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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 63/307,418, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 10-12, 20-21, 27, 30, and 34 receive the priority date of 02/07/22.
Claims 4, 8, 13, 15-19, 24-26, 28, and 35 receive the filing date of the current application, 02/07/23.
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.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hellenkamp (US 4038571 A)[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (Nodal area)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Acoustic transformer)].
[AltContent: textbox (Nodal area)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 2 zoom portion)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Component)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Transducer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Acoustic transformer)][AltContent: textbox (Transducer)][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (First and Second end)][AltContent: textbox (Length)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: ][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
164
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
336
322
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
270
692
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, 24, Hellenkamp discloses an ultrasonic acoustic assembly configured for use with an ultrasonic dental scaler system, the ultrasonic acoustic assembly configured to produce a vibrational wave (see Fig. 1-3 and Fig. 2 zoomed portion above and col. 1, lines 29-30 – piezoelectric dental cleaning device which uses ultrasonic vibrations for cleaning the teeth “) and including:
a transducer (22) (see Fig. 2 and zoomed portion above) defining a fixed length extending between first and second ends of the transducer (22);
an acoustic transformer (14) (see Fig. 2 and zoomed portion) connected to the transducer at a junction and extending therefrom; and
a keyed component (60) (see Fig. 2 above and zoomed portion – where the component 60 is an O-ring mounted around the transducer 22), wherein the transducer (22) is maintained under compression between the acoustic transformer (14) and the component (60) (see Fig. 2 above and zoomed portion – where at least a portion of the transducer 22 is hold between the acoustic transformer 14 and the component 60 along the longitudinal and radial direction), the keyed component (60) and the acoustic transformer (14) configured to inhibit relative rotational motion of the transducer (22) during the compression (see col. 3, lines 40-60 – due to the component 60 is holding from one end of a shoulder of the transducer 22, and from the other side of said shoulder is in direct contact with the acoustic transformer 14, it is understood that both, the component and the transducer, contribute to inhibit any relative motion of the transducer 22 when assembled; furthermore, due to the keyed component 60 is placed in the shoulder of the transducer 22, it is considered to that it won’t move and won’t allow the components that it’s in contact to move, for that reason it is understood that it is keyed component).
Regarding claim 24, Hellenkamp discloses that the keyed component (60) inhibits relative axial motion of the transducer during the compression (see col. 3, lines 40-60 – due to the component 60 is holding from one end of a shoulder of the transducer 22, and from the other side of said shoulder is in direct contact with the acoustic transformer 14, it is understood that both, the component and the transducer, contribute to inhibit any relative motion of the transducer 22 when assembled; furthermore, due to the keyed component 60 is placed in the shoulder of the transducer 22, it is considered to that it won’t move and won’t allow the components that it’s in contact to move, for that reason it is understood that it is keyed component).
Regarding claim 25, Hellenkamp discloses that the acoustic transformer (14) is constrained in both axial and rotational directions (see col. 4, lines 46-62 – where the acoustic transformer 14 is firmly attached by a waterproof seal to the transformer 22 and the fluid connector 38; therefore, it is understood that the acoustic transformer 14 does not move axially or rotationally).
Regarding claim 26, Hellenkamp discloses that the acoustic transformer (14) is constrained at a nodal area of the acoustic assembly (see annotated Fig. 2 above – where the nodal area are at the distal and proximal surfaces facing the longitudinal axis that engages the transducer 22 on one end and the fluid connector 38 at the opposing end).
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 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hellenkamp (US 4038571 A) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Mosch et al. (US 6619957 B1).
Regarding Claim 27, Hellenkamp discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 21.
However, Hellenkamp does not disclose the transducer is a Terfenol-D transducer.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Ultrasonic dental scaler system)]
PNG
media_image4.png
304
636
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Housing)]
PNG
media_image5.png
380
668
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Mosch teaches an ultrasonic dental scaler system (see Fig. 1 above), including: an ultrasonic acoustic assembly (see Fig. 1) disposed at least partially within the enclosure (212) (see Fig. 2), including: a transducer (see col. 3, lines 15-25); the transducer is a Terfenol-D transducer (see col. 3, lines 15-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the transducer of Hellenkamp to be a Terfenol-D transducer as taught by Mosch in order to have a magnetostrictive material (column 3, lines 15-25).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hellenkamp (US 4038571 A) as applied to claim 21 above, further in view of Warrin et al. (US 4820152 A).
Regarding claim 28, Hellenkamp discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 21.
However, Hellenkamp does not disclose the transducer is capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer.
[AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (First and second ends of the transducer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Enclosure)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Transducer)]
PNG
media_image6.png
278
422
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Warrin et al. teaches an ultrasonic dental scaler system, the system including an ultrasonic acoustic assembly (see Fig. 1 above) disposed at least partially within the enclosure (12) (see Fig. 1 above), including a transducer (22) (see Fig. 1 above) defining a fixed length extending between first and second ends of the transducer (22) (see Fig. 1 above), where the transducer (22) is capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer (see col. 8, lines 10-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the transducer of Hellenkamp to be capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer as taught by Warrin, in order to have the correct vibration of the tip.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cranston (US 4110908 A) in view of Guaragno et al. (US 20170281306 A1).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Tip)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Outer housing)]
PNG
media_image7.png
168
758
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rotatable grip)][AltContent: textbox (Inner housing)]
[AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (O-ring support chamber 50)][AltContent: textbox (Ultrasonic acoustic assembly (transducer 23, acoustic transformer 25))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image8.png
270
916
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 30, Cranston discloses ultrasonic dental scaler system (see Fig. 1-2), the system including:
an outer enclosure (11) configured to be handheld (see Fig. 1 above);
an inner housing (12) (see annotated Fig. 2 above, col. 2, line 42 – “interior casing 12”) at least partially disposed within the outer enclosure (11) (see col. 3, lines 4-25);
an ultrasonic acoustic assembly (23,25) (see Fig. 2 above) disposed at least partially within the inner housing (12) and rotationally fixed to the inner housing (12) at a nodal area of the ultrasonic acoustic assembly (23,25) (see annotated Fig. 2 and col. 2, lines 46-57 – where the ultrasonic acoustic assembly 23 and 25 are “positioned within the casing 12 at the section housing the coil 21”, where the “the transducer stack 23 is welded or soldered to an end of the tool holder 25“, and the “transformer 25 extends through the intermediate section of the outer casing 11”), the ultrasonic acoustic assembly(23,25) configured to produce a vibrational wave (see col. 2, lines 42-60), and including:
a transducer (23) (see Fig. 2) disposed within the inner housing and defining a fixed length extending between first and second ends of the transducer (figure 2);
an acoustic transformer (25) (Figure 2) connected to the transducer (23) at a junction within the inner housing (12) and extending therefrom (see annotated Fig. 2 and col. 2, lines 52-53 – where “one end of the transducer stack 23 is welded or soldered to an end of the tool holder 25 shaped to serve as an acoustical impedance transformer”); and
a tip (31) (see annotated Fig. 1 above) detachably connected to a distal end of the acoustic transformer (see Fig. 2, col. 2, lines 4-25 and 61-65 figure 2; column 2, lines 4-25);
a rotatable grip (52) (see Fig. 2 and col. 3, lines 4-25) coupled to the acoustic transformer (25) at a nodal area of the acoustic assembly (see Fig. 2 above and col. 1, lines 56-57 - “a forced nodal plane is induced in the transformer at a location other than a natural nodal plane”; col. 2, lines 6-13 – “this forced shift of the nodal plane from the natural nodal plane to the balance point of the vibrator assembly causes the frequency of the system to be approximately 25,000 cycles per second” and “enables a much shorter vibrator assembly to be utilized”, and col. 3, lines 12-16 – where “the o-ring support chamber 50 is preferably positioned at the balance point of the transformer. It should be noted that this balance point is different than the natural nodal plane of the combination”; therefore, due to the natural nodal plane has been shift to balance point where it is located the o-ring support chamber 50, in which it is aligned with the coupling between the rotatable grip 52 and the acoustic transformer).
However, Cranston does not disclose the inner housing is rotatable relative to the outer enclosure and the rotatable grip configured to rotate the ultrasonic acoustic assembly relative to the outer enclosure, thereby providing rotational adaptation of the tip during treatment.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Ultrasonic dental scaler system)]
PNG
media_image9.png
420
656
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
406
650
media_image10.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Outer enclosure)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rotatable grip)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Inner housing)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image11.png
332
638
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Guaragno teaches an ultrasonic dental scaler system (see Fig. 1 above), the system including:
an outer enclosure (111) (see annotated Fig. 3 above) configured to be handheld (see Fig. 1 above and [0024]);
an inner housing (101) (see annotated Fig. 3) rotatable relative to the outer enclosure (111) (see [0024]) and at least partially disposed within the outer enclosure (111) (See Fig. 2); and
the rotatable grip (117) (see Fig. 1-3) configured to rotate the ultrasonic acoustic assembly relative to the outer enclosure, thereby providing rotational adaptation of the tip during treatment (see [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the inner housing and rotatable grip of Cranston such that the inner housing is rotatable relative to the outer enclosure and the rotatable grip configured to rotate the ultrasonic acoustic assembly relative to the outer enclosure, thereby providing rotational adaptation of the tip during treatment as taught by Guaragno in order to be able for the insert orientation be adaptable by the user during a procedure.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cranston (US 4110908 A) in view of Guaragno et al. (US 20170281306 A1) as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of Mosch et al. (US 6619957 B1).
Regarding Claim 34, Cranston/Guaragno discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 30.
However, Cranston does not disclose that the transducer is a Terfenol-D transducer.
Mosch discloses an ultrasonic dental scaler system (see Fig. 1 above), including an ultrasonic acoustic assembly disposed at least partially within the enclosure (see Fig. 2 above), that includes a transducer (see col. 3, lines 15-25); and that the transducer is a Terfenol-D transducer (see col. 3, lines 15-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the transducer of Cranston/Guaragno to be a Terfenol-D transducer as taught by Mosch in order to have a magnetostrictive material (see col. 3, lines 15-25).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cranston (US 4110908 A) in view of Guaragno et al. (US 20170281306 A1) as applied to claim 30 above, and further in view of Warrin et al. (US 4820152 A).
Regarding claim 35, Cranston/Guaragno discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 30.
However, Cranston does not disclose the transducer is capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer.
Warrin et al. teaches an ultrasonic dental scaler system, the system including an ultrasonic acoustic assembly (see Fig. 1 above) disposed at least partially within the enclosure (12) (see Fig. 2 above), including a transducer (22) (see Fig. 1 above) defining a fixed length extending between first and second ends of the transducer (22) (see Fig. 1 above), where the transducer (22) is capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer (see col. 8, lines 10-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the transducer of Cranston to be capable of operating as an nλ/4 transducer, where n =1, and wherein a frequency of resonance fo is defined by the fixed length of the transducer as taught by Warrin in order to have the correct vibration of the tip.
Response to Arguments
After further evaluation it is understood that the prior art of Hellenkamp discloses the limitations described in the claims 21-28. Therefore, the 103 rejections of Hellenkamp in view of Rahman is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 27 January 2026 with respect to the use of the prior art of Hellenkamp have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 21 rejection, applicant argues that the prior art of Hellenkamp does not disclose that the transducer is the element 22 and that the acoustic transformer is the element 14, and where transducer is maintained under compression between the acoustic transformer and the component.
The element 14 is identified in Hellenkamp as a tubular piezoelectric crystal/lead zirconate-lead titanate ceramic crystal, capable of providing ultrasonic vibrational in its longitudinal direction when activated by high frequency electrical impulses from the electrical wires 16 (see col. 4, lines 46-52). Due to the element 14 takes the high frequency electrical impulses from the electrical wires and transforms it into an ultrasonic vibrational activity, it is understood that complies with what an acoustic transformer is, that is a device that transforms energy into vibration.
The element 22 is identified in Hellenkamp as a transducer (see col. 3, line 40). Even when the prior art uses the names “transducer” and “acoustical transformer” along the disclosure, it is understood that based on the function of the element 22 of transmitting the ultrasonic vibration of the crystal 14 to the dental work piece for use in cleaning the teeth.
Therefore, for at least having the transducer and the acoustic transformer in the prior art, it is understood that Hellenkamp discloses both limitations.
Furthermore, applicant argues that the prior art of Hellenkamp does not disclose that the transducer is maintained under compression between the acoustic transformer and the keyed component.
The Office disagree, the transducer 22 includes neck 92 in which a component/O-ring 60 is located. Said component 60 maintains the relative position of the transducer with respect to the outer case of the device when the front cap 10 is positioned around the front end of the front portion 4 of the outer case through rotation. Due to it is used rotation, it is understood that there is some sort of force from the front cap 10 towards the transducer through the component 60, in order for the component 60 been able to maintain its relative position and orientation. On the other side of the neck 92 the transducer 22 includes an annular exterior shoulder 90 where the acoustic transformer 14 connect with the transducer 22 in the longitudinal direction. For that reason, it is understood that due to the component 60 force from one side and the acoustic transformer 14 are located on opposing side of the neck of the transducer 22, those structures inhibit relative rotational motion of the transducer (22) when in the housing of the device by providing compression.
On the other hand, it is observed on Fig. 5 of the present application, that the transducer extending from a first and a second ends, it is placed between the acoustic transformer on one end of the first and second ends and the keyed component on the opposing one end of the first and second ends.
Due to the description of the relative location between each component is not specific enough, it is understood that the claimed transducer in which it is maintained under compression between the acoustic transformer and the keyed component can be interpreted in a way that is found in the prior art of Hellenkamp.
Regarding claim 30 rejection, the applicant argues that the prior art of Cranston does not disclose that the ultrasonic acoustic assembly is rotationally fixed to the inner housing at a nodal area of the ultrasonic acoustic assembly.
The Office disagrees, Cranston discloses that natural nodal plane and the balance point are not in the same location. However, it is also disclosed that Cranston shifts the natural nodal plane to the balance point of the vibrator assembly, in which it is positioned at the O-ring support chamber 50 that at the same time is aligned with the coupling between the rotatable grip 52 and the acoustic transformer, that it happens to be the same location as claimed.
Furthermore, the claimed nodal plane is of the ultrasonic acoustic assembly. The balance point of Cranston is shifted based from the transducer and the acoustical transformer assembly. For that reason, it is understood that said balance point refers to the claimed nodal point, because both nodal points are based on the ultrasonic acoustic assembly.
For that reason, it is understood that the claimed subject matter is found in the prior art of Cranston, making the rejection proper and will be maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10-13, and 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, Cranston discloses ultrasonic dental scaler system (figures 1-2), the system comprising: an enclosure (10; Figure 1) configured to be handheld (figure 1); an ultrasonic acoustic assembly (23, 25; figure 2) disposed at least partially within the enclosure (figure 2), the ultrasonic acoustic assembly configured to produce a vibrational wave (column 2, lines 42-60) and including: a transducer (23; figure 2) defining a fixed length extending between first and second ends of the transducer; an acoustic transformer connected to the transducer at a junction (figure 2) and extending therefrom (figure 2); and a tip (31; figure 1-2) detachably connected to a distal end of the acoustic transformer (Figure 2; column 3, lines 4-25), wherein the vibrational wave is transmitted from the transducer along the acoustic transformer to the tip to produce an output amplitude at the tip (column 2, lines 42-60); a rotatable grip (52; figure 2; column 4; lines 4-25) coupled to the acoustic transformer at a nodal area of the acoustic assembly (figure 2).
Cranston does not disclose a cordless ultrasonic dental scaler; the rotatable grip configured to rotate the ultrasonic acoustic assembly relative to the enclosure; and a fluid source (disposed within the enclosure; an electronic control system disposed within the enclosure and configured to energize the ultrasonic acoustic assembly, the electronic control system including an amplitude control circuit configured to control the output amplitude at the tip based on a user selectable amplitude level; a battery disposed within the enclosure and configured to power the electronic control system; the fluid source containing a fluid and having a metered flow rate of the fluid from the fluid source, the metered flow rate controlled by a flow control circuit of the electronic control system that is coupled to the amplitude control circuit and configured to vary the metered flow rate of the fluid from the fluid source proportionally to a change in the output amplitude at the tip.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MIRAYDA ARLENE APONTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1933. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Eric Rosen can be reached at 571-270-7855. 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.
/MIRAYDA A APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights