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 .
Priority
Examiner acknowledges that the instant application is a National Stage Application under 35 U.S.C. 371 with relation to PCT Application No. EP2021/074709, filed 09/08/2021, which claims foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) to Application No. FR2009099, filed 09/08/2020.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s communications filed on 5/29/2022 have been considered.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 10-12 that the claims integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and provide an inventive concept by reciting a specific, non-conventional computational architecture requiring separation of computational tasks, which improves the functioning of a computer vision system. Applicant further refers to ([0201][0210][0401][0408]) as describing a technical improvement regarding the functioning of a computer. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive. As claimed, the amended limitations, both individually and in combination, represent the mere use of generic computing components to facilitate the abstract idea, and do not recite a technical improvement. Similarly, the specification does not describe a technical improvement, as apparent one of ordinary skill in the art.
Note: Applicant’s Remarks appear to cite paragraphs of the pre-grant publication of the instant application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/19/2023). For purposes of clarity, Examiner has provided citations to paragraphs from said publication in this Response to Arguments section.
If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional function of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. Although the specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary sill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. (see MPEP 2106.05(a); MPEP 2106.04(d)(1)).
Applicant’s specification does not provide the requisite detail necessary such that one of ordinary skill in the art could recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. Applicant’s specification does not provide sufficient detail with respect to the claimed technology, and is specific only in its use in facilitating the abstract idea of recommending relevant dental products according to dental attributes. Furthermore, the specification as filed does not reveal to one of ordinary skill in the art that Applicant has provided an improvement to the claimed technology. Nor does the specification provide technical detail regarding an improvement to the functioning of the claimed neural networks, or another technical area. Applicant’s cited portions of the specification (see at least [0201][0210][0401][0408]) further describe image processing techniques, including segmentation and determination of dental attributes, but do not reflect a change or improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology as would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). It is further noted that the specification describes the claimed image processing algorithms as generic algorithms (see at least [0202] the segmentation methods are well known, [0211-0260] determining the dental attribute preferably uses artificial intelligence algorithms… [a list of generic convolutional neural networks is provided], [0399] the values can be determined by conventional image processing algorithms), further supporting that Applicant’s disclosure does not describe the invention such that one of ordinary skill in the art would ascertain an improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology. Furthermore, while the “segmentation” algorithm is described as generic, the act of “segmenting, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs…” falls within the claimed abstract idea. While the “valorization” algorithm is described in the specification as generic, the act of “determining the value of the dental attribute by submitting said depiction as input… to provide, as output, a value of said dental attribute” is additionally directed to the abstract idea. Accordingly, these limitations amount to mere implementation of the abstract idea using generic computing components, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, applying the abstract idea using generic neural networks does not amount to an improvement to technology
With regards to Applicant’s argument on page 11 that the claimed system alters how the computer processes the image by restricting the input of the valorization neural network strictly to the isolated dental organ depictions, this argument has been considered but is not persuasive. The portions of the specification, discussed above (see at least [0201][0210][0401][0408]) do not describe a technical improvement resulting from restricting the input of the valorization neural network (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). Rather, the specification describes the claimed “segmentation” and “valorization” neural networks as generic computing components (see at least [0202][0211][0399]). Furthermore, machine learning models receive data as input, and output results. The specification does not describe how restricting the input of the valorization network by using the output of the segmentation neural network is an improvement to technology. Furthermore, while Applicant argues an improvement to the computing process of analyzing the entire “raw” updated image, which includes background noise and irrelevant areas, the specification similarly does not describe technical implementation details behind this process, such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize an improvement to technology, in light of the amended claim. Accordingly, the claim does not amount to a specific combination of two distinct neural networks that improves the technological process of computer vision, but rather amounts to the use of known computing components in order to implement the abstract idea.
With regards to Applicant’s argument on pages 11-12 that the claimed invention solves a problem of accuracy or reliability in automated dental image analysis by improving how the computer executes the image analysis, this argument has been considered but is not persuasive. As discussed above, the specification does not provide sufficient technical detail behind the claimed image processing via neural networks, such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize an improvement to technology. Furthermore, the claimed neural networks are described in the specification as generic computing components (see at least [0202][0211][0399]) (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). Accordingly, the rejection has been maintained.
With regards to Applicant’s argument on page 12 that the claimed invention “goes beyond the commercial proposal”, this argument has been considered but is not persuasive. As discussed above, the amended claims remain directed to the abstract idea without integration into a practical application or providing an inventive concept, as the claims amount to mere implementation of the abstract idea of recommendation relevant dental products according to dental attributes (and therefore falling under the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas), using generic computing components. While Applicant argues that the claims Accordingly, the claims do not go beyond the “Certain Methods” grouping, and the rejection has been maintained.
With regards to Applicant’s argument on page 12 that the specific combination of ordered steps provides an inventive concept, as it is far more than well-understood, routine, and conventional activity, this argument has been considered but is not persuasive. As discussed above, the claims amount to mere implementation of the abstract idea in a generic computing environment, without effectuating a change or improvement to the claimed technology. Furthermore, the specification describes the claimed neural networks as generic computing components (See at least [0202][0211-0260][0399]) (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). Furthermore, the claims do not reflect a technical improvement resulting from the combination of limitations, but rather reflect steps of the abstract idea, performed using generic computing components. Accordingly, the claims are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, as they recite performing the abstract idea via the use of generic computing components.
Accordingly, amended claim 1 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, or provide an inventive concept.
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 12-13 that amended claim 1 overcomes currently cited Salah (US 2019/0026599 A1) in view of Lorenzi (US 11,108,844 B1) because the dental attribute of the present invention is not anticipated by the tooth attribute of Salah. This argument has been considered but is not persuasive. With regards to the amended claim 1, as well as Applicant’s remarks, it is noted that Applicant’s specification (see at least [0101]) defines “a ‘dental organ’ is an element inside the mouth, and particularly a tooth or a gum”, which further supports the broadest reasonable interpretation of a dental organ as a tooth (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). In other words, the broadest reasonable interpretation of two different dental organs selected from a tooth… [and] dental organs inside the mouth would be selecting from a tooth and a different tooth. In light of this interpretation, Salah (see at least [0012][0110][0172][0235]) discloses, for at least two separate teeth, the identification of tooth zones from the reference image for future attribute value determination, including determining (via a neural network) a probability relating to the presence, at a location of the image, of an analysis tooth zone, which reasonably reads on “segmenting by means of a ‘segmentation’ neural network, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs selected from a tooth, a gum, a tongue, dental organs inside the mouth, a lip and a perioral area on the updated image”. Examiner further notes that ([Figs. 17A-17C]) of Salah depicts the labeling of teeth within an updated image with tooth numbers, which are transferred to the updated tooth zones. It is further noted that Applicant’s specification defines a “dental attribute” as the value of an attribute relating to the dental situation of the target consumer (see at least [0177]), and accordingly the broadest reasonable interpretation of a dental attribute is any value of an attribute relating to the condition of the consumer’s dental arch (According to Applicant citing the PGPub of this application (US 2023/0334549 A1, published 10/10/2023), Examiner has similarly cited the PGPub for purposes of clarity). In light of this, as well as the Response to Arguments filed in the previous Non-Final Rejection (filed 3/10/2026), Salah (see at least [0110-0118]]) discloses the determination of tooth attribute values, which reasonably reads on the claimed dental attributes. Accordingly, Salah teaches the amended limitations of claim 1, and additionally discloses dental attributes.
As discussed above, the broadest interpretation of “two different dental organs selected from a tooth, a gum, a tongue, dental organs inside the mouth, a lip and a perioral area” includes a tooth and a different tooth, is taught by the disclosure of Salah, and accordingly the combination of Salah in view of Lorenzi has been relied upon in the 103 rejection of independent claim 1. It is further noted that Brown et al. (US 2021/0074061 A1, see Notice of References Cited) discloses the generation of an intraoral 3D model, including machine-learning based segmentation of mesh points into dental classes including tooth, gingiva, or moving tissue (tongue, fingers, etc,).
Accordingly, the rejection has been maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite an abstract idea. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Under Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test for Products and Processes, the claims must be directed to one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03. Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are directed towards a manufacture. Therefore, claims 1-7 and 9-18 are directed to one of the four statutory categories (Step 1: YES, regarding claims 1-7 and 9-18).
Under Step 2A of the MPEP, it is determined whether the claims are directed to a judicially recognized exception. See MPEP 2106.04. Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry.
Under Prong 1, it is determined whether the claim recites a judicial exception. In determining whether the claims are directed to a judicial exception, the claims are analyzed to evaluate whether the claims recite a judicial exception.
Taking Claim 1 as representative, claim 1 recites limitations that fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity groupings of abstract ideas, including:
a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer, said method comprising the following steps:
a) instructing the acquisition, at an acquisition instant of at least one image, called "updated image", at least partially depicting a dental arch of the target consumer; and
b) analyzing the updated image so as to determine a value for at least one dental attribute relating to the dental situation of the target consumer at the acquisition instant;
c) selecting, as a function of said value,
- at least one dental product, called "relevant dental product", from dental products;
d) presenting the target consumer with a response relating to said at least one relevant dental product; and/or
- delivering said at least one relevant dental product to the target consumer;
in step b), the dental attribute being:
- an appearance parameter for a gum, a tongue, one or more lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image;
- a parameter relating to the state of a gum, a tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth or the mouth depicted on the updated image;
- a parameter relating to the shape of a gum, the tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image;
said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products;
in step b), the following steps are carried out:
- segmenting, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs selected from a tooth, a gum, a tongue, dental organs inside the mouth, a lip and a perioral area on the updated image;
- determining the value of the dental attribute by submitting said depiction as input to provide, as output, a value of said dental attribute in response to the presentation, as input, of a representation of one of said dental organs.
Claim 1, as exemplary, recites certain methods of organizing human activity, such as performing commercial interactions. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). The MPEP defines the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping as including fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2). The abstract ideas recited in representative claim 1 are certain methods of organizing human activity because acquiring and analyzing an image to determine dental attributes of a target consumer, including appearance, state, and shape, and selecting and presenting a response to a dental product is a commercial or legal interaction because it is an advertising, marketing or sales activity, or business relations.
Accordingly, under Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Under Step 2A (prong 2), if it is determined that the claims recite a judicial exception, it is then necessary to evaluate whether the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of that exception (see MPEP 2106.04). As stated in the MPEP, when “an additional element merely recites the words ‘apply it (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea,” the judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application. In this case, representative claim 1 includes additional elements such as (additional elements are bolded):
A non-transitory computer medium storing computer-program instructions for executing a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer, said method comprising the following steps:
a) instructing the acquisition, at an acquisition instant and with an acquisition device of at least one image, called "updated image", at least partially depicting a dental arch of the target consumer; and
b) analyzing the updated image by a processing computer, so as to determine a value for at least one dental attribute relating to the dental situation of the target consumer at the acquisition instant;
c) selecting, by the processing computer, as a function of said value,
- at least one dental product, called "relevant dental product", from a database of dental products;
d) presenting the target consumer with a response relating to said at least one relevant dental product; and/or
- delivering said at least one relevant dental product to the target consumer;
in step b), the dental attribute being:
- an appearance parameter for a gum, a tongue, one or more lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image;
- a parameter relating to the state of a gum, a tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth or the mouth depicted on the updated image;
- a parameter relating to the shape of a gum, the tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image;
said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products;
in step b), the following steps are carried out:
- segmenting by means of a "segmentation" neural network, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs selected from a tooth, a gum, a tongue, dental organs inside the mouth, a lip and a perioral area on the updated image;
- determining the value of the dental attribute by submitting said depiction as input for a "valorization" neural network that is trained to provide, as output, a value of said dental attribute in response to the presentation, as input, of a representation of one of said dental organs.
These additional elements are described at a high level in Applicant’s specification without any meaningful detail about their structure or configuration. As such, these computer-related limitations are not found to be sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 1 specifying that the abstract idea is executed in a computer environment merely indicates a field of use in which to apply the abstract idea because this requirement merely limits the claims to the computer field, i.e., to execution on a generic computer. As such, under Prong Two of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, when considered both individually and as a whole, the limitations of claim 1 are not indicative of integration into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO).
Since claim 1 recites an abstract idea and fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, claim 1 is “directed to” an abstract idea (Step 2A: YES). Accordingly, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Next, under Step 2B, examiners should evaluate additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). In this case, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Returning to representative claim 1, taken individually or as a whole the additional elements of claim 1 amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer and/or no more than a general link to a technological environment. For the same reason these elements are not sufficient to provide an inventive concept. Therefore when considering the additional elements alone, and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claim, and thus the claim is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims 2-7 and 9-18, when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea. As for dependent claims 4-5, 7, 9-11, and 13-18, these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea noted in independent claim 1, and do not recite any additional elements other than what is disclosed in independent claim 1. Therefore, claims 4-5, 7, 9-11, and 13-18 are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
As for dependent claims 2, 3, 6 and 12, these claims recite limitations that further define the abstract idea noted in independent claim 1. Additionally, they recite the following additional limitations:
wherein step a) is at least partially carried out by means of a dedicated application loaded into the acquisition device, the acquisition device being:
- a mobile telephone; or
- a device comprising a mirror, a camera or an imaging device, and an acquisition computer;
a step in which the dedicated application is downloaded into the mobile telephone, with the downloading being triggered by reading a code printed on a dental product and/or on a panel arranged in an aisle in which dental products are arranged;
wherein the additional information defining a constraint specifies… a list of one or more technical feature(s) that a dental product must not include or must include;
wherein, in step c), a selection neural network is implemented in order to provide, as output, one or more relevant dental product(s) as a function of the value determined in step b) introduced at the input of said selection neural network.
The additional elements of a dedicated application loaded into the acquisition device, the acquisition device being: - a mobile telephone; or - a device comprising a mirror, a camera or an imaging device, and an acquisition computer; the dedicated application is downloaded into the mobile telephone, with the downloading being triggered; technical feature(s); a selection neural network are all recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than instructions to apply the judicial exception in a generic technological environment. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, under the Alice/Mayo test, claims 1-7 and 9-18 are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 1-2, 5-7, 9-12, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Salah (US 2019/0026599 A1), in view of previously cited Lorenzi (US 11,108,844 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Salah discloses A non-transitory computer medium storing computer-program instructions for executing a method, said method comprising the following steps ([0104]; [0459-0460]):
a) instructing the acquisition, at an acquisition instant and with an acquisition device of at least one image, called "updated image", at least partially depicting a dental arch of the target consumer ([0106] The step A) is intended for the production of an updated reference model modeling an arch of the patient; [0018][0107] creation of the model at an “updated” instant using a 3D scanner to create an image of the dental arch of the patient; [0121] The acquisition of the updated images is performed by means of an image acquisition apparatus, preferably chosen from a cellphone, a so-called “connected” camera, a so-called “smart” watch, a tablet or a personal computer, fixed or portable, comprising an image acquisition system such as a webcam or a camera); and
b) analyzing the updated image by a processing computer, so as to determine a value for at least one dental attribute relating to the dental situation of the target consumer at the acquisition instant ([0110] For each tooth, from the updated reference model, a model of said tooth, or “tooth model”, is defined; [0112] One or more tooth attributes are associated with the tooth models as a function of the teeth that they model; [0114] A tooth attribute value may be assigned to each tooth attribute of a particular tooth model; [0115] For example, the “tooth type” tooth attribute will have the value “incisor”, “canine” or “molar”; [0118] the deep learning device is trained with views of the historical tooth models of this library, then one or more views of the particular tooth model are analyzed with the trained deep learning device, so as to determine the tooth attribute value of said particular tooth model);
c) selecting, by the processing computer, as a function of said value, information ([0246] For example, the deep learning device may conclude that, “globally”, the dental situation is “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”, without determining the tooth potentially at the origin of the dissatisfaction; [0345][0349] The invention proposes a method for acquiring an image of a dental arch of a patient, said method comprising the following steps… c′) determination, for the analysis image, of a value for an image attribute, said value being a function of said tooth attribute value if a detailed analysis method according to the invention has been implemented in the preceding step; [0350] d′) optionally, comparison of said image attribute value with an instruction);
d) presenting the target consumer with a response relating to information ([0334] the orthodontist and/or the computer informs the patient, for example by sending him or her a message on his or her telephone. This message may in particular inform the patient of an unfavorable situation and urge him or her to make an appointment with the orthodontist; [0374] the acquisition method makes it possible to determine that the updated image has been “taken on the right” and compare this image attribute value with the instruction which had been given to the operator to take the updated image on the left. Since the attribute value of the updated image (image taken on the right) does not correspond to the instruction (acquire an updated image on the left), the acquisition apparatus may immediately alert the operator in order for him or her to modify the acquisition direction); and/or
- delivering information to the target consumer;
in step b), the dental attribute being ([0114] A tooth attribute value may be assigned to each tooth attribute of a particular tooth model):
- an appearance parameter for a gum, a tongue, one or more lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image ([0118] In a preferred embodiment, the shape of a particular tooth model is analyzed so as to define its tooth attribute value, for example its number… see [0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… a tooth appearance parameter, in particular a translucency index or a color parameter);
- a parameter relating to the state of a gum, a tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth or the mouth depicted on the updated image ([0115] For example, the “tooth type” tooth attribute will have the value “incisor”, “canine” or “molar” depending on whether the tooth model is that of an incisor, of a canine or of a molar, respectively… see [0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… a parameter relating to the condition of the tooth, for example “abraded”, “broken”, “decayed” or “fitted”);
- a parameter relating to the shape of a gum, the tongue, one or both lips, a perioral area, a tooth or a group of teeth depicted on the updated image ([0118] In a preferred embodiment, the shape of a particular tooth model is analyzed so as to define its tooth attribute value, for example its number… see [0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… a tooth shape parameter);
said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products;
in step b), the following steps are carried out:
- segmenting by means of a "segmentation" neural network, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs selected from a tooth, a gum, a tongue, dental organs inside the mouth, a lip and a perioral area on the updated image ([0110] for each tooth, from the updated reference model, a model of said tooth, or “tooth model”, is defined via “segmentation”; [0172] the reference image is a view of the updated reference model segmented into tooth models. The limits of the representation of each tooth model on the reference image, or “reference tooth zone”, may therefore be identified; [0235] through its training, the deep learning device is capable of analyzing the analysis image in order to determine a probability relating to the presence of a zone representing a tooth, or “tooth analysis zone”… see [0012] A first deep learning device, preferably a neural network, may in particular be implemented to assess a probability relating to the presence, at a location of said analysis image, of an analysis tooth zone);
- determining the value of the dental attribute by submitting said depiction as input for a "valorization" neural network that is trained to provide, as output, a value of said dental attribute in response to the presentation, as input, of a representation of one of said dental organs ([0114-0116] tooth attribute values, such as “tooth type” are automatically assigned to particular tooth models; [0174] In the step E), each updated tooth zone is assigned the tooth attribute value or values of the tooth model which corresponds to it… see [0013] A second deep learning device, preferably a neural network, may in particular be implemented to assess a probability relating to the type of tooth represented in an analysis tooth zone; [0118] tooth attribute values are determined via analysis of a particular tooth model, performed by a deep learning device, preferably a neural network; [0233-0237] training the deep learning device to determine probabilities relating to attribute values).
Salah discloses selecting, by the processing computer, as a function of said value, information, and presenting the target consumer with a response relating to information. However, Salah does not explicitly teach a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer; selecting at least one dental product, called "relevant dental product", from a database of dental products; wherein information is said at least one relevant dental product; and said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, teaches a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer ([Col 16 Ln 49-67] FIG. 6 illustrates an example display or user interface 600 for recommending one or more products (e.g., products 602p and 622p) based on the one or more personal attributes (e.g., 502 and 522) of individual 501… Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes));
selecting at least one dental product, called "relevant dental product", from a database of dental products ([Col 15 Ln 30-57] Such personal attributes may include, but are not limited to… an oral, e.g., tooth or teeth related need (e.g., plaque, coloring, or other oral issue); [Col 16 Ln 49-67] Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes)… see [Col 7 Ln 4-24] The data stored in the memories 106 and/or the database 104 may include all or part of any of the data or information described herein); and
wherein information is said at least one relevant dental product ([Col 15 Ln 30-57] Such personal attributes may include, but are not limited to… an oral, e.g., tooth or teeth related need (e.g., plaque, coloring, or other oral issue); [Col 16 Ln 49-67] Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes));
said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products ([Col 15 Ln 30-57] Such personal attributes may include, but are not limited to… an oral, e.g., tooth or teeth related need (e.g., plaque, coloring, or other oral issue); [Col 16 Ln 49-67] Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Salah, a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer, selecting at least one dental product, called "relevant dental product", from a database of dental products, and wherein information is said at least one relevant dental product, said at least one relevant dental product being selected from among toothpastes, toothbrushes, dental floss, chewing gums, interdental brushes, whitening kits, gum care products, products for preventing bad breath and oral lotions, lip restructuring or wrinkle reduction products, as taught by Lorenzi, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salah, to include the teachings of Lorenzi, in order to recommend one or more relevant products based on one or more personal attributes of an individual obtained via image analysis (Lorenzi, [Col 16 Ln 49-67]).
Regarding Claim 2, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah further discloses wherein step a) is at least partially carried out by means of a dedicated application loaded into the acquisition device, the acquisition device being ([0458] The invention relates also: [0459] to a computer program, and in particular a dedicated application for cellphones, comprising program code instructions for the execution of one or more steps of any method according to the invention):
a mobile telephone ([0121] The acquisition of the updated images is performed by means of an image acquisition apparatus, preferably chosen from a cellphone… comprising an image acquisition system such as a webcam or a camera); or
a device comprising a mirror, a camera or an imaging device, and an acquisition computer ([0121] The acquisition of the updated images is performed by means of an image acquisition apparatus, preferably chosen from a cellphone, a so-called “connected” camera, a so-called “smart” watch, a tablet or a personal computer, fixed or portable, comprising an image acquisition system such as a webcam or a camera).
Regarding Claim 5, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 16.
Salah further discloses wherein first and/or second additional information comprises additional information:
- defining a constraint or a preference to be imposed for the selection in step c); and/or
- defining a constraint or a preference to be imposed for the presentation and/or the delivery and/or the placing in contact in step c); and/or
- defining a dental objective to be achieved by the target consumer; and/or
- relating to the target consumer ([0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… an age for the patient).
Regarding Claim 6, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 5.
Salah further discloses wherein the additional information defining a constraint specifies:
- a maximum price, with the price of a dental product having to be below said maximum price so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- when the dental product comprises a consumable, a range for the amount of the consumable, within which range the amount of consumable of a dental product must be included so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a maximum period for delivering or providing a dental product so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a list of one or more ingredient(s) that a dental product must not include or must include so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a list of one or more technical feature(s) that a dental product must not include or must include so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a list of manufacturing countries where a dental product must be manufactured or must not be manufactured so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a list of manufacturers by which a dental product must be manufactured or must not be manufactured so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a list of brands that must include the brand of a dental product so that said dental product can be selected in step c);
- a maximum price, with the price for a service by a dental care professional having to be below said maximum price so that said dental care professional can be selected in step c);
- a maximum period for making an appointment with the dental care professional so that said dental care professional can be selected in step c);
- a list of one or more item(s) of equipment that a dental care professional must have available so that said dental care professional can be selected in step c);
- a list of one or more diploma(s) or qualification(s) that a dental care professional must hold so that said dental care professional can be selected in step c);
- a list of language(s) in which a dental care professional must be proficient so that said dental care professional can be selected in step c);
- criteria for presenting the response in step d);
- criteria for delivering the one or more relevant dental product(s) in step d);
- criteria for contacting the relevant dental care professional in step d); and/or
the dental objective is selected from among the following objectives: teeth whitening, reducing plaque, reducing tartar, reducing a soft tissue inflammation, improving breath, correcting/improving teeth alignment, improving the general appearance of the smile, reducing snoring and/or sleep apnea, and/or improving lip shape and/or improving the appearance of the perioral area; and/or
the additional information relating to the target consumer specifies:
- their age ([0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… an age for the patient); and/or
- their gender; and/or
- the one or more dental care professional(s) they have already consulted or they consult regularly; and/or
- whether or not they are wearing an orthodontic appliance ([0381] The attribute value of the analysis image may also be, for example, the “presence” or “absence” of a dental, preferably orthodontic, appliance); and/or
- if they are predisposed to certain pathologies; and/or
- if they have followed or if they follow or if they are contemplating following a particular orthodontic treatment ([0188] The initial reference model may in particular be generated at an initial instant preceding an active orthodontic treatment, for example less than 6 months, less than 3 months, or less than 1 month before the start of the treatment; [0189] The initial instant may alternatively be an instant at the end of active orthodontic treatment, for example less than 6 months, less than 3 months, or less than 1 month after the end of the treatment); and/or
- if they are currently undergoing dental treatment in order to achieve a dental objective and/or,
if they have already previously used the method within the context of said dental treatment, details concerning said dental treatment ([0335] The orthodontist may also compare the assembled model with assembled models received previously for the same patient. The analysis thereof advantageously makes it possible to assess the trend of the situation); and/or
- whether or not they are content with their smile, their breath or their current dental situation; and/or
- if they experience pain, and/or a measure of the perceived pain, and/or a location of the perceived pain; and/or
- if their teeth are sensitive to contact with heat and/or cold.
Regarding Claim 7, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 16.
Salah further discloses wherein, in step a), acquired first additional information is stored in said database ([0118] a library of historical tooth models is created, each historical tooth model having a value for the tooth attribute, as described hereinbelow (step a)), the deep learning device is trained with views of the historical tooth models of this library, then one or more views of the particular tooth model are analyzed with the trained deep learning device, so as to determine the tooth attribute value of said particular tooth model; [0279] In the step a), a historical library 20 (FIG. 18) is created comprising more than 1000, preferably more than 5000, preferably more than 10 000 historical tooth models 22. The greater the number of historical tooth models, the more accurate the assembled model., and/or
wherein second additional information is provided by one or more different additional information source(s) of the acquisition device.
Regarding Claim 9, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 5.
Salah further discloses wherein:
- a dental objective is to whiten the teeth, the dental organ is a tooth, the dental attribute is a shade, for example, a whiteness, of the dental organ, and the relevant dental product is a tooth whitening product; or
- the dental organ is a tooth ([0114] A tooth attribute value may be assigned to each tooth attribute of a particular tooth model); or
- a dental objective is to reduce soft tissue inflammation, the dental organ is the gum, the dental attribute is a color and/or a size of an inflamed area, and the relevant dental product is an anti-gingivitis product; or
- a dental objective is to improve breath, the dental organ is a tooth, the dental attribute is the presence of tartar, and/or the presence of dental plaque, and/or the presence of food debris, and the relevant dental product is an anti-tartar product and/or an oral lotion for preventing bad breath, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush; or
- a dental objective is to improve breath, the dental organ is the tongue, the dental attribute is a color of the dental organ, and the relevant dental product is an anti- tartar product or an oral lotion for preventing bad breath, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush; or
- a dental objective is to improve breath, the dental organ is the mouth, the dental attribute is an amount of saliva in the mouth, and the relevant dental product is an anti-tartar product or an oral lotion for preventing bad breath, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush; or
- a dental objective is to reduce whitish deposits, the dental organ is the mouth, the dental attribute is an amount of saliva, and the relevant dental product is an artificial saliva; or
- a dental objective is to improve the general appearance of the smile, the dental organ is a lip or the lips, the dental attribute is a shape and/or a thickness and/or a color of the lip, and the relevant dental product is a product for restructuring the lips; or
- a dental objective is to improve the general appearance of the smile, the dental organ is the perioral area, the dental attribute is a shape and/or a thickness and/or a color of bitterness folds, and/or a thickness and/or a color of nasogenian furrows, and/or a thickness and/or a color of sun wrinkles, and the relevant dental product is a wrinkle reduction product;
But does not explicitly disclose wherein: - the dental objective is to reduce dental plaque, the dental attribute is an amount and/or a size and/or a color of dental plaque, and the relevant dental product is an anti-tartar product, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein:
- the dental objective is to reduce dental plaque, the dental attribute is an amount and/or a size and/or a color of dental plaque, and the relevant dental product is an anti-tartar product, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush ([Col 15 Ln 30-57] Pixel data of image 500 (e.g., detailing one or more features of an individual, such as a mouth) may be used to… determine one or more personal attributes of the individual. Such personal attributes may include, but are not limited to… an oral, e.g., tooth or teeth related need (e.g., plaque, coloring, or other oral issue); [Col 16 Ln 39-48] the result or images as determined, or analyzed, may be displayed with, or be used to display (e.g., via display screen 201), one or more corresponding recommend products…. as determined from the pixel data of the personal attributes (e.g., personal attributes 502-522) of the individual may be displayed or otherwise recommended to the user or individual).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah, wherein the dental objective is to reduce dental plaque, the dental attribute is an amount and/or a size and/or a color of dental plaque, and the relevant dental product is an anti-tartar product, and/or a toothpaste and/or a toothbrush, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 10, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah further discloses wherein, in step c), a set of rules is applied to the value determined in step b), with said set of rules comprising at least one rule selected from among ([0287] On completion of the step b), an analysis image is obtained that is enriched with a description providing, for each analysis tooth zone, a tooth attribute value for at least one tooth attribute, for example a tooth number; [0288] In the step c), a search is carried out in the historical library, for each analysis tooth zone determined in the preceding step, for a historical tooth model exhibiting a maximal proximity with the analysis tooth zone):
- filtering rules suitable for retaining items of the database of items and/or for retaining dental care professionals from the database of dental care professionals, as a function of the value determined in step b) ([0293] Preferably, a historical tooth model is sought that has, for at least one tooth attribute, the same value as said analysis tooth zone. The tooth attribute may in particular relate to the tooth type or to the tooth number. In other words, the historical tooth models are filtered to examine in more detail only those which relate to the same type of tooth as the tooth represented on the analysis tooth zone); and
- weighting rules suitable for giving weights to the items of the database of items and/or to the dental care professionals of the database of dental care professionals, as a function of the value determined in step b) ([0289] The “proximity” is a measurement of one or more differences between the historical tooth model and the analysis tooth zone. These differences may include a difference in shape, but also other differences like a difference in translucency or in color. The maximal proximity may be searched for by… a weighted sum of these differences);
But does not explicitly disclose wherein items are dental products.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein items are dental products ([Col 16 Ln 49-67] Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah, wherein items are dental products, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 10.
Salah further discloses wherein the rules involve,
- said value determined in step b) ([0287] On completion of the step b), an analysis image is obtained that is enriched with a description providing, for each analysis tooth zone, a tooth attribute value for at least one tooth attribute, for example a tooth number; [0288] In the step c), a search is carried out in the historical library, for each analysis tooth zone determined in the preceding step, for a historical tooth model exhibiting a maximal proximity with the analysis tooth zone; and/or
- a constraint and/or a dental objective and/or a preference and/or a requirement of the target consumer and/or a specific feature of the target consumer and/or a feature of an event prior to step a), and/or a plurality of dental products and/or a plurality of dental care professionals and/or data independent of the target consumer.
Regarding Claim 12, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah further discloses wherein, in step c), a neural network is implemented in order to provide, as output, information as a function of the value determined in step b) ([0246] For example, the deep learning device may conclude that, “globally”, the dental situation is “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”, without determining the tooth potentially at the origin of the dissatisfaction; [0345][0349] The invention proposes a method for acquiring an image of a dental arch of a patient, said method comprising the following steps… c′) determination, for the analysis image, of a value for an image attribute, said value being a function of said tooth attribute value if a detailed analysis method according to the invention has been implemented in the preceding step; [0350] d′) optionally, comparison of said image attribute value with an instruction);
But does not explicitly disclose wherein a selection neural network provides one or more relevant dental product(s) as a function of information introduced at the input of said selection.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein a selection neural network provides one or more relevant dental product(s) as a function of information introduced at the input of said selection ([Col 16 Ln 49-67] the output or result of machine learning imaging model (e.g., of and/or WASM module as described herein) may be used to generate or identify recommendations for corresponding product(s) on based on image analysis (e.g., analysis of pixel data of image 500) of the one or more personal attributes (e.g., 502 and 522) of individual 501… see [Col 11 Ln 12-43] The machine learning program or algorithm may employ a neural network, which may be a convolutional neural network, a deep learning neural network).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah, wherein items are dental products, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 16, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah further discloses wherein step a), comprises the acquisition of first additional information ([0112] One or more tooth attributes are associated with the tooth models as a function of the teeth that they model; [0113] The tooth attribute is preferably chosen from… an age for the patient; [0114] A tooth attribute value may be assigned to each tooth attribute of a particular tooth model); and
step c) the selection is performed as a function of said value, and of said first additional information ([0246] For example, the deep learning device may conclude that, “globally”, the dental situation is “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”, without determining the tooth potentially at the origin of the dissatisfaction; [0345][0349] The invention proposes a method for acquiring an image of a dental arch of a patient, said method comprising the following steps… c′) determination, for the analysis image, of a value for an image attribute, said value being a function of said tooth attribute value if a detailed analysis method according to the invention has been implemented in the preceding step; [0350] d′) optionally, comparison of said image attribute value with an instruction).
Regarding Claim 17, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 16.
Salah further discloses wherein at step c) the selection is further performed as a function of second additional information that is stored, prior to step a), in a database ([0118] a library of historical tooth models is created, each historical tooth model having a value for the tooth attribute, as described hereinbelow (step a)), the deep learning device is trained with views of the historical tooth models of this library, then one or more views of the particular tooth model are analyzed with the trained deep learning device, so as to determine the tooth attribute value of said particular tooth model; [0264] c) for each analysis tooth zone determined in the preceding step, search, in the historical library, for a historical tooth model exhibiting a maximum proximity with the analysis image or with the analysis tooth zone, or “optimal tooth model”; [0283] The historical library therefore contains historical tooth models and associated attribute values which facilitate the search in the step c)).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salah in view of Lorenzi, and further in view of previously cited Mueller (US 2020/0394699 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 2.
Salah further discloses: comprising, before step a), a step in which the dedicated application is downloaded into the mobile telephone ([0438] Such a reminder may be sent by the orthodontic practice or laboratory or by the dentist or by the dedicated mobile application of the patient; [0458] The invention relates also: [0459] to a computer program, and in particular a dedicated application for cellphones, comprising program code instructions for the execution of one or more steps of any method according to the invention, when said program is run by a computer); or
- comprising, in step a), the detection of the target consumer in front of the mirror and the acquisition of the updated image when the target consumer is detected in front of the mirror;
But does not explicitly disclose with the downloading being triggered by reading a code printed on a dental product and/or on a panel arranged in an aisle in which dental products are arranged.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein a dental product is a product ([Col 16 Ln 49-67] Such recommendations may include products such as toothpaste (e.g., for oral attributes)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Salah, wherein a dental product is a product, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Mueller, on the other hand, discloses with the downloading being triggered by reading a code printed on a product ([0029] A QR or other code is provided to the article of clothing. The QR or other code is scannable by a smart device (e.g., a smartphone, tablet, or the like) or other electronic device (e.g., a computer), causing the smart device to access a webpage or other structured information display; [0066] The reader 908 may scan a QR code on an article of clothing, for instance, and the reader interface 910 may help decode it, revealing a URL or other information that instructs the native OS 912 to start up the browser module 914 (or the standalone application) based on the link information and/or
on a panel arranged in an aisle in which products are arranged.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah in view of Lorenzi, with the downloading being triggered by reading a code printed on a product and/or on a panel arranged in an aisle in which products are arranged, as taught by Mueller, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salah in view of Lorenzi, to include the teachings of Mueller, in order to provide dynamically-generated and organized content relevant to the article in which a QR code is printed on (Mueller, [0007]), as well as easily convey a broad scope of information about an article directly from that article without having to include large and potentially irritating tags or labels (Mueller, [0008]).
Regarding Claim 4, Salah in view of Lorenzi and Mueller teach the limitations of claim 3.
Salah further discloses wherein, in step a), the dedicated application analyzes the content of a preview image ([0130] For each updated image, a set of virtual acquisition conditions approximating the real acquisition conditions upon the acquisition of said updated image is preferably determined… the position of the image acquisition apparatus is estimated in relation to the teeth at the moment when it took the updated image (position of the acquisition apparatus in space and orientation of this apparatus)) and
guides the positioning of the target consumer as a function of the result of said analysis ([0131] To perform this rough assessment, one or more heuristic rules are preferably used. For example, preferably, virtual acquisition conditions likely to be tested in subsequent operations, the conditions which correspond to a position of the image acquisition apparatus behind the teeth or at a distance from the teeth greater than 1 m, are excluded; [0342] conditions which would correspond to a position of the acquisition apparatus at a distance from the teeth greater than 1 meter are excluded from the search).
Claims 13, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salah in view of Lorenzi, and further in view of previously cited Johnson (US 2020/0402649 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah further discloses wherein in step d), performing an action as a function of the value determined in step c) ([0246] For example, the deep learning device may conclude that, “globally”, the dental situation is “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”, without determining the tooth potentially at the origin of the dissatisfaction; [0334] the orthodontist and/or the computer informs the patient, for example by sending him or her a message on his or her telephone. This message may in particular inform the patient of an unfavorable situation and urge him or her to make an appointment with the orthodontist);
But does not explicitly disclose wherein, at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, at least one dental care professional, called "relevant dental care professional", is selected from a database of dental care professionals and in step d), the target consumer and a dental care professional are placed in contact.
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein, at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, an additional product is selected ([Col 17 Ln 1-12] user interface 600 comprises a list 601 of recommended products as determined by image analysis of image 500 and on the one or more personal attributes (e.g., 502 and 522) of individual 501; [Col 13-22] list 601 includes a second recommendation 602 for personal attribute 522).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah, wherein, at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, an additional product is selected, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Johnson, on the other hand, discloses wherein at least one dental care professional, called “relevant dental care professional”, is selected from a database of dental care professionals ([0029] area providers 400 are selected from a directory within the platform, and the prospective patient information and digital smile design preview is transmitted to those providers 400 per patient preference for case approval. The providers are notified of a potential new case for review via the platform, and once case acceptance is achieved 8B the first in-person appointment is scheduled between patient 200 and preferred, accepting provider 500) and
in step d), the target consumer and a dental care professional are placed in contact ([0030] With the digital smile design completed and treatment preview approved by patient and selected provider, the dental laboratory can prepare 8C initial dental assets for review by the provider and ship these assets to the provider for a try-in at the initial meeting; [0031] The initial patient appointment now allows for the provider to directly review the digital images with the patient, complete the necessary clinical examination and direct diagnostics followed by a physical smile try-in using the asset(s) produced by the platform).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah in view of Lorenzi, wherein at least one dental care professional, called “relevant dental care professional”, is selected from a database of dental care professionals and in step d), the target consumer and a dental care professional are placed in contact, as taught by Johnson, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salah in view of Lorenzi, to include the teachings of Johnson, in order to facilitate access to digital prosthetic smile design through a digital platform that defines patient expectations, establishes patient-provider relationships for the efficient completion of dental procedures to achieve treatment goals (Johnson, [0003]).
Regarding Claim 15, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah wherein the acquisition in step a) and/or the presentation in step d), is/are carried out ([0121] The acquisition of the updated images is performed by means of an image acquisition apparatus, preferably chosen from a cellphone, a so-called “connected” camera, a so-called “smart” watch, a tablet or a personal computer, fixed or portable, comprising an image acquisition system such as a webcam or a camera);
But does not explicitly disclose wherein the acquisition is carried out at the home target consumer or in a store or a pharmacy in which said dental products are offered for sale or in which teeth whitening can be carried out.
Johnson, on the other hand, discloses wherein the acquisition is carried out at the home target consumer or in a store or a pharmacy in which said dental products are offered for sale or in which teeth whitening can be carried out ([0026] The user interface for the scheduling system requires a patient to provide either an image capture of the patient's face and teeth or an uploaded image to complete the reservation of the appointment in the system; [0028] The scheduling system allows the patient to include additional media, such as videos of the face, scans or images from home impression kits).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah in view of Lorenzi, wherein the acquisition is carried out at the home target consumer or in a store or a pharmacy in which said dental products are offered for sale or in which teeth whitening can be carried out, as taught by Johnson, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 13.
Regarding Claim 18, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah does not explicitly disclose wherein at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, at least one dental care professional, called "relevant dental care professional", is selected from a database of dental care professionals and step d) comprises the presentation of the target consumer with a response relating to said at least one relevant dental product and to said at least one relevant dental care professional; and/or - delivering said at least one relevant dental product to the target consumer; and/or - placing the target consumer in contact with a dental care professional selected in step c).
Lorenzi, on the other hand, discloses wherein at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, an additional product is selected ([Col 17 Ln 1-12] user interface 600 comprises a list 601 of recommended products as determined by image analysis of image 500 and on the one or more personal attributes (e.g., 502 and 522) of individual 501; [Col 13-22] list 601 includes a second recommendation 602 for personal attribute 522).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah, wherein at step c), in addition to the at least one dental product, an additional product is selected, as taught by Lorenzi, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Johnson, on the other hand, discloses wherein at least one dental care professional, called “relevant dental care professional”, is selected from a database of dental care professionals ([0029] area providers 400 are selected from a directory within the platform, and the prospective patient information and digital smile design preview is transmitted to those providers 400 per patient preference for case approval. The providers are notified of a potential new case for review via the platform, and once case acceptance is achieved 8B the first in-person appointment is scheduled between patient 200 and preferred, accepting provider 500) and
step d) comprises the presentation of the target consumer with a response relating to said at least one relevant dental product and to said at least one relevant dental care professional; and/or
- delivering said at least one relevant dental product to the target consumer; and/or
- placing the target consumer in contact with a dental care professional selected in step c) ([0030] With the digital smile design completed and treatment preview approved by patient and selected provider, the dental laboratory can prepare 8C initial dental assets for review by the provider and ship these assets to the provider for a try-in at the initial meeting; [0031] The initial patient appointment now allows for the provider to directly review the digital images with the patient, complete the necessary clinical examination and direct diagnostics followed by a physical smile try-in using the asset(s) produced by the platform).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the medium, as taught by Salah in view of Lorenzi, wherein at least one dental care professional, called “relevant dental care professional”, is selected from a database of dental care professionals and step d) comprises the presentation of the target consumer with a response relating to said at least one relevant dental product and to said at least one relevant dental care professional; and/or - delivering said at least one relevant dental product to the target consumer; and/or - placing the target consumer in contact with a dental care professional selected in step c), as taught by Johnson, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 13.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salah in view of Lorenzi, and further in view of previously cited Welss (US 2020/0176099 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Salah in view of Lorenzi teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Salah does not explicitly disclose wherein the database of dental products includes records for dental products that are not exclusively intended to improve a dental situation.
Welss, on the other hand, discloses wherein the database of dental products includes records for dental products that are not exclusively intended to improve a dental situation ([0152] at least one suitable body treatment product (for example, a body treatment product of the care or decorative cosmetics) and/or at least one care indication may be associated with each of the plurality of body area conditions; [0153] literature data may be the basis of assessing suitability of a body treatment product and/or a care instruction in caring for skin, hair or teeth having a given body area condition … see [0067] a database that includes a plurality of body area conditions and a plurality of associated products, wherein each body area condition… is associated with at least one suitable body treatment; [0149] a plaque settlement degree of teeth, a tooth color…).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Salah in view of Lorenzi, wherein at least one dental care professional, called “relevant dental care professional”, is selected from a database of dental care professionals and in step d), the target consumer and a dental care professional are placed in contact, as taught by Welss, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salah in view of Lorenzi, to include the teachings of Welss, in order to provide a suitable product depending on a current condition of a body area, including cosmetic products (Welss, [0003][0014]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S Patent Application No. 2021/0074061 A1 to Brown et al. – Generating an intraoral 3D model, including machine learning-based segmentation of labeled mesh points into dental classes including tooth, gingiva, or moving tissue (tongue, fingers, etc.).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZACHARY R DONAHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-5850. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-5p.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
/ZACHARY RYAN DONAHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3689
/MARISSA THEIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3689
Prosecution Insights