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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/02/2026 has been entered.
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 1/20/2022 have been considered.
Claims 1-7 and 9-18 have been amended.
Claim 8 has been canceled.
Claims 1-7 and 9-18 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the objection of claims 1-18 have been considered and are persuasive.
Examiner notes that the application papers containing the most recent Claims and Applicant’s Remarks, filed 02/02/2026, are presented in a form having sufficient clarity and contrast between the paper and the writing thereon, and the writing thereon does permit the direct reproduction of readily legible copies. It is further noted that the substitute papers for the Application papers filed 08/06/2025 have been received and are acknowledged. The objection has been withdrawn.
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 that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea (Remarks Page 11 and 12). This argument has been considered and is not persuasive. The MPEP enumerates groupings of abstract ideas, thereby synthesizing the holdings of various court decisions to facilitate examination. See MPEP 2106.04. Among the enumerated groupings is the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping, which includes activity that falls within the enumerated sub-grouping of commercial or legal interactions, including subject matter relating to agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. Aside from the claimed additional elements, including a non-transitory computer medium, an acquisition device, a processing computer, a “segmentation” neural network, and a “valorization” neural network, which are not analyzed under Step 2A, Prong 1, the claims, as emphasized in Step 2A, Prong 1 of the 101 rejection, below, recite limitations including a method for selecting at least one dental product for a target consumer; instructing the acquisition… of at least one image, called “updated image”, at least partially depicting a dental art of the target consumer, 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, selecting, as a function of said value, at least one dental product, called “relevant dental product”, from a database of dental products, and 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. These limitations fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas, in that they recite commercial interactions and/or marketing/sales activities. Applicant’s specification (see at least Spec [0001-0004]) discloses that an aim of the claimed invention is to allow consumers to select a dental product that is best suited to their dental situation, particularly in order to maintain oral hygiene without dental or orthodontic treatment, indicating that the claims recite collection and analysis of data for the purpose of providing appropriate dental products to a consumer. Accordingly, the independent claims recite an abstract idea.
Applicant argues that the claims provide a technical improvement by “solv[ing] a complex problem in the field of computer vision and image processing,” by “requir[ing] specific processing by a neural network that goes beyond simple human commercial practice,” and “enabl[ing] an objective and reproducible assessment of the dental situation” (Remarks Pages 11 and 12). This argument has been considered and is not persuasive. The specification should be evaluated to determine if the disclosure provides sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. MPEP 2106.04(d)(1). The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art, and conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. Applicant’s specification provides no explanation of an improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology. For example, the specification (see at least [0208-0215]) states that the neural network learns to determine a description for a photo that is has been presented with as input, as well as identify the tooth areas on a photo that it is presented with as input, and furthermore that the neural network may be trained to determine values of dental attributes (see at least [0269-0273]), these are not indicative of technical improvements, and furthermore do not provide any detail regarding how the claimed invention is providing any improvement to the functioning of the computer or other technology, thereby making the statements of improvement conclusory. Accordingly, the claimed additional elements, including a non-transitory computer medium, an acquisition device, a processing computer, a “segmentation” neural network, and a “valorization” neural network, merely amount to implementing the abstract idea of recommending dental products according to dental attributes in a computing environment, without technical improvement.
With regards to Applicant’s arguments that the claimed invention provides improvements such as “select[ing] a specific toothpaste or toothbrush… [which] helps improve oral health,” (Remarks Page 12), these arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Improving oral health by selecting a specific toothpaste or toothbrush based on analysis of a dental situation is not a technical improvement. The claimed invention, while arguably resulting in more appropriate recommendations for dental products such as toothpaste and toothbrushes, is not providing any improvement to another technology or technical field, as discussed above. For example, there is no improvement to the claimed non-transitory computer medium, acquisition device, a processing computer, or neural networks. The claimed invention utilizes known computing components to improve how dental product recommendations are provided to a user according to a dental situation. As such, the claims do not recite technical improvements.
With regards to Applicant’s arguments that “the use of a computer, and particularly the neural network, is essential here to process the complexity of the image, which makes the invention non-abstract” (Remarks Page 12), these arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Limitations that the courts have identified as insufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application includes additional elements that amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. MPEP 2106.04(d). As discussed above, the specification does not describe or explain an improvement to the functioning of any of the claimed additional elements, and the claimed invention amounts to mere implementation of the abstract idea in a computing environment. For example, the specification does not describe an improvement to the claimed neural networks. Accordingly, the claimed do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
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 that the claims, as amended, overcome the currently cited prior art because “as explained in the previous response, Salah does not disclose the value for at least one dental attribute, but for a ‘tooth attribute’ which is different,” and “[the claimed] ‘dental attribute’ is determined after the segmentation of at least two different dental organs (lips, gums, teeth…, etc.)… the ‘tooth attribute’ of Salah is related to teeth” (Remarks Pages 14 and 15). This argument has been considered and is not persuasive. In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (dental attribute being determined after the segmentation of at least two different dental organs) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It appears as though Applicant does not consider each tooth (or tooth zone) considered in Salah to be a separate dental organ. If Applicant is claiming that “at least two different dental organs” refer to something more specific such as requiring at least one of those organs be from the lips, gums, or tongue, Examiner suggests amending to include these limitations to overcome the cited references. As amended, independent claim 1 states that the dental attribute may be “an appearance parameter for… a tooth depicted on the updated image; a parameter relating to the state of… a tooth depicted on the updated image; a parameter relating to the shape of a tooth depicted on the updated image.” As amended, the broadest reasonable interpretation of ‘a dental attribute,’ would be attributes relating to the appearance, state, and shape of a tooth as depicted in the updated image. Salah discloses that a number of tooth attributes are determined from the updated model (see at least Salah [0113-0118]), including a tooth appearance parameter such as translucency or color, a condition of the tooth, such as “abraded”, “broken”, etc., and a tooth shape parameter. Accordingly, Salah teaches the claimed dental attributes. The limitation claiming “dental” attributes does not explicitly exclude a “tooth” attribute, particularly in light of the previously recited limitations regarding parameters of the dental attributes. Nothing in the claim excludes the tooth attributes of Salah from teaching the dental attributes, as claimed.
With regards to Applicant’s arguments regarding “the technical problem to be solved” (see Remarks Pages 14-15), these arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. USPTO practice identifies claims as nonobvious when 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. MPEP 2141. Accordingly, under guidance set forth by the MPEP, “the technical problem to be solved” has no indication on the determination of obviousness regarding the claims. See the Response to 101 Arguments section, above, for analysis as to why the amended claims do not represent a technical improvement.
Applicant further argues “Salah does not disclose a segmentation neural network to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs on the updated image and even less in order to determine the value of the dental attribute” (Remarks Page 15). This argument has been considered and is not persuasive. Salah has been further relied upon to teach segmenting by means of a “segmentation” neural network, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs on the updated image, at (Salah, [0012][0110][0172][0235]), describing the segmentation of an updated reference model and reference image into individual tooth models, where the limits of each tooth model represent a “tooth zone” for the tooth model. This portion of Salah further discloses that a first deep learning device (neural network) performs the assessment of probabilities relating to the presence of tooth zones in analysis images. It is further noted that the claimed “segmentation” neural network is not described as performing the determination of dental attribute values – the claimed “valorization” neural network is claimed as performing this function. With this in mind, Salah has been further relied upon to teach 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, at (Salah, [0013][0114-0116][0118][0174]), disclosing that a second deep learning device assesses probabilities relating to the type of tooth represented in a tooth analysis zone, where “tooth type” is an tooth attribute value. It can be seen from the cited portions of Salah that the segmentation and determination of tooth zones for tooth models is performed via the first deep learning device (neural network), and the assignment of tooth attribute values (such as type) to corresponding tooth models is performed via the second deep learning device (neural network). Accordingly, Salah teaches a first deep learning device and a second deep learning device in the form of neural networks, which perform segmentation/determination of tooth zones and assignment of tooth attribute values, such as type, respectively.
Applicant further argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been prompted to combine Salah with the teachings of Lorenzi because “Lorenzi does not disclose any ‘dental attributes’”, and “the aim of Lorenzi related more to a secure system and method for interacting with individuals via a web environment” (Remarks Pages 15 and 16). This argument has been considered and is not persuasive. If a rejection is based on a combination of references, a reply limited to arguing what a subset of the applied references teaches or fails to teach, or that does not address the combined teaching of the references, will not be persuasive. MPEP 2145. Salah has been relied upon, in combination with the teachings of Lorenzi, to teach the limitations of amended clam 1. It is further noted that, while Lorenzi has not been relied upon to teach dental attributes, Salah has been relied upon to teach such dental attributes, as discussed in the above paragraphs.
With regards to Applicant’s argument that the combination of Salah and Lorenzi is not an obvious path for a person of ordinary skill in the art because these references target different aims and purposes (Remarks Page 16), this argument has been considered and is not persuasive. A reference is analogous art to the claimed invention if: (1) the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (even if it addresses a different problem); or (2) the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is no in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention). MPEP 2141.01(a). Salah is directed to image analysis regarding a dental arch of a patient via a deep learning neural network (see at least Salah [0005-0007]). Similarly, Lorenzi is directed to an artificial intelligence based imaging method comprising recommending one or more products, such as toothpaste, according to oral attributes of a user, including teeth (see at least Lorenzi [Col 15 Ln 30-57][Col 16 Ln 24-67]). Accordingly, Salah and Lorenzi are directed to the same field of endeavor, specifically, to image analysis.
Claim Interpretation
Any step indicated as being optionally performed or steps that are taken after the optionally performed steps that require the performance of the optionally performed steps are contingent limitations that are not within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed method (MPEP 2111.04, “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.”).
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 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, so as to isolate the depiction of at least two different dental organs 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 the abstract idea of recommending relevant dental products according to dental attributes. These recited limitations fall within the "Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities" Grouping of abstract ideas as it relates to commercial interactions or sales activities or behaviors. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.04.
Accordingly, under Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Under Prong 2, it is determined whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception.
Claim 1 recites additional elements beyond the judicial exception(s), including a non-transitory computer medium storing computer-program instructions for executing; an acquisition device; a processing computer; segmenting by means of a “segmentation” neural network; and input for a “valorization” neural network that is trained.
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 of recommending relevant dental products according to dental attributes 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 is 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, the instant claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above, the additional elements of a non-transitory computer medium storing computer-program instructions for executing; an acquisition device; a processing computer; segmenting by means of a “segmentation” neural network; and input for a “valorization” neural network that is trained amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. 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 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 printer on a dental product and/or on a panel arranged in an aisle in which dental products are arranged; a list of one or more technical feature(s); and 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);
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 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);
But does not explicitly disclose 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 (Lorenzi, [Col 16 Ln 49-67]).
Regarding Claim 2, Salah and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, as taught by Salah and 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 and 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, 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, 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 system, as taught by Salah and 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 and 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, as taught by Salah and 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 system, 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 system, as taught by Salah and 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 and Lorenzi teach 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 and 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 and 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
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