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 .
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 1-2, 4-7, 13 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “by virtue of the stiffness of the solid dental clip”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the stiffness”. Additionally, it is unclear what this limitation structurally requires. For examining purposes, it was understood as “a stiffness of the solid dental clip” and that the clip has sufficient stiffness to be secured to the tooth.
Claim 1 additionally discloses “spacing between opposed elements”. It is unclear what is meant by “opposed elements” and what they structurally are. For examining purposes, it was understood that the dental structure comprises opposing sides that are spaced apart such that it can be configured to be secured around a dental structure.
Claims 2, 4-7, 13 are rejected under 35 USC 112(B) by virtue of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jodaikin et al. (US 2005/0175959 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jodaikin teaches an intraoral device, comprising: a support structure (50) configured to engage with one or more dental structures (see Figures 5a-5d),
wherein the support structure forms a solid dental clip (see 50) that is removable and engages the one or more dental structures (the structure is fully capable of engaging the tooth and being removed from the tooth);
wherein by virtue of the stiffness of the solid dental clip and spacing between opposed elements, the solid dental clip is imparted with sufficient flexibility to facilitate securement to the one or more dental structures ([0210], [0035]; the structure is formed from any suitable material and aims to provide it with sufficient flexibility to allow it to be placed interproximally at the dental site);
wherein the support structure is integrally formed from at least one antiviral and/or antibacterial and/or antifungal ion releasing agent ([0210]-[0211]; the matrix is in the form of a ribbon (50) and [0137-0138], [0294] the matrix comprises the antimicrobial material), and
wherein when said device is exposed to the oral cavity and to any gases, liquids and solids passing through the oral cavity, the at least one agent is capable of inactivating viruses and/or bacteria and/or fungi penetrating into the oral cavity (see at least [0032], [0070], [0121], [0137-0138], [0173], [0243], [0255], [0259], [0281], [0294]; a matrix or matrices is to carry at least one material or agent in order to provide an optimal rate of ion or chemical interaction with the tooth surface and to provide a mobile environment for the appropriate ions and/or other chemicals to reach the tooth surface).
Regarding claim 4, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 3 (see rejection above), wherein the dental clip is configured as a single continuous loop whose peripheral element is configured to completely encircle the dental structure (see Figures 5a-5d).
Regarding claim 5, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 4 (see rejection above), wherein the peripheral element is configured to completely encircle a unit of one or more teeth (see Figs. 5a-5d).
Regarding claim 6, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 4 (see rejection above), wherein the peripheral element is configured to completely encircle a unit of one or more teeth of a set of dentures or of a dental bridge ([0041-0042]; the device is fully capable of engaging with prosthetic teeth).
Regarding claim 7, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 4 (see rejection above), wherein the peripheral element comprises two opposed interproximal elements, two opposed buccolingual elements, and a curved portion continuously extending between corresponding interproximal and buccolingual elements (see annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
284
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the device is adapted to be installed on full or partial dentures or any other pre-existing intraoral device, or on at least one artificial or non-artificial tooth ([0041-0042]; the device is fully capable of engaging with prosthetic teeth).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jodaikin et al. (US 2005/0175959 A1), in view of Kania (US2004/0258738).
Regarding claim 2, Jodaikin teaches the device according to claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the at least one antiviral and/or antibacterial ion releasing agent materials(s) include comprises one or more of the following materials: solid-state copper (Cu), silver (Ag), copper(I) oxide (Cu2O), copper(II) oxide (CuO), silver nitrate (AgNO3), silver oxide (Ag20), copper(II) chloride (CuCl2), copper(I) chloride (CuCl), Zinc-Oxide, silver nitrate (AgNO3) and silver sulfide (Ag2S) in combinations with natural/synthetic polymers and/or ceramics, or any combination thereof.
Jodaikin teaches the material may include zinc oxide or copper ([0281], [0294]) and may be an ion releasing material configured to interact with the microenvironment of the teeth ([0243]) or charged fluoride ([0252]) and contemplates many materials and material combinations for use depending on the applications, including: desensitizing, cleaning, stabilizing, antimicrobial, etc. Jodaikin teaches the matrix is a polymeric material ([0046]).
Jodaikin does not explicitly disclose zinc oxide or copper being releasing ions. Kania teaches a device (30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, etc.) for use within the mouth and around a tooth (see Figures) and the device comprising antimicrobial properties and having a polymeric material comprising a layer of a bactericidal metal like silver (abstract). Kania teaches that other metals that exhibit antibacterial and/or antifungal properties may also be useful for the practice of the present invention, including but not limited to gold, copper, platinum, aluminum, Zinc, titanium, and combinations and alloys thereof ([0050]). Kania teaches the device releases silver ions through a process known as oligodynamic action and that deposits of this type are believed to have a greater effective surface area than conventional silver-plated coatings, and therefore the capability of releasing more silver ions per unit coating weight, in shorter periods of time ([0051-0056]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify material to be an ion-releasing/charged metal or metal alloy such as silver, copper, platinum, titanium, etc., as taught by Kania, because they are known suitable metals with antimicrobial properties. Using a charged/ion-releasing agent increases surface energy and therefore enhances interactions and binding between the agent and the environment due to the release of charged particles.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Jodaikin teaches that structure 50 must be joined by means of a knot or alternatively by tying ends of a cord together referencing paragraph [0210] of Jodaikin and therefore it fails to disclose a pre-formed “solid dental clip”. Applicant additionally argues that a knot or a corset requires external restraining straps and therefore intrinsically lacks the “stiffness” and structured “spacing between opposed elements” to achieve self-securement. This is not found to be persuasive.
According to dictionary.com, “solid” is defined as 1. “having three dimensions as a geometrical body or figure”; 2. “Having the interior completely filled up, free from cavities, or not hollow”; 3, “without openings or breaks”; or 4. “firm, hard, or compact in substance”. Jodaikin’s structure is described to be made from any suitable material and it may be a cord, which is solid in the sense that it is not hollow or that it is a three-dimensional body or that it is firm or compact, and therefore it reads on the structure being solid. Although it is not claimed that the clip is “pre-formed”, the tying of the knot to close the loop and form the structure may be done before it is installed on the tooth and therefore having a knot does not prevent it from being solid according to the definition of the term and the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Moreover, the limitation “by virtue of the stiffness of the solid dental clip and spacing between opposed elements, the solid dental clip is imparted with sufficient flexibility to facilitate securement to the one or more dental structures” does not require any structural elements but only that the clip be capable of having flexibility enough for it to be secured to the dental structure and, as best understood, to have opposing sides spaced apart that also make it capable of being secured to the dental structure. Jodaikin’s structure has opposing sides (similar to a square shape) that go around the tooth and Jodaikin also mentions in [0210] and [0035] that the structure may be made of any suitable material and that it is intended to have sufficient flexibility to be able to be inserted between two teeth (i.e., interproximally) and therefore also reads on the claimed limitations as it has the structure and characteristics that make it fully capable of being secured to the tooth.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 attached to this office action.
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 LINA FARAJ whose telephone number is (571)272-4580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/LINA FARAJ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
7/10/2026
Prosecution Insights