DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/3/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed 8/3/2026 has been entered. Currently, claims 1-7, 9, 10 and 13-18 are pending, claims 8, 11 and 12 are cancelled and claims 2, 6 and 7 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3-5, 9, 10 and 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kudo et al. (US 2017/0135910).
Please note that the limitations in the preamble or body of the claims of “for dental attachments” is an intended use limitation that is not dispositive of patentability.
With regard to claims 1, 4, 5, 9 and 13-18, Kudo et al. teach a self-adhesive dental composite resin that reads on applicants’ composition [0018]. The composite resin can comprise a photopolymerization initiator, a filler, an asymmetric acrylamide-methacrylic acid ester that may be N-methylacryloyloxyethyl acrylamide, which reads on applicants’ formula (1) and resin (A-2a), an acid group-containing (meth)acrylic polymerizable monomer that may be 10-(meth)acryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate, which reads on the applicants’ monomer (A-1), and a hydrophobic crosslinkable polymerizable monomer that may preferable be 2,2-bis(4-methacryloyloxypolyethoxyphenyl)propane having an average moles of added ethoxy of 2.6 or triethyleneglycol di(meth)acrylate [0032], [0033], [0036], [0037], [0048], [0049], [0060] and [0071]. The hydrophobic crosslinkable polymerizable monomer can be a combination of two or more monomers [0050].
The 10-(meth)acryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate can be present at 1 to 40 parts relative to 100 parts by weight of the total polymerizable monomers, which reads on the parts by mass of (A-1) relative to the mass of the polymerizable monomer (A) of applicants’ claims [0043]. The filler can be 50 to 90 weight % relative to the total weight of the composite resin, which reads on applicants’ 50 to 90 parts by mass in total 100 parts by mass of the composition [0084]. The filler in the examples is taught to have an average particle size of 2.2 or 2.4 microns [0140]-[0143]. Additionally, the filler could also include ultrafine particle filler having an average particle diameter of less than 0.1 microns to improve the paste handling properties, wherein the average particle diameter of the ultrafine particle filler is preferably from 1 to 50 nm [0085] and [0086]. The may be two or more photopolymerization initiators including a water-soluble acylphosphine oxide, which reads on applicants’ water-soluble photopolymerization initiator, and 2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyldiphenylphosphine oxide, which reads on applicants’ water insoluble photopolymerization initiator [0060]-[0063] and [0067]; however, Kudo et al. do not have a single example with these specific monomers, the photopolymerization initiators or a combination of both of the filler particles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made a composition with the combination of 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate, N-methylacryloyloxyethyl acrylamide, 2,2-bis(4-methacryloyloxypolyethoxyphenyl)propane having an average moles of added ethoxy of 2.6 and triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate. The results of combining these monomers would have been predictable one having ordinary skill as they are all specifically taught as monomers for forming the composite resin.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made a composition with the combination of a water-soluble acylphosphine oxide and 2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyldiphenylphosphine oxide. The results of combining these monomers would have been predictable one having ordinary skill as they are all specifically taught as photopolymerization initiators for forming the composite resin. It would also have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have combined them in any amount, including a mass ratio of 10:1 to 1:10, to form a composition having an excellent photocurability regardless of the light source used.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have combined the ultrafine particle filler having an average particle size of 1 to 50 nm with the exemplary filler particles having an average particle size of 2.2 or 2.4 microns. The results of such a combination would have been predictable to one having ordinary skill; further, the rationale to combine them is to improve the paste handling properties of the composite resin. This would read on applicants’ combination (II) in the claims.
With regard to claim 3, since all of the monomer, photopolymerization initiator and filler are combined together to make the composite resin, this reads on a one-pack composition as claimed [0165].
With regard to claim 10, since the composition rendered obvious above has the same monomers as preferentially claimed along with a filler in the same proportion as claimed, the composition of Kudo et al. will intrinsically possess the flexural modulus claimed absent objective evidence to the contrary.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/3/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue on page 9 that the reference does not teach a combination of water-soluble and water-insoluble photopolymerization initiators.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the reference suggests a combination of a water-soluble acylphosphine oxide and 2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyldiphenylphosphine oxide as set forth in the rejection above. The 2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyldiphenylphosphine oxide reads on applicants’ water-insoluble photopolymerization initiator, and therefore the prior art renders obvious a combination of water-soluble and water-insoluble photopolymerization initiators.
Applicants argue on pages 9-11 that there are unexpected results for the combination of water-soluble and water-insoluble photopolymerization initiators at least in Example 17 that provides evidence of secondary considerations.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that applicants’ claims are not commensurate in scope with the evidence provided for multiple reasons.
First, there is only one example with a combination of two specific photopolymerization initiator compounds, i.e. Li-TPO and CQ, in a single mass ratio of 0.3:0.2. This one example does not provide evidence over the full scope of compounds or mass ratios claimed.
Second, the unexpected results that applicants are relying upon is the bond strength/durability of the final product on uncut enamel. This evidence for the final product cannot provide unexpected results for the initial composition being claimed as the composition claims are not commensurate in scope with the final product.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERARD T HIGGINS whose telephone number is (571)270-3467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291. 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.
/Gerard Higgins/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights