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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that Jacoby/Zipprich fail to provide for the new limitation of the at least portions of the circular center including sidewalls extending between the size walls of the plurality of radially convex portions, however this new limitation is address by the newly cited prior art of Nebl et al..
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 55, 57, 59-66, 68-73 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacoby et al. (US 2017/0049539 A1) in view of Zipprich et al. (US 2011/0223562 A1) and further in view of Nebl et al. (US 2007/0065254 A1).
Regarding claim 55, 68, and 72, Jacoby discloses a dental implant for insertion into bone tissue of a patient (title and abstract), comprising:
a core body having an apical end and a coronal end (Figs. 1, 4, 6 etc. having a top/gingival/coronal end and distal/apical, bottom end), and
at least one thread extending outwardly from said core body (throughout figures showing external thread, paragraphs [0100] an [0101] disclosing the body having threads),
wherein the core body comprises a channel which is open to the coronal end and extends along a longitudinal direction of the implant from the coronal end towards the apical end (Fig. 1a element 160), and
wherein the core body has a drive zone (Fig. 1c element 150), in which drive zone a cross-sectional shape that extends along an entire length of the drive zone of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a cross-sectional shape having a circular center (Fig. 1c circular inner perimeter of elements 150a/b that extend longitudinally their whole length, Fig. 4a length of 405a) and a plurality of radially convex portions arranged along a circumference of the cross-section of the channel (Fig. 1c elements 150a/b being convex portions outward), wherein each of the plurality of radially convex portions comprise sidewalls extending between the circular center and a respective circle around a center of the cross-section, each radially outermost point of the plurality of radially convex portions lies on the respective circle around the center of the cross-section, at least two of said circles having different radii from each other (Fig. 1c convex notch 150a having a different depth and thus radius from the center of the implant than 150b, paragraph [0097] all disclosing the different plurality of convex portions having shallow notches 150a and deeper notches 150b thus having different radii),
wherein the core body further has a coronal portion (Fig. 4a element 460 similar to fig. 1 etc.) , in which the coronal portion a cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a number of main directions (Fig. 1a/3a/4a, etc. showing the main directions in 160/460 area as a triangle shape), each of the number of main directions comprising a radius measuring a distance between the center of the cross-section and an outer contour is a relative maximum value and thus a higher value than in neighboring orientations of each of the number of main directions (Figs. 1a/3z etc. The radius of each point on the triangles being higher than the thinner walls between each vertex), wherein the coronal portion is configured to be used as an index (Figs. 1a/3a etc. being triangular allows for use as an index), and
wherein the drive zone is arranged apically of the coronal portion (Fig. 4a showing the coronal portion being coronal to the drive zone 450a and thus the drive zone is more apical to the coronal zone), wherein the cross section of the channel of the drive zone perpendicular to the longitudinal direction has a different shape than the cross-section of the channel of the coronal portion perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (Fig. 4a drive zone along405a different than cross section of 406) and wherein the coronal portion has a tapered configuration such that, in the coronal portion, lateral dimensions of the cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant decrease along the longitudinal direction from the coronal end towards the apical end (Fig. 4a showing the cross section of 460 being tapered and the cross section of the channel decreasing from coronal to apical direction).
Regarding claims 55, and 72, Jacoby discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose where the cross section of the coronal portion has a number of main directions each comprising a radius measuring a distance between the center of the cross section and a contour of the cross section of the channel, that is a relative maximum value and thus a higher value than in neighboring orientation of each of the main directions, nor where the cross section of the coronal portion of the channel is trioval.
Zipprich discloses a dental implant for insertion into bone tissue of a patient (title and abstract), comprising a core body having an apical end and a coronal end (Fig. 2 having a top/gingival/coronal end and distal/apical, bottom end), and
at least one thread extending outwardly from said core body (Fig. 1 element 6),
wherein the core body comprises a channel which is open to the coronal end and extends along a longitudinal direction of the implant from the coronal end towards the apical end (Fig. 1 element 10), and
wherein the core body has a drive zone (Fig. 1 interior of 1 receiving 8), in which drive zone a cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a cross-sectional shape having a circular center (Figs. 3/27 etc. circular center i.e. central longitudinal axis, see image below showing each cross-sectional shape having within it a circle) and a plurality of radially convex portions arranged along a circumference of the cross-section of the channel (Fig. 27 elements at HRL-1 and HRL-2), wherein each of the plurality of radially convex portions comprise sidewalls extending between the circular center and a respective circle around a center of the cross-section (Fig. 27 a circle with a center point and circumference at radius HRL-1 would be one circle and another with a center point and a radius of HRL-2 would be a different respective circle), each radially outermost point of the plurality of radially convex portions lies on the respective circle around the center of the cross-section, at least two of said circles having different radii from each other (Fig. 27 a circle with a center point at the longitudinal axis and circumference of radius HRL-1 would be one circle and a circle with the same center point and a radius of HRL-2 would be a larger respective circle and thus different, paragraph [0077] lines 1-10 disclosing that one of the radially convex portions would have a differently increased length radius),
wherein the core body further has a coronal portion (Fig. 2 element 10 nearer to opening of 2), in which coronal portion a cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a number of main directions (Fig. 27 directions from central axis along HRL-1 and HRL-2 being main directions), each of the number of main directions comprising a radius measuring a distance between the center of the cross-section and a contour of the cross-section of the channel is a relative maximum value and thus a higher value than in neighboring orientations of each of the number of main directions (See image below where an apex at each of HRL-1 and HRL-2 is a relative maximum ), wherein the coronal portion is configured to be used as an index (Fig. 27 being triangular allows for use as an index) and where the central channel coronal portion has a cross-section that is trioval in shape (Figs. 25-30, translation page 5 lines 33-36 disclosing “trioval” for a cross section of the mold recess).
PNG
media_image1.png
392
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the trioval cross section of a coronal portion having a number of main directions each comprising a radius measuring a distance between the center of the cross section and a contour of the cross section of the channel, that is a relative maximum value and thus a higher value than in neighboring orientation of each of the main directions as taught by Zipprich into the shape of the cross section of the coronal portion as taught by Jacoby for the purpose of providing for a cross section shape that would provide a high level of tightness which would improve bacteria infiltration avoidance while providing suitable indexing of the implant in a reliable manner and further providing for a cross section shape that would counteract twisting as taught by Zipprich (paragraph [0013] lines 3-6 and [0014] lines 1-6, paragraph [0006] lines 1-7).
Further regarding claims 55 and 68, Jacoby/Zipprich discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose where the sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions each have a curved shape that is partially circular, elliptical, or oval, and that extends from the circular center and the respective circle around the center of the cross section and wherein at least portions of the circular center comprise sidewalls extending between the sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions.
However, Nebl discloses a fastener head (title abstract) with a drive zone having (Fig. 3/4 interior of 1118), in which drive zone a cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a cross-sectional shape having a circular center (Figs. 4. circular center at 120/122/124/126/128/130) and a plurality of radially convex portions arranged along a circumference of the cross-section of the channel (Fig. 4 each of 134/138/142/144/146/48), wherein each of the plurality of radially convex portions comprise sidewalls extending between the circular center and a respective circle around a center of the cross-section (Fig. 4 a circle with a center point and circumference at an outer radius of 144 would be one circle and another with a center point and a outer radius of 134 would be a different respective circle), each radially outermost point of the plurality of radially convex portions lies on the respective circle around the center of the cross-section, at least two of said circles having different radii from each other (Fig. Fig. 4 element 134 circle having a larger radius that 144) and sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions each have a curved shape with an elliptical shape that extends from the circular center and the respective circle around the center of the cross section (Fig. 4 each of 134/138/42 are curving sidewalls between each curing elliptical sidewalls of 144/146/148) and wherein at least portions of the circular center comprise sidewalls extending between the sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions (Fig. 4 the portions of 120/122/124/126/128/130).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate where the sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions each have a curved elliptical shape that extends from the circular center and the respective circle around the center of the cross section and wherein at least portions of the circular center comprise sidewalls extending between the sidewalls of the plurality of radially convex portions as taught by Nebl into the shape of the cross section of the drive zone portion as taught by Jacoby/Zipprich for the purpose of providing for a drive zone that would allow material caught in the drive zone to flow out of it as taught by Nebl (paragraph [0030] lines 10-14).
Regarding claim 57, Jacoby further discloses wherein the number of main directions are three or more (fig. 1a showing three main directions, paragraph [0124] all disclosing the main directions can be greater than 3 by being n-fold symmetrical rotational symmetry).
Regarding claims 59 and 71, Jacoby further discloses where the plurality of radially convex portions comprise first radially convex portions (Fig. 1c elements 150B) and second radially convex portions (Fig. 150A), the radially outermost points of the first radially convex portions all lie on a single first circle around the center of the cross-section (Fig. 1c elements 150B being all the same depth and thus all lie on the same fist circle), the radially outermost points of the second radially convex portions all lie on a single second circle around the center of the cross-section (Fig. 1c elements 150A all being the same depth and thus lie on the same second circle), the second circle has a smaller radius than the first circle (paragraph [0097] all disclosing the different plurality of convex portions having shallow notches 150a and deeper notches 150b thus having different radii with 150a being shallower and thus a smaller circle than 150b) , and the first radially convex portions and the second radially convex portions are alternatingly arranged along the circumference of the cross-section and further regarding claim 71 that the number of the first radial convex portions and the second radially convex portions are the same (Fig. 1c elements 150a and 150b alternate evenly).
Regarding claims 60 and 61 Jacoby further discloses a number of cutting flutes are symmetrically provided in a coronal portion of an implant (Fig. 1c elements 101).
Regarding Claim 62 Jacoby further disclose wherein said core body comprises a first core shaped zone (zone formed by the cross section shown in FIG. 1c) , in which first core shaped zone the cross-section of said core body has a number of main directions (three main directions as shown in FIG. 1A and C) in which the radius measuring the distance between the center of the cross section and its outer contour takes a relative maximum value and thus a higher value than in neighboring orientations (see figure below), and wherein each cutting flute, as seen in orientational direction around a central longitudinal axis of said core body, is positioned at a given rotational offset to a neighboring main direction (see figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
482
668
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 63, Jacoby further discloses wherein the number of cutting flutes, equals to the number of main directions (the cutting directions and flutes are both three as shown above in FIG. 1c).
Regarding claim 64, Jacoby further discloses wherein the cutting flutes are positioned in a threaded region of the implant, each cutting flute being positioned with a displacement relative to its neighboring cutting flute, such that in their positioned the cutting flutes follow a pitch of the thread around the longitudinal axis of the implant (Fig. 1b shown at 130 the cutting flutes end at the threaded section to intersect the threads) .
Regarding claim 65, Jacoby further discloses wherein the cross-section of the channel perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the implant has a plurality of radially concave portions alternatively arranged with the plurality of radially convex portions along the circumference of the cross-section (Fig. 1c inward portions spaced between each element 150a and 150b).
Regarding claim 66, Jacoby further discloses wherein the radially convex portions and the radially concave portions are arranged directly adjacent to each other (Fig. 1c inward portions spaced between each element 150a and 150b and thus the portion between 150a and 150b for each notch ins directly adjacent).
Regarding claim 69, Jacoby further discloses wherein the number of radially convex portions and the number of radially concave portions are the same (Fig. 1c inward portions spaced between each element 150a and 150b and thus the number of convex and concave are the same at six each).
Regarding claim 70, Jacoby further discloses wherein the number of radially convex portions and the number of radially concave portions are both six (Fig. 1c inward portions spaced between each element 150a and 150b and thus the number of convex and concave are the same at six each).
Regarding claim 73, Jacoby further discloses wherein the cross sectional shape extends along an entire length of the drive zone (Fig. 1c circular inner perimeter of elements 150a/b that extend longitudinally their whole length, Fig. 4a length of 405a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
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 MATTHEW P SAUNDERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3250. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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.
/M.P.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 04/04/2026
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights