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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 23, 2025 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the support having the shape of T must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. It is noted that the support 1019 is not shown as having the shape of a T.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The amendments to the specification received on 12/23/2025 are accepted and 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 1-3 and 5-11 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.
With respect to claim 1, the applicant claims “a dental overlay device” and the further claims “a dental overlay device and veneer combination”. It is unclear if the two different limitations are the same structure or different. It is noted that for examination purposes, they are being interpreted as the same, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed. It is noted the same issue applies to the same limitations in claims 10-11.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitation “placing adjacent and spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device and veneers positioned within the spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device and veneer combination onto a corresponding plurality of teeth of the patient” is unclear. It is unclear what structure is being claimed and placed on the teeth. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted providing a dental overlay device, the dental overlay device comprising a first support and a second support, wherein the first support and second support are spaced apart from each other and further a first veneer is positioned on the first support and a second veneer is positioned on the second support and then further placing the first support with the first veneer on a first tooth of the patient and the second support with the second veneer on a second tooth of the patient, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the applicant claims “”veneers positioned within the spaced apart supports” and further claims “a first veneer” and “a second veneer”. It is unclear if the claimed veneers positioned within the supports include the claimed first and second veneer or if the claimed first and second veneer are in addition to the veneers positioned within the spaced apart supports. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitations are being interpreted as the claimed veneers including the first and second veneer, however, the applicant should amend the claim to further clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitation including “where the placing further comprises positioned the first support onto a first tooth of the plurality of teeth and positioning the second support onto a second tooth of the plurality of teeth” is unclear in view of the previously claimed limitation “placing adjacent and spaced apart supports…onto a corresponding plurality of teeth” It is noted that the claimed first and second support are the claimed adjacent and spaced apart supports which are placed on corresponding teeth. Therefore, it is unclear if the applicant is claiming a broad limitation and a narrow limitation within the claimed or if the limitation is not further limiting and just repetitive. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as just being repetitive and the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed. In the alternative, if the applicant is trying to claim a broad limitation (corresponding plurality of teeth) followed by a narrower limitation (a first tooth and a second tooth), it is noted 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 a corresponding plurality of teeth, and the claim also recites a first tooth and a second tooth which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. 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.
With respect to claim 2, the claimed limitation “respective adjacent and spaced apart first and second supports” is unclear. It is unclear if the claimed first and second supports of claim 2 are the claimed first and second supports of the independent claim or different supports. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as the claimed first and second supports of the independent claim such that the claim is further limiting the veneers from being positioned within the supports to resting on the supports, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify.
Further respect to claim 2, it is unclear how the limitation of the supports extending from the base is further limiting that of the independent claim. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as not further limiting the limitation of the supports extending from the base through struts, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fares et al. (2018/0263726).
With respect to claim 1, Fares discloses a method for treating working teeth in a mouth of a patient, the method comprising placing adjacent and spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device and veneers positioned within the spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device and veneer combination onto corresponding plurality of teeth of the patient such that a first support of the spaced apart supports and a first veneer within the first support and a second support of the spaced apart supports and a second veneer within the second support of the dental overlay device and veneer combination are mounted onto the plurality of teeth (see annotated figures below, pars. 33, 134, 136-137, such that the supports are shaded and they are spaced apart from each other) and flossing between the first veneer and the second veneer with the dental overlay device and veneer combination positioned on the plurality of teeth, such that a dental floss extends between the first and second supports and the first and second veneers (pars. 131, 134, fig. 34B, annotated figure below), wherein the placing further comprises positioning the first support onto a first tooth of the plurality of teeth and positioning the second support on a second tooth of the plurality of teeth (see fig. 34B, annotated figure below), such that a first connecting strut extending between the first support and a base of the dental overlay device and a second connecting strut extending between the second support and the base of the dental overlay device do not extend across a buccal surface of the respective first tooth and the second tooth (see annotated figure below, such that the connecting struts portion of element 465 extending on the occlusal portion of the tooth to element 462, such that it does not extend across a buccal surface and it connects the first and second support with the base), and wherein the supports extend substantially parallel to the base (see annotated figure below showing portion of device that is the supports, such that they a are the portion of element 465 that is on the buccal portion of the teeth) and further figures 33a-34a which show the base and supports being substantially parallel to each other, such the support is on the buccal portion of the teeth and the base is on the lingual portion and those surfaces are substantially parallel to each other).
PNG
media_image1.png
257
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Fares further discloses wherein the first and the second veneers rest on respective adjacent and spaced apart first and second supports of the dental overlay device, each of the first and the second supports extending from a base of the dental overlay device (pars. 121-122, such that the digital model is the restored model including the shape of the veneers, such that the supports are shaped to match the veneers and hold them in place, see annotated figure below, pars. 33, 35, 128, 131, 134).
With respect to claim 3, Fares further discloses aligning the first veneer with a first tooth of the plurality of teeth by the placing step such that the first veneer covers at least a majority of a buccal side of the first tooth; and aligning the second veneer with a second tooth of the plurality of teeth by the placing step such that the second veneer covers at least a majority of a buccal side the second tooth (see figs 41-42A-B, 43A-43B, par. 137).
With respect to claim 5, Fares further discloses wherein a bonding agent is removed from between the first tooth and the second tooth by the step of flossing between the first tooth and the second tooth (pars. 131, 134, such that excess adhesive is removed by the flossing).
With respect to claim 7, Fares further discloses, wherein the flossing step further comprises while the first and second teeth and the first and second veneers are positioned within the respective first and second supports, passing the dental floss between the first and second teeth to remove excess cement between the first and second supports and between the first and second teeth (pars. 131, 134, such that the floss is inserted between the supports 465 and into the interproximal space between the first and second teeth, pars. 33, 134, 136-137, see annotated figure above, such that each individual tooth has an individual veneer).
With respect to claim 8, Fares further discloses wherein the first and the second supports extend from a base in a transverse direction orthogonal to mesial-distal directions (such that the mesial distal direction is front to back of the mouth, such that the support extends from the base in buccal lingual direction which is a transverse direction orthogonal to the mesial distal direction) within the mouth of the patient such that the floss is passed from a buccal side to a lingual side of a dental arch of the patient that includes the teeth on which the dental overlay device is placed (see annotated figure below, pars. 131, 134, such that the teeth are floss such that floss extends between the teeth in the interproximal spaces in a buccal to lingual direction).
With respect to claim 11, Fares further discloses wherein the dental overlay device and veneer combination is placed such that an inner surface of the dental overlay device remains releasably fixed to a plurality of teeth in the same position relative to the plurality of teeth upon application of pressure to the dental overlay device and veneer combination during the flossing step (see pars. 33, 131, 134-137).
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 5, 7-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fares et al. (2018/0263726) in view of Rudman (2018/0071057).
With respect to claim 1, Fares teaches a method for treating working teeth in a mouth of a patient, the method comprising placing adjacent supports of a dental overlay device and veneers positioned within the supports of a dental overlay device and veneer combination onto corresponding plurality of teeth of the patient such that a first support of the spaced apart supports and a first veneer within the first support and a second support of the spaced apart supports and a second veneer within the second support of the dental overlay device and veneer combination are mounted onto the plurality of teeth (see annotated figures below, pars. 33, 134, 136-137) and flossing between the first veneer and the second veneer with the dental overlay device and veneer combination positioned on the plurality of teeth, such that a dental floss extends between the first and second supports and the first and second veneers (pars. 131, 134, fig. 34B, annotated figure below), wherein the placing further comprises positioning the first support onto a first tooth of the plurality of teeth and positioning the second support on a second tooth of the plurality of teeth (see fig. 34B, annotated figure below), such that a first connecting strut extending between the first support and a base of the dental overlay device and a second connecting strut extending between the second support and the base of the dental overlay device do not extend across a buccal surface of the respective first tooth and the second tooth (see annotated figure below, such that the connecting struts portion of element 465 extending on the occlusal portion of the tooth to element 462, such that it does not extend across a buccal surface and it connects the first and second support with the base), and wherein the supports extend substantially parallel to the base (see annotated figure below indication the support and further figures 33a-34a which show the base and supports being substantially parallel to each other, such the support is on the buccal portion of the teeth and the base is on the lingual portion and those surfaces are substantially parallel to each other). Fares teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically the first and second support are spaced apart from each other.
PNG
media_image2.png
368
251
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Rudman teaches a method for treating working teeth in a mouth of a patient, the method comprising placing adjacent and spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device 4 and elements 5 positioned within the spaced apart supports of the dental overlay device and element combination onto a corresponding plurality of teeth of the patient, such that a first support of the space apart supports and a first element withing the first support and a second support of the spaced apparat supports and a second element within the second support of the dental overlay device and element combination are mounted onto the plurality of teeth (see figs. 1-2 and 12-13, such that the supports are the enlarged end of element 1 that is directly engaged with the element 5), wherein the placing further comprises positioning the first support onto a first tooth of the plurality of teeth and positioning the second the second support onto a second tooth of the plurality of teeth (see fig. 13). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the first and second supports taught by Fares with the spaced apart supports taught by Rudman in order to save material. Such that by not connecting the supports, material will be saved and to more easily remove the device from the mouth.
With respect to claim 2, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches wherein the first and the second veneers rest on respective adjacent and spaced apart first and second supports of the dental overlay device, each of the first and the second supports extending from a base of the dental overlay device (pars. 121-122, such that the digital model is the restored model including the shape of the veneers, such that the supports are shaped to match the veneers and hold them in place, see annotated figure below, pars. 33, 35, 128, 131, 134).
With respect to claim 3, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches aligning the first veneer with a first tooth of the plurality of teeth by the placing step such that the first veneer covers at least a majority of a buccal side of the first tooth; and aligning the second veneer with a second tooth of the plurality of teeth by the placing step such that the second veneer covers at least a majority of a buccal side the second tooth (see figs 41-42A-B, 43A-43B, par. 137).
With respect to claim 5, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches wherein a bonding agent is removed from between the first tooth and the second tooth by the step of flossing between the first tooth and the second tooth (pars. 131, 134, such that excess adhesive is removed by the flossing).
With respect to claim 7, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches, wherein the flossing step further comprises while the first and second teeth and the first and second veneers are positioned within the respective first and second supports, passing the dental floss between the first and second teeth to remove excess cement between the first and second supports and between the first and second teeth (pars. 131, 134, such that the floss is inserted between the supports 465 and into the interproximal space between the first and second teeth, pars. 33, 134, 136-137, see annotated figure above, such that each individual tooth has an individual veneer).
With respect to claim 8, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches wherein the first and the second supports extend from a base in a transverse direction orthogonal to mesial-distal directions (such that the mesial distal direction is front to back of the mouth, such that the support extends from the base in buccal lingual direction which is a transverse direction orthogonal to the mesial distal direction) within the mouth of the patient such that the floss is passed from a buccal side to a lingual side of a dental arch of the patient that includes the teeth on which the dental overlay device is placed (see annotated figure below, pars. 131, 134, such that the teeth are floss such that floss extends between the teeth in the interproximal spaces in a buccal to lingual direction).
With respect to claim 9, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches wherein one or both of the first and the second supports is in the shape of T (see annotated figure above which shows the shading representing the T shape).
With respect to claim 11, Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Fares further teaches wherein the dental overlay device and veneer combination is placed such that an inner surface of the dental overlay device remains releasably fixed to a plurality of teeth in the same position relative to the plurality of teeth upon application of pressure to the dental overlay device and veneer combination during the flossing step (see pars. 33, 131, 134-137).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fares et al. (2018/0263726) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rudman (2018/0071057).
Fares teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach wherein one or both of the first or second supports is in a shape of a letter “T”. Fares teaches a T-shaped first and second support, however, they are not spaced apart from each other (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
251
368
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Rudman teaches a method for treating working teeth in a mouth of a patient, the method comprising placing adjacent and spaced apart supports of a dental overlay device 4 and elements 5 positioned within the spaced apart supports of the dental overlay device and element combination onto a corresponding plurality of teeth of the patient, such that a first support of the space apart supports and a first element withing the first support and a second support of the spaced apparat supports and a second element within the second support of the dental overlay device and element combination are mounted onto the plurality of teeth (see figs. 1-2 and 12-13, such that the supports are the enlarged end of element 1 that is directly engaged with the element 5), wherein the placing further comprises positioning the first support onto a first tooth of the plurality of teeth and positioning the second the second support onto a second tooth of the plurality of teeth (see fig. 13). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the first and second supports taught by Fares with the spaced apart supports taught by Rudman in order to save material. Such that by not connecting the supports, material will be saved and to more easily remove the device from the mouth.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fares et al. (2018/0263726) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fischer et al. (2004/0214131).
Fares teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, including passing a tool between first and second supports of the dental overlay device (pars. 131, 137, such that a tool is used to clean and remove excess adhesive between the supports), however, does not specifically teach passing a probe between first and second supports of the dental overlay device.
Fischer teaches a method for treating working teeth in the mouth of a patient including using a provide to remove excess adhesive (see par. 56, fig. 7D). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the tool taught by Fares to be a probe as taught by Fischer in order to accurately remove the excess adhesive, such that the probe has a small sharp tip that will allow for precise removal. It is noted that the combination of references teaches the limitations are claimed such that the tool of Fares is passed between the supports, therefore, the tool of Fares is modified to be a probe and therefore the claimed limitation of passing a probe between the supports is taught.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fares et al. (2018/0263726) in view of Rudman (2018/0071057) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fischer et al. (2004/0214131).
Fares/Rudman teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, including Fares teaching passing a tool between first and second supports of the dental overlay device (pars. 131, 137, such that a tool is used to clean and remove excess adhesive between the supports), however, does not specifically teach passing a probe between first and second supports of the dental overlay device.
Fischer teaches a method for treating working teeth in the mouth of a patient including using a provide to remove excess adhesive (see par. 56, fig. 7D). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the tool taught by Fares/Rudman to be a probe as taught by Fischer in order to accurately remove the excess adhesive, such that the probe has a small sharp tip that will allow for precise removal. It is noted that the combination of references teaches the limitations are claimed such that the tool of Fares is passed between the supports, therefore, the tool of Fares is modified to be a probe and therefore the claimed limitation of passing a probe between the supports is taught.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed December 23, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that the office has not shown that Fares teaches all of the features recited in claim 1. However, as discussed above in detail, the prior art of Fares teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as amended. It is noted that the art was interpreted in a different way from the previous office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEIDI MARIE EIDE whose telephone number is (571)270-3081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-4:00.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 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 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.
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
3/5/2026