DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Feng (US 2005/0048440).
Feng shows a system to replace a non-functional natural tooth of a patient (Fig. 5-6 for instance), the system comprising a dental implant (Fig. 1-4) including a root portion configured to integrate with an in-vivo jawbone cavity or a periodontal ligament structure adjacent the in-vivo jawbone cavity ([0027] discusses the implant matching the natural tooth, however the resulting structure is simply an implant with a shape/size capable of fitting in a jawbone cavity), the root portion having a first custom-shaped surface with a first spatial extension correlating to a corresponding first spatial surface of a natural root-form anatomy of the non-functional natural tooth or the in- vivo jawbone cavity (Fig. 3-4; [0027] show the surfaces and extensions matching); and an occlusal-facing interface to receive an occlusal-facing dental component (at 102 in Fig. 1, 4), the occlusal-facing interface having a second custom-shaped surface (at 102 in Fig. 1, 4, custom-shaped to fit 106 and 128) with a second spatial extension having an asymmetrical cross-section from an elevation view (elevation view shown in Fig. 1 for instance, since 128 is shaped to the natural tooth which is asymmetric, the portions of 102 extending therefrom will also be asymmetric) correlating to a corresponding second spatial surface of a natural occlusal- facing anatomy of or adjacent the non-functional natural tooth or the in-vivo jawbone cavity (similar shape as seen in Fig. 4), the asymmetrical cross-section of the occlusal-facing interface operable to create a form-lock fit with a corresponding inverse spatial interface surface of the occlusal-facing dental component (the crown is not positively recited as part of the system, Feng shows in Fig. 4 a fit that would be capable of form-lock fit with a corresponding crown by hashed line). With respect to claim 2, wherein the dental implant is a finished manufactured product prior to insertion into the in-vivo jawbone cavity of the patient corresponding to the non-functional natural tooth (this is considered intended use, however Fig. 4 shows the manufactured product before insertion). With respect to claim 3, wherein the first spatial extension of the first custom-shaped surface at least partially dimensionally matches a corresponding first oversized or undersized virtual representation of the first spatial surface (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant close in size to a natural tooth is at issue, which is taught by Feng); the second spatial extension of the second custom-shaped surface at least partially dimensionally matches a corresponding second oversized or undersized virtual representation of the second spatial surface (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant close in size to a natural tooth is at issue, which is taught by Feng, however Fig. 3-4 shows this); and the first spatial extension or the second spatial extension includes at least one of, which is three-dimensional, non-planar, and non-linear: an extension surface, a transitional surface boundary, an extension shape, or an extension edge (since it matches the natural tooth, this structure is met by Feng). With respect to claim 4, wherein the natural occlusal-facing anatomy of or adjacent the non-functional natural tooth or the in-vivo jawbone cavity includes at least one of: a surface of a crown portion of the non-functional natural tooth, a surface of a neck portion of the non-functional natural tooth, a surface of a natural juncture between dentin and enamel of the non-functional natural tooth, a bone crest margin surface of the in-vivo jawbone cavity, or an outer gum line surface of a gingiva adjacent the in-vivo jawbone cavity (sine Feng matches the natural shape, this structure is met). With respect to claim 5, wherein the occlusal-facing dental component includes at least one of: a dental crown, a transgingival cap, a dental implant abutment, or a dental bridge (crown 106). With respect to claim 7, wherein at least a portion of the first spatial extension of the first custom-shaped surface or the second spatial extension of the second custom-shaped surface correlates to a corresponding virtual spatial surface defined by numerical machine control data originated to form the dental implant (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant is required). With respect to claim 8, wherein at least a portion of the first spatial extension of the first custom-shaped surface or the second spatial extension of the second custom-shaped surface correlates to a corresponding virtual spatial surface defined by a virtual three-dimensional model of the dental implant formed to design the dental implant (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant is required). With respect to claim 9, wherein at least a portion of the first spatial extension of the first custom-shaped surface or the second spatial extension of the second custom-shaped surface correlates to a corresponding virtual spatial surface represented by a three-dimensional image of the non-functional natural tooth or the in-vivo jawbone cavity (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a naturally shaped dental implant is required). With respect to claim 10, wherein the three-dimensional image is generated prior to removal of the non-functional natural tooth from the in-vivo jawbone cavity (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant is required). With respect to claim 11, wherein the three-dimensional image includes at least one of: a 3D X-ray image, a Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) image, a Computed Tomography (CT) image, a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) image, an ultrasound scan image, a 3D scan image of a physical dental impression, the 3D X-ray image of a physical dental impression, a destructive scan image of a physical dental model, a 3D surface scan image of the physical dental model, a 3D surface scan image of a physical dental analog, or an intra- oral 3D surface scan image (this is considered product-by-process where only the resulting structure of a dental implant is required). With respect to claims 12 and 14, including a manufacturing machine (CAM, [0031]) and medical imaging device ([0028] operable to use and provide the data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 13 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Feng.
Feng discloses the device as previously described above, but fails to show including a rapid prototyping device to use the virtual model, instead including a CAM lathe. The Office takes official notice that use of a rapid prototyping device as an alternative to a CAM lathe is very well known in the dental art and therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Feng’s system by including a rapid prototyping device to speed up manufacturing and/or allow printing of test devices.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Appliant’s arguments with respect to the newly amended claim language have been addressed with additional recitations of Feng that show these structural limitations.
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 MATTHEW NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5898. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm EDT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen, 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 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772