portion of the gingival edge extends along an outer side of the first tooth (Figs. 1A and 5B, para. 00124); and forming the dental aligner based on the virtual dental aligner with the adjusted gingival edge (Fig. 39, paras. 00337-00340). Kopelman does not disclose adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva, and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge of the virtual shell to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva, the gingival edge having an edge profile that is the furthest gingival extent of a wall of the virtual shell, wherein the second portion of the gingival edge extends along at least one of an outer side of the second tooth or an inner side of the second tooth, Chang teaches an apparatus (Figs. 9-10) comprising a dental aligner (10 in Fig. 9, para. 0061) wherein at least a first portion of a gingival edge of a shell (portion 1 in annotated Fig. 9) is adjusted to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061), and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge of the shell (portion 2 in annotated Fig. 9) in a direction to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061), the gingival edge having an edge profile that is the furthest gingival extent of a wall of the virtual shell (Fig. 9, paras. 0061-0062), wherein the second portion of the gingival edge extends along at least one of an outer side of the second tooth (Fig. 9, para. 0061). The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental aligners. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kopelman by specifying the method further includes adjusting at adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva, and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge in a direction to relieve pressure on a second portion of the patient's gingiva, the gingival edge having an edge profile that is the furthest gingival extent of a wall of the virtual shell, wherein the second portion of the gingival edge extends along at least one of an outer side of the second tooth or an inner side of the second tooth as taught by Chang in order to allow for prevention of muscle interference of the cheeks with the gums and teeth in order to induce expansion and growth of the maxillary arch (Chang para. 061). In regard to claim 14, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 12. Kopelman does not disclose further comprising forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge of the dental aligner at a gumline of the virtual model. Chang further teaches forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge (portion 3 in annotated Fig. 9) of the dental aligner at a gumline of the model (Fig. 9, para. 0062). The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental aligners. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kopelman in view of Chang by specifying the method further includes forming at least a third portion of the gingival edge of the dental aligner at a gumline of the model as taught by Chang in order to allow for forward growth of the maxilla and treatment of Class 3 malocclusion (Chang para. 062). In regard to claim 15, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 1. Kopelman further discloses wherein forming the virtual dental aligner includes modifying a wall shape (paras. 00133 and 00158-00160) of the virtual dental aligner to apply net repositioning forces according to at least a segment of the treatment plan (paras. 0070, 00173-00175 and 00181-00182). In regard to claim 16, Kopelman in view of Chang discloses the invention of claim 1. Kopelman further discloses wherein forming the virtual dental aligner includes modifying a wall thickness (para. 0149) of the virtual dental aligner to apply net repositioning forces according to at least a segment of the treatment plan (paras. 0070, 00173-00175 and 00181-00182; any repositioning forces exerted will have a net repositioning force vector). In regard to claim 30, Kopelman discloses a method of forming a dental aligner (Figs. 1A-1C, 5B and 38-39), comprising: determining a first orientation and a second orientation of a first tooth of a virtual model of a patient's teeth as part of a treatment plan (3810 in Fig. 38, paras. 00323-00325); forming a virtual dental aligner for moving the first tooth from the first orientation to the second orientation (3830 in Fig. 38, paras. 00328 and 00332-00334), wherein forming the virtual dental aligner includes adjusting a portion of a gingival edge of a virtual shell (512 in Fig. 5B, paras. 00124, 00328 and 00332-00334) in a direction away from a dental arch (Fig. 5B and para, 00124) and away from the gingiva, wherein the at least the portion of the gingival edge extends along an outer side of the tooth (Figs. 1A and 5B, para. 00124); and forming the dental aligner based on the virtual dental aligner with the adjusted gingival edge (Fig. 39, paras. 00337-00340). Kopelman does not disclose adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge to relieve pressure against a first portion of the patient's gingiva and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge of the virtual shell a second amount in a direction to relieve pressure against a second portion of the patient's gingiva. Chang teaches an apparatus (Figs. 9-10) comprising a dental aligner (10 in Fig. 9, para. 0061) wherein at least a first portion of a gingival edge of a shell (portion 1 in annotated Fig. 9) is adjusted to relieve pressure on a first portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061), and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge of the shell (portion 2 in annotated Fig. 9) a second amount in a direction to relieve pressure against a second portion of the patient's gingiva (Fig. 9, para. 0061). The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental aligners. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Kopelman by specifying the method further includes adjusting at least a first portion of a gingival edge to relieve pressure against a first portion of the patient's gingiva and adjusting a second portion of the gingival edge of the virtual shell a second amount in a direction to relieve pressure against a second portion of the patient's gingiva as taught by Chang in order to allow for prevention of muscle interference of the cheeks with the gums and teeth in order to induce expansion and growth of the maxillary arch (Chang para. 061). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 03 December 2025 with respect to the rejections of the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant is directed to the rejections in view of the amendments. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY N HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-7219. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5:00PM (EST) flex, 2nd Friday off. 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. /COURTNEY N HUYNH/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 13, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 19, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 17, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 25, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 25, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 23, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 29, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 30, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 23, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 23, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 04, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 03, 2025
Interview Requested
Apr 10, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 10, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 02, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594145
ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE WITH ORTHOPEDIC FUNCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12551319
Screw-attached Pick-up Dental Coping System and Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12532951
APPLICATOR FOR APPLYING A HAIRCARE PRODUCT, AND ASSOCIATED APPLICATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12527653
RIDGED DENTAL FLOSS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12527375
WIG APPARATUS HAVING ANTI-SLIP BAND
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
43%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+47.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 96 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month