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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the remarks filed on 02/16/2026.
The amendment filed 02/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7 and 9-22 remain pending in the application, and claim 8 has been canceled.
The claim objections have been withdrawn in light of claim amendments.
The 112(a) and 112(b) rejections has been withdrawn in light of claim amendments and cancelled claim 8.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7-10, 15-17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al. (US 20100322490 A1, hereinafter "Pan") in view of Cheng et al. (US 20200022582 A1, hereinafter “Cheng”).
Regarding claim 1, Pan teaches an oral cavity detection method, wherein the oral cavity detection method comprises:
acquiring an ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (fluorescence image is generated under excitation light in the ultraviolet-blue range [0121]; obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025])
determining a first region comprising a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region based on the ultraviolet light image (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0025], [0071]-[0072] and [0078] further disclose identifying tooth regions from the UV/fluorescent images), wherein the determining a first region is performed by image processing of the ultraviolet light image (image processing to determine tooth regions disclosed in [0072]-[0078]);
acquiring a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (reflectance image is generated using white or single color light [0121] obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025]; the image captured using white/single colored white is the non-ultraviolet image as claimed);
acquiring from the non-ultraviolet light image a first intermediate image, wherein the first intermediate image only comprises an image region that corresponds to the first region (FIG. 3A shows one embodiment of step 110 of generating a digital image of a tooth, comprising steps of obtaining a fluorescence image, obtaining a reflectance image, and combining image data for the fluorescence and reflectance images to generate an image such as a FIRE image [0063]), wherein the acquiring the first intermediate image is performed by image processing of the non-ultraviolet light image (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0075]; extracting a lesion area from sound tooth regions by identifying tooth regions [0025]; Since some image processing work is done on a certain channel of a color image, for convenience, the following terms Iwred, Iwgreen, Iwblue, Ibred, Ibgreen, Ibblue, Ifred, Ifgreen, and Ifblue are used to represent the intensity values of the pixels in the red, green, and blue channels of the reflectance, fluorescence, and FIRE images [0074])
determining a second region that only comprises the tooth region (an adapted threshold technique is preferably used on a fluorescence or FIRE image to separate the tooth region, which contains both normal/sound tooth areas and caries areas, from the gum and other background [0075]; [0076]-[0078] discloses separating images that only contain teeth), based on the first intermediate image, wherein the determining the second region is performed by image processing of the first intermediate image (Sub-Step of Identifying Tooth Regions 165 [0076]-[0083] discloses using the first intermediate image/i.e. the digital image to determine the teeth regions)
acquiring a second intermediate image from the ultraviolet light image, wherein the second intermediate image comprises an image region that corresponds to the second region, and the acquiring the second intermediate image is performed by image processing of the ultraviolet light image (obtaining a fluorescence image [0063]; the fluorescence image is one obtained under blue excitation light [0069]; The fluorescence image is the digital image used for subsequent image processing steps [0070]).
image processing (image data processing disclosed in [0053]) of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold (The above four steps increase the accuracy of selecting tooth regions 165 as compared to thresholding just the FIRE or fluorescence image. The refined tooth regions 165 image is then used in the following sub-steps of extracting suspicious lesion areas and removing false positives [0077]).
Pan, however, does not teach:
determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the determining of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque is performed by [image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold].
Cheng is considered analogous to the instant application as “Image-processing methods for marking plaque fluorescent reaction area and systems therefore” is disclosed (title). Cheng teaches:
determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the determining of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all of the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”), is performed by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold (obtaining a plurality of pixel points corresponding to the plaque according to the third RGB image and the first RGB image or the second RGB image; and marking the pixel points in the third RGB image [0004]; The processing unit 140 further compares the RGB images and the HSV images corresponding to different light sources to obtain pixel points corresponding to the plaque [0011]; the images are combined to find regions containing plaque within in an image, using a pixel values amounts, i.e. thresholds as disclosed in [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the determining of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque is performed by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Pan teaches oral cavity detection method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan, however, does not each: converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold.
Cheng is considered analogous to the instant application as “Image-processing methods for marking plaque fluorescent reaction area and systems therefor” is disclosed (title).
Cheng teaches:
converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space (the processing unit 140…. converts the second RGB image into the second HSV image, respectively [0017]);
receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses calculation of pixels values that are associated with plaque, which is the “comparison threshold” as claimed); and
determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second Intermediate image converted to the HSV color space ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all of the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”), and the dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses determining plaque based off of the pixel value over a certain value, which is the dental plaque comparison threshold” as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection method according to claim 1, as discussed above. Pan further teaches wherein the non-ultraviolet light is white light (the reflectance image is generated using white or single color light [0121]).
Regarding claim 9, Pan teaches oral cavity detection device, characterized by comprising:
a non-ultraviolet light module, configured to emit non-ultraviolet light and comprising at least one non-ultraviolet light lamp (white or single color light [0121]);
an ultraviolet light module, configured to emit ultraviolet light and comprising at least one ultraviolet light lamp (fluorescence image is generated under excitation light in the ultraviolet-blue range [0121]; obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025]):
an image capturing device, configured to acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity and an ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (FIG. 3A shows one embodiment of step 110 of generating a digital image of a tooth, comprising steps of obtaining a fluorescence image, obtaining a reflectance image, and combining image data for the fluorescence and reflectance images to generate an image such as a FIRE image [0063]),
an image processing device (image data processing disclosed in [0053]), configured to select and use a region of the ultraviolet light image including teeth and at least one portion of gum to analyze the non-ultraviolet light image (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0075]; extracting a lesion area from sound tooth regions by identifying tooth regions [0025]; Since some image processing work is done on a certain channel of a color image, for convenience, the following terms Iwred, Iwgreen, Iwblue, Ibred, Ibgreen, Ibblue, Ifred, Ifgreen, and Ifblue are used to represent the intensity values of the pixels in the red, green, and blue channels of the reflectance, fluorescence, and FIRE images [0074]),
acquire an ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity from the ultraviolet light camera device (fluorescence image is generated under excitation light in the ultraviolet-blue range [0121]; obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025]);
determine a first region comprising a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region based on the ultraviolet light image (the ultraviolet images captures regions that comprise of tooth and gum/adjacent regions as disclosed in [0025], [0071]-[0072] and [0078] further disclose identifying tooth regions from the UV/fluorescent images), wherein the image processing device (data processing hardware [0053]) is further configured to determine a first region by image processing of the ultraviolet light image (the ultraviolet images captures regions that comprise of tooth and gum/adjacent regions as disclosed in [0025], [0071]-[0072] and [0078] further disclose identifying tooth regions from the UV/fluorescent images);
acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity from the camera device (the non-ultraviolet light image/”reflectance images” captures a first region, the process which is disclosed in [0065]-[0068]);
acquire from the non-ultraviolet light image a first intermediate image, wherein the first intermediate image only comprises an image region that corresponds to the first region (FIG. 3A shows one embodiment of step 110 of generating a digital image of a tooth, comprising steps of obtaining a fluorescence image, obtaining a reflectance image, and combining image data for the fluorescence and reflectance images to generate an image such as a FIRE image [0063]), wherein the image processing device is further configured to acquire a first intermediate image by image processing of the non-ultraviolet light image (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0075]; extracting a lesion area from sound tooth regions by identifying tooth regions [0025]; Since some image processing work is done on a certain channel of a color image, for convenience, the following terms Iwred, Iwgreen, Iwblue, Ibred, Ibgreen, Ibblue, Ifred, Ifgreen, and Ifblue are used to represent the intensity values of the pixels in the red, green, and blue channels of the reflectance, fluorescence, and FIRE images [0074]);
determine a second region that only comprises the tooth region, based on the first intermediate image, wherein the image processing device is further configured to determine a second region by image processing of the first intermediate image (an adapted threshold technique is preferably used on a fluorescence or FIRE image to separate the tooth region, which contains both normal/sound tooth areas and caries areas, from the gum and other background [0075]; [0076]-[0078] discloses separating images that only contain teeth);
acquire a second intermediate image from the ultraviolet light image, wherein the second intermediate image comprises an image region that corresponds to the second region (Sub-Step of Identifying Tooth Regions 165 [0076]-[0083] discloses using the first intermediate image/i.e. the digital image to determine the teeth regions) and
the image processing device (image data processing disclosed in [0053]) is further configured to acquire the second intermediate image by image processing of the ultraviolet light image (The above four steps increase the accuracy of selecting tooth regions 165 as compared to thresholding just the FIRE or fluorescence image. The refined tooth regions 165 image is then used in the following sub-steps of extracting suspicious lesion areas and removing false positives).
Pan, however, does not teach:
wherein the image capturing device comprises a camera device, and
determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image wherein the image processing device is further configured to determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold.
Cheng, however, teaches:
wherein the image capturing device comprises a camera device (emitting, via a second light emitter, blue light to the mouth region; obtaining, via the image-capturing unit, a second RGB image corresponding to the mouth region [0004]),
determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the image processing device is further configured to determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all of the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”), by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold (obtaining a plurality of pixel points corresponding to the plaque according to the third RGB image and the first RGB image or the second RGB image; and marking the pixel points in the third RGB image [0004]; The processing unit 140 further compares the RGB images and the HSV images corresponding to different light sources to obtain pixel points corresponding to the plaque [0011]; the images are combined to find regions containing plaque within in an image, using a pixel values amounts, i.e. thresholds as disclosed in [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include wherein the image capturing device comprises a camera device and determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image wherein the image processing device is further configured to determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Pan teaches oral cavity detection device according to claim 9, wherein the determination of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan, however, does not each: converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold.
Cheng is considered analogous to the instant application as “Image-processing methods for marking plaque fluorescent reaction area and systems therefor” is disclosed (title).
Cheng teaches:
converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space (the processing unit 140…. converts the second RGB image into the second HSV image, respectively [0017]);
receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses calculation of pixels values that are associated with plaque, which is the “comparison threshold” as claimed); and
determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second Intermediate image converted to the HSV color space ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all pf the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”, and the dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses determining plaque based off of the pixel value over a certain value, which is the dental plaque comparison threshold” as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection device according to claim 9, as discussed above. Pan further teaches wherein the non-ultraviolet light is white light wherein the non-ultraviolet light is white light (the reflectance image is generated using white or single color light [0121]).
Regarding claim 16, Pan teaches a tangible computer-readable storage medium, wherein the storage medium is non-transitory and comprises an instruction for executing the oral cavity detection method (The stored instructions of such a software program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium [0054]), and when the instruction is executed, a processor of the computer (processing apparatus 180 [0059]) is configured at least to:
acquire an ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (fluorescence image is generated under excitation light in the ultraviolet-blue range [0121]; obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025]) ;
determine a first region comprising a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region based on the ultraviolet light image (the ultraviolet images captures regions that comprise of tooth and gum/adjacent regions as disclosed in [0025], [0071]-[0072] and [0078] further disclose identifying tooth regions from the UV/fluorescent images) wherein the processor of the computer is further configured to determine a first region (FIG. 3A shows one embodiment of step 110 of generating a digital image of a tooth, comprising steps of obtaining a fluorescence image, obtaining a reflectance image, and combining image data for the fluorescence and reflectance images to generate an image such as a FIRE image [0063]) by image processing of the ultraviolet light image acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0075]; extracting a lesion area from sound tooth regions by identifying tooth regions [0025]; Since some image processing work is done on a certain channel of a color image, for convenience, the following terms Iwred, Iwgreen, Iwblue, Ibred, Ibgreen, Ibblue, Ifred, Ifgreen, and Ifblue are used to represent the intensity values of the pixels in the red, green, and blue channels of the reflectance, fluorescence, and FIRE images [0074]);
acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity (reflectance image is generated using white or single color light [0121] obtaining images from tooth regions/oral cavity disclosed in [0025]; the image captured using white/single colored white is the non-ultraviolet image as claimed) wherein the first intermediate image only comprises an image region that corresponds to the first region, wherein the processor of the computer is further configured to acquire a first intermediate image by image processing of the non-ultraviolet light image (generating a digital image of a tooth, the image comprising actual intensity values for a region of pixels corresponding to the tooth, gum, and background [0075]; extracting a lesion area from sound tooth regions by identifying tooth regions [0025]; Since some image processing work is done on a certain channel of a color image, for convenience, the following terms Iwred, Iwgreen, Iwblue, Ibred, Ibgreen, Ibblue, Ifred, Ifgreen, and Ifblue are used to represent the intensity values of the pixels in the red, green, and blue channels of the reflectance, fluorescence, and FIRE images [0074]);
determine a second region that only comprises the tooth region, based on the first intermediate image ([0076]-[0078] disclose a threshold processes to find a tooth region, which is based on the intermediate image/non-ultraviolet image which is part of the “FIRE” image, from which a tooth region 165 is determined ); and wherein the processor of the computer is further configured to determine a second region by image processing of the first intermediate image;
acquire a second intermediate image from the ultraviolet light image, wherein the second intermediate image comprises an image region that corresponds to the second region (obtaining a fluorescence image [0063]; the fluorescence image is one obtained under blue excitation light [0069]; The fluorescence image is the digital image used for subsequent image processing steps [0070]), and the processor of the computer is further configured to acquire the second intermediate image by image processing of the ultraviolet light image (obtaining a fluorescence image [0063]; the fluorescence image is one obtained under blue excitation light [0069]; The fluorescence image is the digital image used for subsequent image processing steps [0070]).
Pan, however, does not teach: a camera device, and determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the processor of the computer is further configured to determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold.
Cheng is considered analogous to the instant application as “Image-processing methods for marking plaque fluorescent reaction area and systems therefore” is disclosed (title).
Cheng teaches:
a camera device (emitting, via a second light emitter, blue light to the mouth region; obtaining, via the image-capturing unit, a second RGB image corresponding to the mouth region [0004]),
acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity from the camera device (emitting, via a first light emitter, natural light to a mouth region of a user; obtaining, via an image-capturing unit, a first RGB image corresponding to the mouth region [0004])
determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque by image processing plaque ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all of the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”) of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold (obtaining a plurality of pixel points corresponding to the plaque according to the third RGB image and the first RGB image or the second RGB image; and marking the pixel points in the third RGB image [0004]; The processing unit 140 further compares the RGB images and the HSV images corresponding to different light sources to obtain pixel points corresponding to the plaque [0011]; the images are combined to find regions containing plaque within in an image, using a pixel values amounts, i.e. thresholds as disclosed in [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include acquire an ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity from a camera device, acquire a non-ultraviolet light image of the oral cavity from a non-ultraviolet light camera device; determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, wherein the processor of the computer is further configured to determine the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque by image processing of the second intermediate image and the use of a dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Pan teaches computer-readable storage medium according to claim 16, wherein the determination of the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque in the second intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan, however, does not each: converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold.
Cheng is considered analogous to the instant application as “Image-processing methods for marking plaque fluorescent reaction area and systems therefor” is disclosed (title).
Cheng teaches:
converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space (the processing unit 140…. converts the second RGB image into the second HSV image, respectively [0017]);
receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses calculation of pixels values that are associated with plaque, which is the “comparison threshold” as claimed); and
determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second Intermediate image converted to the HSV color space ([0015]-[0016] discloses calculation of pixels corresponding to plaque based off all pf the pixels in the image, i.e. “proportion of pixels containing dental plaque”, and the dental plaque comparison threshold ([0018] discloses determining plaque based off of the pixel value over a certain value, which is the dental plaque comparison threshold” as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include converting the second intermediate image from an RGB color space to an HSV color space; receiving a dental plaque comparison threshold; and determining the proportion of pixels containing dental plaque based on the second intermediate image converted to the HSV color space and the dental plaque comparison threshold, as taught by Cheng. Doing so would allow for more accurately marking areas having plaque by comparing two oral images corresponding to two different light sources, as suggested by Cheng ([0002]).
Regarding claim 22, modified Pan teaches computer-readable storage medium according to claim 16, as discussed above. Pan further teaches wherein the non-ultraviolet light is white light (the reflectance image is generated using white or single color light [0121]).
Claims 3-6, 11-14, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al. (US 20100322490 A1, hereinafter "Pan") in view of Cheng et al. (US 20200022582 A1, hereinafter “Cheng”) and Seibel et al. (US 20150010878 A1, hereinafter “Seibel”).
Regarding claim 3, modified Pan teaches oral cavity detection method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above.
Pan further teaches converting the ultraviolet light image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076]);
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the first region ([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select tooth regions within the UV/fluorescent image which contain images of the gum as well as disclosed in [0075]);
Pan, however, does not teach: performing a median filtering operation on the ultraviolet light image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the ultraviolet light image ([0064] discloses capturing images in the ultraviolet wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection method according to claim 3, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above. Pan, further teaches adjusting the contrast of the ultraviolet light image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the florescent/UV image prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Regarding claim 5, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image. Pan, further teaches:
converting the first intermediate image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076]; the reflectance image is from the non-UV image/first intermediate image as claimed)
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the second region (([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select only the tooth regions/second region)
Pan, however, does not teach performing a median filtering operation on the first intermediate image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the first intermediate image ([0064] discloses capturing images in across many wavelengths).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Pan teaches The oral cavity detection method according to claim 5, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan further teaches adjusting the contrast of the first intermediate image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the non-UV/reflectance/intermediate prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Regarding claim 11, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection device according to claim 9, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above.
Pan further teaches converting the ultraviolet light image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076])
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the first region ([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select tooth regions within the UV/fluorescent image which contain images of the gum as well as disclosed in [0075])
Pan, however, does not teach: performing a median filtering operation on the ultraviolet light image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the ultraviolet light image ([0064] discloses capturing images in the ultraviolet wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Pan teaches oral cavity detection device according to claim 11, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above. Pan, further teaches adjusting the contrast of the ultraviolet light image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the florescent/UV image prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Regarding claim 13, modified Pan teaches the oral cavity detection device according to claim 9, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image. Pan, further teaches:
converting the first intermediate image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076]; the reflectance image is from the non-UV image/first intermediate image as claimed)
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the second region ([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select only the tooth regions/second region)
Pan, however, does not teach performing a median filtering operation on the first intermediate image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the first intermediate image ([0064] discloses capturing images in across many wavelengths).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Pan teaches oral cavity detection device according to claim 13, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan further teaches adjusting the contrast of the first intermediate image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the non-UV/reflectance/intermediate prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Regarding claim 18, modified Pan teaches the computer-readable storage medium according to claim 16, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above.
Pan further teaches converting the ultraviolet light image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076])
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the first region ([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select tooth regions within the UV/fluorescent image which contain images of the gum as well as disclosed in [0075])
Pan, however, does not teach: performing a median filtering operation on the ultraviolet light image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the ultraviolet light image ([0064] discloses capturing images in the ultraviolet wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Pan teaches computer-readable storage medium according to claim 18, wherein the determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image, as discussed above. Pan, further teaches adjusting the contrast of the ultraviolet light image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the florescent/UV image prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Regarding claim 20, modified Pan teaches the computer-readable storage medium according to claim 16, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image. Pan, further teaches:
converting the first intermediate image into a gray-scale image (grayscale versions of both the fluorescence and reflectance images are used [0076]; the reflectance image is from the non-UV image/first intermediate image as claimed)
performing an adaptive threshold segmentation operation to determine the second region (([0077] discloses applying threshold segmentation on regions within the image to select only the tooth regions/second region)
Pan, however, does not teach performing a median filtering operation on the first intermediate image.
Seibel is considered analogous to the instant application as “Dental demineralization detection, methods and systems” is disclosed (title). Seibel teaches:
performing a median filtering operation (median filter [0115]) on the first intermediate image ([0064] discloses capturing images in across many wavelengths).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Pan to include performing a median filtering operation, as taught by Seibel. Doing so would remove electronic noise, as suggested by Seibel ([0115]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Pan teaches the computer-readable storage medium according to claim 20, wherein the determination of the second region that only comprises the tooth region based on the first intermediate image, as discussed above. Pan further teaches adjusting the contrast of the first intermediate image ([0091]-[0093] and [0109] discloses adjust contrast in the non-UV/reflectance/intermediate prior to carrying out screening/diagnoses).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection claims 1, applicant argues the following:
Page 13-16: “This disclosure does not teach or suggest "determining a first region comprising a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region based on the ultraviolet light image… Pan given in the Final Office Action appear to teach or motivate away by providing the specification that "[c]aries detection only needs to be performed inside tooth regions 165." (underlining added for emphasis), when the present claim recitation concerns "a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region".. Even if Pan in some of these citations refers to image processing, it is not in connection with "a tooth region and at least one portion of a gum region based on the ultraviolet light image" as in the present claim recitation…”
In response, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Pan discloses that the teeth region and the gum region is separated in paragraphs [0075] and [0076]-[0078], and that the image contains pixels that include the gum in [0025]. Both UV images and non UV images are used in identification, as disclosed in [0063] and [0121]. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Pages 17-18: “The cited reference disclosure does not disclose or suggest acquiring a second intermediate (UV) image from the ultraviolet light image, "wherein the second intermediate image comprises an image region that corresponds to the second region" as recited in the claim… indicated below, the quote provided to Pan [0077], concerns identifying tooth regions with generation and treatment of threshold images as described therein… Pan does not disclose taking UV and non-UV images, the selection of specific regions in such images and the interplay between such selected regions as in the claimed methodology, to finally acquire a UV image with the removal of adverse effects of the gum region… In contrast, the processing of images disclosed in Cheng …is different from and does not suggest the processing recited in the pending claims that includes the acquisition of image sections and interplay between them as recited in the pending claim limitations… A document word search does not appear to uncover the recitation of "images are combined", or similar, narrative therein… In view of the many ways of processing images, the many types of images and imaged regions and combinations thereof that can be taken by one of ordinary skill in the art, it is not established how one of ordinary skill in the art, unless relying on impermissible hindsight reconstruction from the present Application, could chose elements from Pan and Cheng, modify them, and combine them as recited in claim 1 in a way to arrive at the claimed methodology and do so with a reasonable expectation of successfully achieving the results that the claimed methodology achieves..”
In response, the examiner asserts the following: In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., acquire a UV image with the removal of adverse effects of the gum region) 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). In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Accordingly, the arguments are not persuasive the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 1 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection claims 2 and 7, applicant argues page 21-21 that “… it is not established how one of ordinary skill in the art, unless relying on impermissible hindsight reconstruction from the present Application, could chose elements from Pan and Cheng, modify them, and combine them as recited in this claim in a way to arrive at the claimed methodology and do so with a reasonable expectation of successfully achieving the results that the claimed methodology achieves”. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Accordingly, the arguments are not persuasive the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 2 and 7 are maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 8 and 9, applicant’s arguments on pages 22-23 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 8-9 are maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 10, applicant’s arguments on pages 23 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for claim 2. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above for claim 2. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 10 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 15, applicant’s arguments on pages 23-24 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for claim 7. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above for claim 7. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 15 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 16, applicant’s arguments on pages 24-25 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 16 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 17, applicant’s arguments on pages 25 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for claim 2. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above for claim 2. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 2 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 3, applicant argues on pages 26-27 that “the recitation "converting the ultraviolet light image into a gray-scale image" in claim 3 concerns the "determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image" as recited in the claim… Whereas this Seibel disclosure indicates that a median filter operation was performed, it was not performed in the context of the operations performed according to the recitation of claim 3. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Pan is used teach the limitations regarding "determination of the first region comprising the tooth region and the at least one portion of the gum region based on the ultraviolet light image", whereas Seibel was used merely to teach the limitations regarding “performing a median filtering operation on the ultraviolet light image”. Examiner further states that performing median filtering on images is a well-known operation that is used to reduce noise. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 3 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 4, applicant argues that “Whereas the cited Pan reference may disclose adjusting the contrast of an ultraviolet light image in the course of performing the sub-step operations on the tooth image referred to above, such adjusting was not performed in the context of the operations performed according to the recitation of claim 4”. The examiner asserts that Pan discloses that the teeth is extracted in the images, i.e. “within the context” of the claim, on paragraph [0077] as noted in claim 1 above. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 4 is maintained.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 5-6, 11-14, and 18-21, applicant’s arguments on pages 28-31 are premised upon the assertion that the claims are allowable for the same reasons as stated above for the claims that recite similar limitations. The examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons as stated above. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive and the 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 5-6, 11-14, and 18-21 are maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NESHAT BASET whose telephone number is (571)272-5478. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-17:30 CST.
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, PASCAL M. BUI-PHO can be reached on (571) 272-2714. 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.
/N.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/PASCAL M BUI PHO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798