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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/04/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks filed on 08/04/2026, have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments against the rejections in view of the prior art of record have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
The Examiner notes that the determination of the first location or the second location is arbitrary. For instance, a surgeon could select any first location corresponding to the position of one or more current teeth or dental implant of a patient having alveolar bone loss. Said first location could be in any part of the alveolar ridge.
EAO discloses a method for oral surgery, as claimed, including the steps of identifying a first location along the alveola ridge corresponding to the position of one or more current teeth or dental implant of a patient having alveolar bone loss (Minute 0:24 and Annotated Figure of minute 0:24, above); identifying one or more second locations along the alveolar ridge adjacent to the first location (Annotated Figure of minute 0:24), wherein at least one of said one or more second locations includes a socket and/or alveolar defect; opening the gum of a patient at the one or more second locations (minute 0:49) and at the first location to expose at least a portion of a root surface of the current tooth or dental implant at the first location (minute 0:53); preparing the exposed root surface (since the roots has been clear if any debris, as shown in minute 0:53); packing a graft material comprising ground dentin into the socket and/or alveolar defect at the one or more second locations and around the exposed root surface at the first location (the Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth in addition to the particulated dentin graft is added in minutes 1:08 to 1:18, see Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:08 to 1:18 above, clearly augments the alveolar bone height at both locations); and covering the graft material with a membrane (membrane in the form of a white material, shown in minutes 1:19 to 1:30 and Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:19 to 1:30).
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.
Claim(s) 1–2, 4, 7, 10-14, 16, 19, 22-24 and 26-36 is/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 and 13 recite “preparing the exposed root surface”, it is unclear what procedure is required by this limitation. The scope of the claim is indefinite. A review of the Specification appears to indicate the root surfaces were debrided and/or root planning was performed. This interpretation was given for the purpose of examination.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation “to expose at least a portion of a root surface of the current tooth or dental implant at the first location”, and the claim also recites “preparing the exposed root surface” and “packing a graft material… around the exposed root surface at the first location” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation.
Claim 13 recites the broad recitation “opening gingival tissue to expose at least a portion of a root surface of the current tooth or dental implant at the first location”, and the claim also recites “preparing the exposed root surface” and “packing a graft material comprising ground dentin at the second location and around the exposed root surface at the first location” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. It is also unclear if the opening of the gingival tissue is only to expose a dental implant at the first location, how the packing of graft material could be done around the exposed root surface at the first location.
The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claims 2, 4, 7, 10-12, 26-30 and 36 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claims 14, 16, 19, 22-24 and 31-35 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
PNG
media_image1.png
811
1690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 1. Minute 0:24)]Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7, 10, 13-14, 16, 22 and 28-30 and 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EAO Channel (Please see the link for the YouTube video provided in the PTO 892 form and NPL attached to this Office Action).
PNG
media_image2.png
666
1426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 2. Minute 0:49)]
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 3. Minutes 1:08 to 1:18)]
PNG
media_image3.png
774
1450
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Figure 4. Minutes 1:19 to 1:30)]
PNG
media_image4.png
668
1432
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, EAO discloses a method for oral surgery (The video shows a method of alveolar augmentation using autologous Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth), comprising: identifying a first location along the alveola ridge corresponding to the position of one or more current teeth or dental implant of a patient having alveolar bone loss (Minute 0:24 and Annotated Figure of minute 0:24, above); identifying one or more second locations along the alveolar ridge adjacent to the first location (Annotated Figure of minute 0:24), wherein at least one of said one or more second locations includes a socket and/or alveolar defect; opening the gum of a patient at the one or more second locations (minute 0:49) and at the first location to expose at least a portion of a root surface of the current tooth or dental implant at the first location (minute 0:53); preparing the exposed root surface (since the roots has been clear if any debris, as shown in minute 0:53); packing a graft material comprising ground dentin into the socket and/or alveolar defect at the one or more second locations and around the exposed root surface at the first location (the Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth in addition to the particulated dentin graft is added in minutes 1:08 to 1:18, see Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:08 to 1:18 above, clearly augments the alveolar bone height at both locations); and covering the graft material with a membrane (membrane in the form of a white material, shown in minutes 1:19 to 1:30 and Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:19 to 1:30).
Regarding claim 2, EAO discloses “wherein the graft material comprises autologous dentin”; since EAO discloses the extraction of a wisdom tooth (minute 0:31), the separation of the tooth in halves (minute 0:36), the particulation of the tooth (minute 0:40) and the step of applying the particulated dentin graft material (minute: 1:09).
Regarding claim 4, EAO discloses wherein the first location is an alveolus directly adjacent to an alveolus at the second location (EAO Annotated Figure minute 0:24). The Examiner applies the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “alveolus”, being the bony cavity located within the alveolar process of the maxilla and the mandible that that houses and supports the roots of the teeth. Therefore, as shown in the Annotated Figure of minute 0:24, above, there is an alveolus directly adjacent to an alveolus at the second location (i.e. the alveolus of a current tooth adjacent to the socket of a missing tooth).
Regarding claim 10, EAO discloses wherein the first location corresponds to a questionable tooth (since as shown in EAO Annotated Figure of minute 0:24 the first location is a questionable tooth due to root exposure and vertical bone loss adjacent and or surrounding the root of the tooth located at the first location).
Regarding claim 13, EAO discloses a method for treating alveolar bone loss lateral to a treatment site (since the video shows a method of alveolar augmentation in the vertical and horizontal directions using “Autologous Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth”), comprising: identifying a first location along the alveolar ridge corresponding to the position of one or more current teeth or dental implant of a patient having alveolar bone loss, identifying a second location along the alveolar ridge laterally adjacent to the first location, wherein the second location includes an extraction socket or alveolar defect (Minute 0:24 and EAO Annotated Figure of minute 0:24); opening gingival tissue to expose at least a portion of a root surface of the current tooth or dental implant at the first location (minute 0:49); preparing the exposed root surface (since the roots has been clear if any debris, as shown in minute 0:53); packing a graft material comprising ground dentin at a the second location and around the exposed root surface at the first location (the Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth in addition to the particulated dentin graft is added in minutes 1:08 to 1:18, see Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:08 to 1:18 above, clearly augments the alveolar bone height at both locations); and covering the graft material with a membrane (membrane in the form of a white material, shown in minutes 1:19 to 1:30 and Annotated Figure of minute minutes 1:19 to 1:30).
Regarding claim 14, EAO discloses wherein dentin graft material comprises autologous dentin (since EAO discloses the extraction of a wisdom tooth (minute 0:31), the separation of the tooth in halves (minute 0:36), the particulation of the tooth (minute 0:40) and the step of applying the particulated dentin graft material (minute: 1:09)).
Regarding claim 16, EAO discloses wherein the first location is an alveolus directly adjacent to an alveolus at the second location (EAO Annotated Figure minute 0:24).
Regarding claim 22, EAO discloses “wherein the first location corresponds to a questionable tooth”; since as shown in (EAO Annotated Figure of minute 0:53) the first location is a questionable tooth due to vertical bone loss adjacent and or surrounding the root of the tooth located at the first location.
Regarding claims 29 and 34, EAO discloses wherein alveolar bone height at the first location is preserved or augmented following the packing step (as shown in the conclusion, minute 5:16, the alveolar bone height at the first location is preserved or augmented).
Regarding claims 30 and 35, EAO discloses wherein the first location corresponds to a tooth or dental implant that is at risk due to periodontal disease, vertical bone loss, root exposure, or a combination thereof (presents bone resorption in the form of vertical bone loss, as shown in EAO Annotated Figure of minute 0:24). As shown in the Annotated Figure, there is an sudden vertical depression, due to bone loss, in the first location; which makes the tooth located at the first location in a risky condition.
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 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 7, 19 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EAO in view of Soon-Xae Hong (Please see the link for the YouTube video provided in the PTO 892 form and NPL attached to the current Office Action).
Regarding claims 7, 19 and 26 EAO fails to disclose “further comprising the step of preparing the second location prior to the packing step-, wherein preparing the second location comprises root planning” and “wherein preparing the exposed root surface comprises at least one of root planing or removing a smear layer from the exposed root surface”.
Soon-Xae discloses a method for alveolar ridge augmentation “comprising the step of preparing the second location prior to the packing step” and “wherein the step of preparing the second location comprises root planing”; as shown in minutes 4:18-5:09. The Examiner notes that the determination of the first location or the second location is arbitrary and that Soon-Xae discloses the step of root planing at two locations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of EAO to introduce the step root planing the second location of EAO, shown in (EAO: minute 0:53); since such modification would remove tartar from a questionable tooth to avoid gum disease after the surgical treatment is completed.
Claims 11 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EAO in view of Elian (US 20200086000 A1).
Regarding claims 11 and 23, EAO fails to disclose “wherein the membrane in the covering step is amnion-chorion membrane”. On the other hand, Elian discloses a dental bone graft that may be used to reverse bone loss or destruction caused by, for example, periodontal disease or trauma. Some grafts are performed to rebuild bone structure to support dental implants; membranes may be used to stabilize the graft as it heals ([0132]). Elian discloses “wherein the membrane in the covering step is amnion-chorion membrane” ([0151]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of EAO to include the use of an amnion-chorion membrane, as taught by Elian; since such modification would provide a membrane that is rich in collagen; therefore, avoiding the resorption of soft tissue (gum) while allowing bone integration between the graft and the membrane.
Claims 12, 24 and 36 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EAO in view of KometaBio Channel (Please see the link for the YouTube video provided in the PTO 892 form and NPL attached to the current Office Action).
Regarding claims 12 and 24 EAO fails to disclose “wherein the graft comprises L-PRF block”. However, KometaBio discloses a method of repairing an extraction socket using dentin and graft material comprising L-PRF block (minutes 2:23-3:27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of EAO to include the use of a graft comprises L-PRF block, as taught by KometaBio; since such modification would create a graft that accelerates the natural healing process by providing a bioactive “band-aid” to enhance the recovery process.
Regarding claim 36 EAO discloses wherein the graft comprises the autologous dentin (the Dentin Graft from the Wisdom Tooth in addition to the particulated dentin graft is added in minutes 1:08 to 1:18), but fails to specifically disclose “in an L-PRF block”. KometaBio discloses a method of repairing an extraction socket using dentin and graft material comprising L-PRF block (minutes 2:23-3:27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of EAO to include the use of a graft comprised in L-PRF block, as taught by KometaBio; since such modification would create a graft that accelerates the natural healing process by providing a bioactive “band-aid” to enhance the recovery process.
Claims 28 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EAO in view of Massoud (US 20030118968 A1).
Regarding claims 28 and 33, EAO discloses wherein packing the graft material comprises packing the graft material around the exposed root surface (minutes 1:08 to 1:18), but fails to disclose “at the first location to a level of an intended alveolar crest or cementoenamel junction”.
Massoud teaches a method for grafting and regeneration of the interdental papilla (Abstract), wherein packing the graft material comprises packing the graft at the first location to a level of an intended alveolar crest or cementoenamel junction (since bone graft is added to achieve the necessary alveolar interproximal height [0041], by grafting it with an appropriated material such as Bio-Oss, irradiated cancellous and the like [0045] and placed around cementoenamel junction [0046]; see Figure 7E). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to modify the method of EAO to include step of packing the graft at the first location to a level of an intended alveolar crest or cementoenamel junction, since such modification would provide more aesthetic result.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS MIGUEL RUIZ MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-0839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 Am - 5 PM (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen can be reached on (571) 270-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LUIS RUIZ MARTIN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 9/3/2026
Prosecution Insights