Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/005,162

IMPLANT ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 11, 2023
Examiner
APONTE, MIRAYDA ARLENE
Art Unit
3772
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
4 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
419 granted / 660 resolved
-6.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
700
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.6%
+1.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 660 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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. 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 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarig et al. (US 20180338818 A1) in view of Bulard et al. (US 20050037319 A1). [AltContent: textbox (Female screw portion)][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Crown link)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Alveolar bone)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Fixture upper portion )][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fixture)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Abutment)] PNG media_image1.png 444 208 media_image1.png Greyscale [AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Top inclined surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Plurality of driver grooves)][AltContent: textbox (Center/longitudinal axis)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fastening depression)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Abutment)] PNG media_image2.png 250 366 media_image2.png Greyscale [AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Link coupling portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Crown link and abutment coaxially aligned)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Upper portion)][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Crown support portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Bottom inclined surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Bottom inclined surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Fastening depression)][AltContent: textbox (Top inclined surface)][AltContent: textbox (Crown link)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Abutment)] PNG media_image3.png 566 364 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 370 234 media_image4.png Greyscale [AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Top inclined surface)][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 4E zoomed portion)] PNG media_image5.png 200 342 media_image5.png Greyscale [AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Bottom inclined surface)][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 4P3 zoomed portion)] PNG media_image6.png 358 798 media_image6.png Greyscale [AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Top inclined surface)][AltContent: textbox (Bottom inclined surface)][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 4R2 zoomed portion)] PNG media_image7.png 248 474 media_image7.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Sarig et al. discloses an implant assembly including: an abutment (440a) provided with a fastening depression that is formed along a longitudinal axis of the abutment (440a) and a top inclined surface (464) that increases outward from a top end of the fastening depression, wherein the abutment (440a) is configured to be fixed to an upper portion of a fixture (90) that is fixed to an alveolar bone (127) (see annotated Fig. 3A, 4I2 and 4R2 above); and a crown link (480) provided with a bottom inclined surface (488) that comes into contact with the top inclined surface (464) of the abutment (440a) on a bottom thereof (see annotated Fig. 4R2 above), and also provided with a crown support portion/body (482) that supports a crown in an upper portion thereof (see annotated Fig. 4P3); wherein, when the crown link (480) is placed on the abutment (440a), the top inclined surface (464) and the bottom inclined surface (488) are coupled to each other (see annotated Fig. 4R2 above) such that the top inclined surface and the bottom inclined surface position the crown link relative to the abutment to achieve a coaxial alignment (see annotated Fig. 4E, 4P3 and 4R2 zoomed portions above and [0228] – where in Fig. 4E shows that surface 464 having an inclination with respect to the longitudinal axis of the fixture, Fig. 4P3 shows the bottom incline surface 488 of the crown link having an inclination with respect the longitudinal axis of the crown link, and in Fig. 4R2 and in [0228] shows and describes that both surfaces (464 and 488) matches the inclination in order to abut against each other; furthermore, due to the inclination of surface 488 matches the inclination of the surface 464, when the crown link is placed on the abutment it is automatically achieved a coaxial alignment without the intervention of the user), and a through hole (38) formed in the crown link (480) and the fastening depression of the abutment (440a) are coaxially aligned along the longitudinal axis (see annotated Fig. 4R2 above) wherein a link coupling portion formed at an entrance of the fastening depression (448) includes hexagonal portions corresponding to corner portion of a hexagon (see [0206]). However, Sarig et al. does not disclose that the fastening depression in addition of having the hexagonal portions, it is formed such that one circle partially passes outward through all sides of the hexagon, wherein each of the arc portions extends radially outward from a corresponding side of the hexagon to form a continuous curved surface at a same depth plane between adjacent hexagonal portions, the link coupling portion being configured to receive either a hexagonal lower-end protrusion or a cylindrical lower-end protrusion of the crown link. [AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Hexagonal portions)][AltContent: textbox (Arc portions)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fastening depression)] PNG media_image8.png 284 496 media_image8.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Link coupling portion / Anti-rotational mating chamber)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rotational mating chamber)][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 2a zoomed portion)] PNG media_image9.png 270 194 media_image9.png Greyscale [AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Distal peaks/edges of the hexagon)][AltContent: textbox (Imaginary lines between each corner of the hexagon)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Arc portions)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 2b zoomed portion)] PNG media_image10.png 444 284 media_image10.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Hexagonal Lower connecting portion)][AltContent: textbox (Cylindrical Lower connecting portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Link coupling portion)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Fastening depression)][AltContent: textbox (Fixture)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Abutment)][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image11.png 778 320 media_image11.png Greyscale PNG media_image12.png 686 286 media_image12.png Greyscale Bulard et al. teaches an implant assembly including an abutment (200) and a fixture (10) (see Fig. 7a and 8a above), where the fixture (10) includes at the coronal portion a fastening depression including a link coupling portion (90) at coronal the portion of the fastening depression, the link coupling portion (90) is configured for engaging a lower-end protrusion of the abutment (200) (see annotated Fig. 2a, 7a and 8a above). Said link coupling portion (90) includes hexagonal portions corresponding to corner portions of a hexagon and arc portions formed such that one circle partially passes outwardly through all sides of the hexagon (see annotated Fig. 2b and 2a & 2b zoomed portions above and [0051] – including an “anti-rotational mating chamber 90, a rotational mating chamber 87”; and the “anti-rotational mating chamber 90 occupies common space with a rotational mating chamber 87, but comprises the distal peaks 85 of the mating orifice 80 that extend outside the rotational mating chamber 87”; the overlapping of the anti-rotational mating chamber 90 and the rotational mating chamber 87 forms arcuate surfaces centrally located on the sides of the hexagon shown the annotated Fig. 2b above, see in space between the imaginary lines placed between each corner of the hexagon and the side surface forming a curved surface). The hexagonal portion provides accommodation for a hexagonal lower-end protrusion (260) of the abutment configured to form an anti-rotational mechanism, and the arc portion provides accommodation for a cylindrical lower-end protrusion (250) of another abutment configured to form a rotational mechanism (see annotated Fig. 2a and 2b above, and [0043] – “The internal cavity may comprise an entry end and a securing end. The entry end correlates with a mating orifice at a generally circular coronal face of the implant anchor; the securing end orients axial and opposite of the entry end. Between the entry end and securing end are an anti-rotational mating portion, a rotational mating portion, and internal threads. The anti-rotational mating portion may have an internal hexagonal configuration, mating with a number of associated implant components that interact with the implant anchor in different capacities “, and [0051]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fastening depression of Sarig, with the fastening depression including hexagonal portions and arc portion of Bulard, in order to provide a link coupling portion capable of engaging with any of a hexagonal lower-end protrusion and a cylindrical lower-end protrusion, depending on the kind of end protrusion the crown link has at the lower end of the body. Regarding claim 3, Sarig/Bulard discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1, and where Sarig et al. discloses a female screw portion (see annotated Fig. 3A) configured for screw coupling with a fastening screw (300) is formed on a lower portion of the fastening depression (see annotated Fig. 3A and 4R2 above), and a plurality of driver grooves (448) are formed in vertical directions through the female fan section (see annotated Fig. 4I2 above – where the hexagonal indexing portion is formed by vertical grooves). Regarding claim 4, Sarig/Bulard discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1, and where Sarig et al. discloses a crown is integrated with the crown support portion (482) of the crown link (480) (see [0005] – where the intention of his invention is to have a system for receiving a prothesis or a superstructure thereon). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 23 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1 amendment, the applicant argues that the added language in lines 10-11 in combination with the claimed subject matter is not found in the prior arts previously submitted in the Office action of 23 December 2025. The Office disagrees, as explained above in the rejection the claimed “top inclined surface and the bottom inclined surface position the crown link relative to the abutment to achieve a coaxial alignment” is found in the prior art of Sarig. Sarig discloses in [02289] that the bottom inclined surface of the crown link matches the inclination of the top inclined surface of the abutment. The Office understands that when Sarig uses the term “matches” it means that one surface follows the angle of the adjacent surface. Due to both surfaces have the relative same inclination and the radial distance of all the inclines surfaces at any given location are equidistance with the central axis, it is understood that when the crown link if placed on top of the abutment, it will naturally fall into the fastening depression coaxially aligned without the assistance of the user. Therefore, even when the prior art of Sarig not specifically discloses the analysis of how each component align with each other, the disclosure that the surfaces matches indicate that the angle of each surface follows the same inclination, in this way allowing the crown link to fall to the center of the fastening depression. Therefore, for at least the reason explained above, the Office understands that the added language is found in the prior art of Sarig, making the rejection proper. Regarding claim 1 amendment, the applicant argues that the added language in lines 16-18 in combination with the claimed subject matter is not found in the prior arts previously submitted in the Office action of 23 December 2025. The Office disagrees, as explained above in the rejection the claimed that “each of the arc portions extends radially outward from a corresponding side of the hexagon to from a continuous curved surface at a same depth plane betwe4en adjacent hexagonal portions” is found in the prior art of Bulard. Bulard discloses in par [0051] that the fastening depression includes the anti-rotational mating chamber 90 occupying a common space with the rotational mating chamber 87, with the exception of the corners 85 of the hexagonal portion of the anti-rotational mating chamber 90. The surfaces of the hexagon located between the corners 85 occupy the same space as the rotational mating chamber 87. By doing so, the common space is curved having an outward radius (see Fig. 2b zoomed portion above). Furthermore, the intended use of this configuration is to allow the fastening depression to be used with a hexagonal shape body or by a cylindrical shape body as shown in Fig. 7a and 8a above, in which is the same intended use as in the present application. Therefore, due to Bulard teaches the same configuration as claimed, it is understood that it would be obvious for a person skill in the art to use it in the abutment and crown link connection of Sarig as explained above on the rejection above, making the rejection proper. For all the reasons given above, it is understood that the present set of claims are not ready for allowance. 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 MIRAYDA ARLENE APONTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1933. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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. /MIRAYDA A APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 11, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 10, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 23, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594143
METHOD FOR TRACKING, PREDICTING, AND PROACTIVELY CORRECTING MALOCCLUSION AND RELATED ISSUES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588983
DENTAL IMPLANT WITH INDEXING SURFACES HAVING A FRICTION-REDUCING COATING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588984
Dental Apparatus and Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575911
DISTRACTOR, BONE SCREW FOR SAID DISTRACTOR, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAID DISTRACTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569318
Device For Heating A Dental Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+20.0%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 660 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