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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 20 April 2026 has been entered.
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 2 and 4 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 2 recites the limitation "or several other combinations or reinforced hybrid materials" in line 4. This limitation is unclear as it is unclear what combinations or reinforced hybrid materials are or are not included in the plastic materials claimed. Examiner suggests amending to clarify.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "or other Curves of interest" in lines 2-3. This limitation is unclear as it is unclear what Curves are or are not included in the Curves of interest claimed. Examiner suggests amending to clarify.
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, 7, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell (U.S. Patent No. 5,370,533 A) in view of Choi (KR 101391038 B1, see translated PDF) and Caritg (U.S. Patent No. 6,398,550 B1) and Charkhandeh (U.S. Patent No. 10,751,153 B2).
With regard to the statement of intended use and other functional statements (e.g. “for obtaining inside a person’s oral cavity a bite registration or impression… as in claim 1 lines 1-2), they do not impose any structural limitations on the claims distinguishable over the prior art which is capable of being used as claimed if one so desires to do so. 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
486
728
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 1, Bushnell discloses a system for obtaining inside a person’s oral cavity a bite registration or impression consisting of full teeth impression or full gum impression (col. 2 lines 58-62) comprising of
an impression material (M1 in Fig. 3);
a substrate (2 in Fig. 1) capable of being inserted into the oral cavity and held between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth or mandibular gums and maxillary gums (col. 1 lines 63-68, col. 2 lines 58-62), wherein the substrate is substantially flat (Figs. 1 and 3) and substantially horse shoe shaped (Fig. 1), and has at least one internal channel (10 in Fig. 1) for conveyance of the impression material (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4) and at least one opening for the impression material (5A in Fig. 1) to eject from the opening (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4); and
an integrated pump (Fig. 9) capable of pumping the impression material through the at least one internal channel of the substrate to eject through the at least one opening of the substrate to flow around the gums or teeth or both forming their impression (Fig. 9, col. 3 line 66- col. 4 line 22).
Bushnell does not disclose a means to connect an integrated source of said impression material to the at least one internal channel of the substrate, at least one groove or multiple grooves to hold and retain said bite registration material or said impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate; and a notch formed by a projected portion located on at least one side of the substrate, the notch being configured to receive one of the mandibular teeth, the maxillary teeth, the mandibular gums or the maxillary gums to hold the substrate in place between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth or mandibular gums and maxillary gums during use;
Choi teaches a system for obtaining bite registration (Abstract) comprising a means (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060, threaded fit) to connect an integrated source of impression material (210 and 220 in Fig. 1, para. 0030) to at least one internal channel (103 in Figs. 1-2) of the substrate (Fig. 2).
Caritg teaches a system (Figs. 1-10) comprising multiple grooves (8 in Fig. 5) to hold and retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of a substrate (col. 5 lines 19-26).
Charkhandeh teaches a system (Figs. 1-6) comprising a notch (140 in Figs. 1 and 2) formed by a projected portion located on at least one side of a substrate (100 in Fig. 2), the notch being capable of receiving one of the maxillary teeth to hold the substrate in place between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth during use (col. 6 lines 45-47).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 system of Bushnell by adding the means to connect an integrated source of impression material to the at least one internal channel of the substrate as taught by Choi in order to allow the connection between the impression material source and the substrate to withstand the pressure applied around where the impression material is pumped in (Choi para. 0060).
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 system of Bushnell in view of Choi by adding multiple grooves to hold and retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate as taught by Caritg in order to ensure the hardening impression material is anchored in the substrate (Caritg col. 5 lines 22-26).
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 system of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg by adding a notch formed by a projected portion located on at least one side of a substrate, the notch being capable of receiving one of the maxillary teeth to hold the substrate in place between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth during use as taught by Charkhandeh in order to ensure the incisors are more accurately placed at a correct position on the bite fork to aid positioning (Charkhandeh col. 9 lines 57-67).
In regard to claim 10, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein impression material used with the system is a semi-solid or a liquid that may solidify after some time or a mixture of multiple liquids or a mixture of liquid and solid substances that solidify after some time.
Choi teaches wherein the impression material used with the system is a mixture of multiple liquids that solidify after some time (paras. 0043-0044).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems. 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 impression material of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the impression material is a mixture of multiple liquids that solidify after some time as taught by Choi in order to allow for accurate impression taking (Choi p. 3 lines 144-147).
In regard to claim 11, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the means to connect the source of the impression material to the substrate comprises a mixer to mix a plurality of constituents of the impression material.
Choi further teaches wherein the means (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060) to connect the source of the impression material (210 and 220 in Fig. 1) to the substrate comprises a mixer (230 in Fig. 1) to mix a plurality of constituents of the impression material (para. 0045).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems. 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 means to connect the source of the impression material of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the means to connect the source comprises a mixer as taught by Choi in order to allow for uniform mixing of the impression material (Choi paras. 0044-0045).
In regard to claim 12, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the means to connect the source of impression material to the substrate comprises of a snap fit or a threaded fit or a clamp fit, and in addition optionally said means may be either permanently integrated with the substrate or be detachably integrated with the substrate.
Choi further teaches wherein the means to connect the source of impression material (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060) to the substrate comprises of a threaded fit (para. 0060), and in addition said means are detachably integrated with the substrate (Fig. 3, para. 0060, screw threads).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems. 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 means to connect the source of the impression material of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the means to connect the source comprises a threaded fit wherein the means are detachably integrated with the substrate as taught by Choi in order to allow the connection between the impression material source and the substrate to withstand the pressure applied around where the impression material is pumped in (Choi para. 0060).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Lee (U.S. Patent No. 4,543,062 A).
With regard to the statement of intended use and other functional statements (e.g. “useful for…” as in claim 14), they do not impose any structural limitations on the claims distinguishable over the prior art which is capable of being used as claimed if one so desires to do so. 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.
In regard to claim 14, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein a bite registration obtained is directed towards bite or occlusion classification, or jaw classification, or both bite and jaw classification useful for prescribing or designing or manufacturing of a denture set such as Removable Partial Dentures or Removable Full Dentures, or useful for manufacture of oral appliances worn over the teeth such as aligners, anti-snoring devices, mandibular advancement devices, or mouth guards or a plurality of appliances.
Lee teaches wherein a bite registration obtained is directed towards bite or occlusion classification (Abstract) useful for prescribing or designing or manufacturing of a denture set such as Removable Partial Dentures or Removable Full Dentures (col. 1 lines 54-58).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 system of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying a bite registration obtained is directed towards bite or occlusion classification useful for prescribing or designing or manufacturing of a denture set as taught by Lee in order to allow for facilitation of the testing of dental prosthesis (Lee col. 1 lines 24-58).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Spencer et al (GB 2473951 A, hereinafter “Spencer”).
In regard to claim 2, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the substrate is made of plastic material such as bio-compatible Polyamides, Polyolefins, Polyesters, Fluoropolymers, Elastomers, Thermoplastics, Poly-p-xylylene, Polystyrenes, Biopolymers, or several other combinations or reinforced hybrid materials, and in addition optionally provided in several different colors.
Spencer teaches a system for obtaining an impression (Abstract) wherein the substrate is made of plastic material such as elastomers or thermoplastics (paras. 0041 and 0042, thermoplastic polyurethane elastomer).
Bushnell, Spencer, and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental tray systems. 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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the substrate is fabricated of an elastomer as taught by Spencer in order to allow for true alignment with the bite registration of the wearer (Spencer para. 0026).
In regard to claims 3 and 4, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the substrate has notches at both sides, becomes flexible when heated, and is capable of being inserted in the oral cavity of a person, and is capable of being bitten by the person for a required duration to enable appropriate registration of a bite curve, then is capable of being removed from the oral cavity and optionally further cooled for a required duration if necessary to enable the substrate to attain relatively higher rigidity for recording of said bite curve registration, and in addition optionally the substrate changes color when transforming from a flexible state to a relatively less flexible state,
wherein said registration of the bite curve is Curve of Wilson, or Curve of Spee, or Curve of Monson, or other Curves of interest, or a plurality of such curve registrations.
Charkhandeh teaches wherein the substrate has notches at both sides (140 in Fig. 3, col. 7 lines 57-66).
Spencer teaches wherein the substrate becomes flexible when heated (para. 0053), and is capable of being inserted in the oral cavity of a person (para. 0053), and is capable of being bitten by the person for a required duration to enable appropriate registration of a bite curve (para. 0053), then then is capable of being removed from the oral cavity (para. 0053),
wherein said registration of the bite curve is Curve of Wilson, or Curve of Spee, (para. 0053).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of dental tray systems.
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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by adding notches on both sides as taught by Charkhandeh in order to in order to ensure the incisors are placed at a known position on the bite fork to aid positioning (Charkhandeh col. 9 lines 60-67).
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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the substrate becomes flexible when heated, and is capable of being inserted in the oral cavity, being bitten to enable registration of a bite curve and then being removed from the oral cavity, wherein said registration of the bite curve is Curve of Wilson, or Curve of Spee as taught by Spencer in order to allow for a custom fit with the occlusal curvature of the user (Spencer para. 0053).
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Coscina (U.S. Patent No. 3,878,610 A) and Lee.
In regard to claim 5, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the substrate provided is one of a plurality of substrates which are a set of different widths and lengths suitable for a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch and substrate thickness ranging from 0.5 millimeters to 10 millimeters suitable for verifying Vertical Dimension of Occlusion (VDO) of the person and in addition optionally verifying freeway space, and in addition optionally therapeutic oral position or a combination of these suitable for a specific oral appliance being prescribed, designed or manufactured.
Coscina teaches an apparatus wherein the substrate provided is one of a plurality of substrates which are a set of different widths and lengths suitable for a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch (18, 10, 20, 22 in Fig. 3, col. 3 lines 21-32).
Lee teaches an apparatus (10 in Fig. 1) wherein substrate thickness is 0.5 millimeters (col. 4 lines 48-50) capable of verifying Vertical Dimension of Occlusion (VDO) of the person (col. 4 lines 40-50).
Bushnell, Coscina, Lee and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the substrate provided is one of a plurality of substrates which are a set of different widths and lengths suitable for a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch as taught by Coscina in order to allow for accommodation of individual patients (Coscina col. 7 lines 40-43).
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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the substrate thickness is 0.5 millimeters as taught by Lee in order to allow for the material to be thin enough that teeth are almost closed together when impression are made (Lee col. 4 lines 40-46).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Zhang et al (CN 209864113 U, see translated PDF, hereinafter “Zhang”)
In regard to claim 6, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell does not disclose wherein the substrate provided is a single substrate that can be expanded by additive manufacturing process or by using stretchable biocompatible elastomer according to a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch and in addition optionally shortened by means of separating, clipping, or breaking one or more ends of the substrate.
Zhang teaches wherein the substrate provided is a single substrate (Figs. 1-5) that can be expanded by additive manufacturing process according to a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch (paras. 0009 and 0016, 3D printing).
Bushnell, Zhang, the references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems. 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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by specifying the substrate provided is a single substrate that can be expanded by additive manufacturing process as taught by Zhang in order to allow for the substrate to be suitably sized and integrally formed (Zhang para. 0019).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Wu et al (U.S. 7,871,269 B2, hereinafter “Wu”).
PNG
media_image2.png
291
464
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
571
558
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 8, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh discloses the invention of claim 1. Bushnell further discloses wherein the substrate has multiple openings (5A in Fig. 1) for the impression material (M1 in Fig. 3) to eject from the openings (col. 2 lines 63-69), and in addition at least one external channel (external channel in annotated Fig. 3) serves the purpose of retention of said material constraining it from flowing beyond the external channel (Fig. 3). Bushnell does not disclose wherein the substrate has a plurality of internal or external channels or grooves or a combination of them for conveyance of the bite registration material or the impression material.
Wu teaches an apparatus wherein the substrate (10 in Fig. 1) has a plurality of internal channels (50, 52, 54, 56 in Fig 4) for conveyance of an impression material (col. 4 lines 52-60).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems. 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 substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by adding a plurality of internal channels for conveyance of the impression material as taught by Wu in order to reduce chances of interrupted flow or clogging within the tray (Wu col. 4 lines 64-67).
In regard to claim 9, Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Wu disclose the invention of claim 8. Bushnell further discloses wherein at least one or more valves are concurrently deployed for enabling controlled distribution of ejection of the impression material from the different openings (Fig. 9, col. 3 line 66-col. 4 line 22).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Caritg and Choi.
In regard to claim 21, Bushnell discloses a system for obtaining inside a person's oral cavity a bite registration or impression consisting of full teeth impression or full gum impression (col. 2 lines 58-62) comprising of
an impression material (M1 in Fig. 3);
a substrate (2 in Fig. 1) capable of being inserted into the oral cavity and held between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth or mandibular gums and maxillary gums (col. 1 lines 63-68, col. 2 lines 58-62), wherein the substrate is substantially flat (Figs. 1 and 3) and substantially horse shoe shaped (Fig. 1), and has at least one internal channel (10 in Fig. 1) for conveyance of the impression material (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4) and at least one opening for the impression material (5A in Fig. 1) to eject from the opening (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4);
a pump (Fig. 9) capable of pumping the impression material through the at least one internal channel of the substrate to eject through the at least one opening of the substrate to flow around the gums or teeth or both forming their impression (Fig. 9, col. 3 line 66- col. 4 line 22); and
a means (57, 58, 59 in Fig. 9, col. 4 lines 15-22) for enabling controlled distribution of the impression material (col. 4 lines 15-22).
Bushnell does not disclose at least one groove or multiple grooves to retain said impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate; a means to connect a source of said bite registration material or said impression material to the at least one internal channel of the substrate.
Caritg teaches a system (Figs. 1-10) comprising multiple grooves (8 in Fig. 5) to retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of a substrate (col. 5 lines 19-26).
Choi teaches a system for obtaining bite registration (Abstract) comprising a means to connect a source of impression material (210 and 220 in Fig. 1, para. 0030) to at least one internal channel (103 in Figs. 1-2) of the substrate (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060, threaded fit).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 system of Bushnell by adding multiple grooves to retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate as taught by Caritg in order to ensure the hardening impression material is anchored in the substrate (Caritg col. 5 lines 22-26).
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 system of Bushnell in view of Caritg by adding the means to connect a source of impression material to the at least one internal channel of the substrate as taught by Choi in order to allow the connection between the impression material source and the substrate to withstand the pressure applied around where the impression material is pumped in (Choi para. 0060).
Claims 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Caritg and Choi and Bosisio et al (WO 2017/048918 A1).
In regard to claim 22, Bushnell in view of Caritg and Choi discloses the invention of claim 21. Bushnell does not disclose wherein said controlled distribution of the bite registration material or the impression material is provided by feedback control using at least one sensor.
Bosisio teaches a similar apparatus (Figs. 1-20) comprising a means for enabling controlled distribution of the bite registration material or the impression material (paras. 0074-0075, controller, sensor and valves) wherein said controlled distribution of the impression material is provided by feedback control using at least one sensor (paras. 0074-0075).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 means for enabling controlled distribution of Bushnell in view of Caritg and Choi by adding at least one sensor and controller wherein said controlled distribution of the impression material is provided by feedback control using the at least one sensor as taught by Bosisio in order to facilitate optimum precision and accuracy of the dental impression relative to its corresponding dental structure (Bosisio paras. 0073-0075).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Zhang and Caritg and Choi.
In regard to claim 23, Bushnell discloses a system for obtaining inside a person's oral cavity a bite registration or impression consisting of full teeth impression or full gum impression (col. 2 lines 58-62) comprising of
an impression material (M1 in Fig. 3);
a substrate (2 in Fig. 1) capable of being inserted into the oral cavity and held between mandibular teeth and maxillary teeth or mandibular gums and maxillary gums (col. 1 lines 63-68, col. 2 lines 58-62), wherein the substrate is substantially flat (Figs. 1 and 3) and substantially horse shoe shaped (Fig. 1), and has at least one internal channel (10 in Fig. 1) for conveyance of the impression material (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4) and at least one opening for the impression material (5A in Fig. 1) to eject from the opening (col. 2 lines 66- col. 3 line 4);
a pump capable of pumping the impression material through the at least one internal channel of the substrate to eject through the at least one opening of the substrate to flow around the gums or teeth or both forming their impression (Fig. 9, col. 3 line 66- col. 4 line 22).
Bushnell does not disclose that the substrate is made by an additive manufacturing process; at least one groove or multiple grooves to retain said bite registration material or said impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate, and a means to connect a source of said bite registration material or said impression material to at least one internal channel of the substrate.
Zhang teaches a substrate made by an additive manufacturing process (paras. 0009 and 0016, 3D printing).
Caritg teaches a system (Figs. 1-10) comprising multiple grooves (8 in Fig. 5) to retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of a substrate (col. 5 lines 19-26).
Choi teaches a system for obtaining bite registration (Abstract) comprising a means to connect a source of impression material (210 and 220 in Fig. 1, para. 0030) to at least one internal channel (103 in Figs. 1-2) of the substrate (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060, threaded fit).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of bite registration systems.
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 system of Bushnell by specifying the substrate is made by an additive manufacturing process as taught by Zhang in order to allow for the substrate to be suitably sized and integrally formed (Zhang para. 0019).
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 system of Bushnell in view of Zhang by adding multiple grooves to retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of the substrate as taught by Caritg in order to ensure the hardening impression material is anchored in the substrate (Caritg col. 5 lines 22-26).
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 system of Bushnell in view of Zhang and Caritg by adding the means to connect a source of impression material to the at least one internal channel of the substrate as taught by Choi in order to allow the connection between the impression material source and the substrate to withstand the pressure applied around where the impression material is pumped in (Choi para. 0060).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regard to the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant argues that unlike the system of Bushnell, Applicant’s invention is not bulky and inconvenient and is lightweight and integrated and optionally disposable. Applicant notes that the independent claims 1, 21, and 23 have been amended to emphasize the integrated configuration and integrating features of dependent claims 3 and 7. Applicant argues that the invention disclosed by Choi needs multiple flexible hoses that are connected to a plurality of impression material injection holes on the tray, and that the hoses are an inconvenience and cause irritation to the patient undergoing the bite registration. Applicant argues that Applicant’s invention overcomes several of these shortcomings in the cited prior art. Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been reasonably motivated to combine or modify the cited prior art in such a way as to arrive at the claimed invention.
Examiner notes that in the above rejection, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh, claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Caritg and Choi, and claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Zhang and Caritg and Choi. Examiner notes that the Applicant’s arguments are narrower than the claim limitations as the claims do not recite bulkiness or weight or disposability in the limitations, or a limitation regarding the number of hoses or regarding irritation of the patient, and notes that the prior art reads on the limitations as claimed. Examiner notes that Caritg teaches a system (Figs. 1-10) comprising multiple grooves (8 in Fig. 5) to retain impression material on at least one or more sides or surfaces of a substrate (col. 5 lines 19-26), Choi teaches a means to connect a source of impression material (210 and 220 in Fig. 1, para. 0030) to at least one internal channel (103 in Figs. 1-2) of the substrate (230, 300, 333 in Figs. 2 and 3, para. 0060, threaded fit), and Charkhandeh teaches a notch (140 in Figs. 1 and 2) formed by a projected portion located on at least one side of a substrate (100 in Fig. 2) and being capable of receiving one of the maxillary teeth to hold the substrate in place (col. 6 lines 45-47). Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to have modified the system of Bushnell by the teachings of Choi in order to allow the connection between the impression material source and the substrate to withstand the pressure applied around where the impression material is pumped in (Choi para. 0060), by the teachings of Caritg in order to ensure the hardening impression material is anchored in the substrate (Caritg col. 5 lines 22-26), and by Charkhandeh in order to ensure the incisors are more accurately placed at a correct position on the bite fork to aid positioning (Charkhandeh col. 9 lines 57-67). Applicant is directed to the rejections in view of the amendments.
Applicant argues that claim 6 has been amended to specify that the substrate can be expanded by additive manufacturing or by using stretchable biocompatible elastomer. Applicant argues that the recitation "an integrated pump configured to pump the bite registration material", emphasis on integrated, implies that there are no hoses involved, and that "integrated" also indicates that the bulkiness and weight of the disclosed structure is different and that facilitates an "integrated" configuration, implying that it is not bulky and is lighter.
Examiner notes that in the above rejection, claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh and Zhang. Zhang teaches wherein the substrate provided is a single substrate (Figs. 1-5) that can be expanded by additive manufacturing process according to a size of the person’s mandibular or maxillary arch (paras. 0009 and 0016, 3D printing). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the substrate of Bushnell in view of Choi and Caritg and Charkhandeh by the teachings of Zhang in order to allow for the substrate to be suitably sized and integrally formed (Zhang para. 0019). Examiner notes that in regard to “integrated”, where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “integrated” is “with two or more things combined in order to become more effective” (p. 1 of attached PDF) or “combined to form a single thing” (p. 2 of attached PDF) as defined by the Cambridge Dictionary. Neither of these definitions appear to indicate the number of hoses involved in an apparatus or the weight, lightness or bulkiness of an apparatus. Examiner notes that the prior art as mentioned above reads on the independent claims 1, 21, and 23 as claimed, and Applicant is directed to the rejections in view of the amendments.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights