Status under America Invents Act
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Acknowledgment of Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 12, 2026 has been entered.
Rejection based on Prior Art
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, 2, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lundgren (US 4,752,294).
In Figure 2 Lundgren discloses a dental implant 10’ having an outer surface forming a plurality of openings 16, a plurality of cavities 12 communicating with the openings; and a plurality of passages being column shaped and narrower than the cavities extending between the cavities and the openings. The cavities are capable of containing a medicine (column 3, lines 19-20). Note the annotated Figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
607
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claims 2 and 6, the latitudinal sections of the cavities is larger thana sectional area opening and the latitudinal sections are parallel with the outer surface as illustrated in Figure 2 of Lundgren. In regard to claim 8, the Figure 2 Lundgren implant is an artificial tooth root.
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 4, 5, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lundgren (US 4,752,294).
Lundgren teaches with respect to the Figure 1 embodiment that the longitudinal section of the cavities that is perpendicular to the outer surface may be rounded in order to enhance the growth of connective tissues. To have rounded the longitudinal sections of the cavities that are perpendicular to the outer surface of the Lundgren Figure 2 embodiment as taught in the Figure 1 embodiment in order to provide for the growth of connective tissue would have ben obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Applicant’s Remarks
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 and remarks are persuasive in addressing the drawing objections and 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections in the Office Action of 10/20/2025. Applicant’s response is also persuasive in overcoming the rejection based on the prior art references to Amrich et al (US 2006/0129161) and Alexander et al (US 2005/01195758). It is noted, however, that the applicant’s broad claims fail to overcome other prior art references as that applied above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ralph Lewis whose telephone number is (571)272-4712. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9AM-4PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Edelmira Bosques 571 270-5614. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
/RALPH A LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 (571) 272-4712