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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: On line 23 of the claim “the jaw ridge” is believed to be in error for -a jaw ridge-. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the first hole strip” is believed to be in error for-the interior first hole strip-. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the first or the second hole strip” is believed to be in error for -the interior first hole strip of the at least one exterior second hole strip-. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the at least one second hole strip” is believed to be in error for -the at least one exterior second hole strip-. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-10 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim1, the applicant claims “an interior first U-shaped hole strip” and then further claims the strip “carries fixing holes”. It is unclear if the claimed fixing holes are in addition to holes in the “hole strip” or if the claimed fixing holes are the holes in the claimed “hole strip”. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitations are being interpreted as an interior u-shaped strip comprising fixing holes, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1 the limitation “for cutting the interior first U-shaped holes strip to length between adjacent ones of the fixing holes” is unclear. It is unclear if the areas of weaknesses are used for cutting or are an area to be cut. Further it is unclear what the length being claimed is and what is meant by “cross-sectional weakness”. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitations are being interpreted as the claimed interior first U-shaped strip comprises fixing holes that are spaced from one another and areas of reduced cross section, such that the fixing holes are areas of reduced cross section are provided in an alternating manner and the areas of reduced cross section provides areas of weaknesses between adjacent fixing holes, such that the area of reduced cross section is configured to be cut so that the interior first U-shaped strip can be cut to a desired length. It is noted that the claim limitations are being interpreted as discussed above in detail, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitations including the interior first U-shaped holes strip has “free end regions and a partial region situated at a distance from the free end regions”. It is unclear from the claim limitation the relationship between the claimed end regions and partial region of the U-shaped hole strip due to the limitation of the partial region “being situated at a distance from the free end regions”. It is noted that since the claimed hole strip has a U shape as claimed, the claimed partial region is being interpreted as a region of the U-shaped plate located between the claimed free ends, such that the 2 parts together make up the U-shaped plate, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitation “for fixing a dental prosthesis that is adapted to be supported in a gap bridge by the interior first U-shaped hole strip” is unclear. It is unclear what the claimed “gap bridge” is. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is functional, such that that gap is a gap between teeth on a jawbone. Such that the limitation is a functional limitation related to when the device is placed on the jawbone, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitation “cross-sectional widenings formed in the strip in an area of each said fixing hole in the partial region which increases an axial extension of the fixing holes…relative to the fixing holes outside of the partial region” is unclear. If is unclear what has the cross sectional widening, specifically the hole, such that the hole is larger/wider than other holes or if it is the strip in the area of the holes and what the holes outside the partial region are. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as the claimed partial region of the strip has the claimed cross-sectional widenings in the area of the holes relative to an area of the strip in the claimed free end regions having the fixing holes. Such that it is the body of the claimed strip in the claimed partial region have has the widened cross-sectional area relative to an area of the body with the holes at the claimed free ends, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the claimed “at least one exterior second hole strip…also carrying fixing holes” is unclear. It is unclear if the claimed fixing holes are in addition to holes in the “hole strip” or if the claimed fixing holes are the holes in the claimed “hole strip”. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitations are being interpreted as an exterior second strip comprising fixing holes, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 1, the limitation “cross-sectional weaknesses fur cutting the at least one exterior second hole strip to length located between adjacent ones of the fixing holes on the at least one exterior second holes strip” are unclear. It is noted that the limitations are being interpreted the same as discussed above with respect to the same limitation on the interior first U-shaped hole strip, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
With respect to claim 5, the limitation of the cross-sectional widening each comprising “a material thickening on the first interior hole strip provided on one or both sides” is unclear. It is unclear what “sides” are being claimed and what the material is thickened relative to. It is noted that for examination purposes, the claimed material thickening is being interpreted as the same as the cross sectional widening, such that the material of the claimed strip is thickened, i.e. extended in a direction, to create the widened body of the strip relative to the body of the strip in the claimed free ends. With respect to the “sides” it is noted that the limitation is being interpreted as the widening is provided on a buccal and/or lingual side of the implant. While it is noted that the limitations are being interpreted as discussed above, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 6, the limitation of the first strip being formed “without a base, peg, or sleeve” are unclear. It is noted that the terms are broad and not specific as to what a base, peg or sleeve is. Specifically, the claimed holes could be interpreted as a sleeve and the body could be a base. Therefore, the claimed structure that the applicant is trying to exclude is unclear.
Further with respect to claim 7, the claimed “reduced strip cross section” is unclear in view of the claimed “cross-sectional weaknesses”. It is unclear if the two sections are different or the same and further how the reduced cross section and thickened area is related to the claimed holes. It is noted that for examination purposes, the claimed reduced strip cross section is being interpreted as a different reduced cross section. Such that the claimed cross-sectional weaknesses is an area of reduced cross section in a horizontal cross section and the claimed reduced strip cross section is in a vertical cross section and the area of the holes has the widened/thickened area and the weakened area has the reduced cross section. While the claims are being interpreted as discussed above, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 7, the claimed” a middle region” is unclear in view of the claimed free ends and partial region. It is unclear where the claimed reduced strip cross section and thickened/enlarged cross section is located on the claimed first or second hole strip. It is noted that the applicant has only claimed free ends relative to the first strip.
With respect to claim 10, the limitation of the jaw implant is “at least one cuttable to length or deformable in a region of the connection webs” is unclear. It is noted that in the independent claim the applicant has claimed that the connection webs are “deformable”, therefore, in the alternative of the webs being deformable, it appears that claim 10 is not further limiting. With respect to the alternative of being “cuttable to length”, it is noted that the limitation is being interpreted as the web is capable of being cut, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify.
With respect to claim 10, the claimed method is unclear specifically with respect to the limitation “at least one of cutting the jaw implant or separating a patrial region of the interior first hole strip and/or the at least one exterior second hole stirp that is adapted to the at least one gap”. It is unclear if the applicant is trying to claim the actual step of cutting the jaw implant which includes separating the claimed partial region from the claimed ends and/or the exterior second hole strip or if all the steps are an alternative which would include cutting the jaw implant or separating a partial region or the exterior second hole strip. It is noted that for examination purposes, the claimed method step is being interpreted as the method including the step of cutting the jaw implant which specifically includes separating the claimed partial region from a portion of the jaw implant and/or the exterior second strip from a portion of the jaw implant such that the length of the jaw implant is cut to a length to fit within a gap between teeth on the patient. It is noted that the applicant should clarify what is being cut and what is then being placed in the gap to clarify what is being claimed.
Further with respect to claim 13, the step of mounting the dental prosthesis “on the partial region..bridging over the at least gap” is unclear. It is noted that the applicant has not claimed mounting the partial region on the jaw within the gap. It is noted that for examination purposes, the claimed method is being interpreted as including the step of mounting the trimmed jaw implant, including the partial region on the jaw in the gap, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1. 3-10 and 12-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach the claimed jaw implant comprising an interior first U-shaped hole strip which carries fixing hole spaced apart from one another and comprises cross-sectional weaknesses configured to be cut between adjacent fixing holes, the interior first U-shaped hole strip includes cross-sectional widening formed in the strip in an area of each of the fixing holes in the partial region, the area being widened relative to the fixing holes in the free end regions, at least one exterior second hole strip which is joined by connection webs to the interior first U-shaped hole strip, the at least one exterior second hole strip comprising fixing hole that are spaced apart from one another and cross sectional weaknesses configured to be cut between adjacent fixing holes, the jaw implant in a region of the connection webs is deformable such that the interior first hole strip is adapted to be mounted on the jaw ridge, while the at least one exterior second hole strip is adapted to be fastened to an adjacent outer flank of the jaw in combination with the other claimed limitations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed July 29, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that the claim amendments overcome the 112 rejections presented in the non-final, however, as discussed above in detail, claims have not been amended to overcome the rejections and the amendments have also presented new issues. Therefore some of the rejection are maintained and new rejections have been added.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEIDI MARIE EIDE whose telephone number is (571)270-3081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-4:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 571-270-5614. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 1/23/2026