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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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) and 120 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, Provisional Application No. 63/251,810, 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 1-19, and 31-37 require the plurality of appliances to include at least one appliance having a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the shell however there is no support for such a limitation in prior-filed application 63/251,810, and only find support in prior-filed application of 63/266,899 as such the claims shall only receive a priority date of the instant application filing date of 01/18/2022.
Further regarding claims 1-19, the disclosure of the prior-filed application, Provisional Application Nos. 63/251,810 and 63/266,899 and Application No. 17/959,965, fail 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 1-19 require the plurality of appliances to provide linear and rotational pressure to teeth positioned in the indentations however there is no support for such linear and rotational pressure on the teeth in any of the prior-filed applications, as such the claims shall only receive a priority date of the instant application filing date of 05/02/2023.
The prior filed applications only provide support for the inside wall to extend at most 5mm over the lingual attachment of the gumline of the patient and as such the limitations of claims 5 and 6 which recite the broader range of at least 3, which includes extension beyond 5mm is not supported by the prior filed applications. Further new claim 36 recites that the outside wall extend over and against at least 3 mm of the buccal attached gingiva which is not supported in the provisional or non-provisional application. As such claims 5, 6, and 36 will only receive a priority date of 05/02/2023.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19, and 31-37 have been considered but are not persuasive as the newly cited prior art of Kim et al. (KR 20180055168 A) provides for the new limitation of the facemask to actually provide the traction force to an intraoral hook on an expansion device. Further the new limitation of the difference in widths is provided for by Kimura et al. as cited in the following action.
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.
Claims 1-11, 13-19, and 31-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 2016/0081769 A1) in view of Wu et al. (US 2018/0153649 A1) in view of Shen et al. (WO 2021/051701 A1, provided translation cited) and further in view of Kim et al. (KR 20180055168 A, provided translation cited).
Regarding claim 1, Kimura discloses dental appliances for jaw remodeling and at least partially simultaneous teeth positioning (paragraph [0042] all disclosing the remodeling of the jaw by palatal expansion, paragraph [0052] all disclosing expanding and repositioning being simultaneous) , comprising:
a plurality of dental appliances (paragraph [0055] lines 1-10) , each dental appliance including an outside wall and an inside wall (see image below), with a channel to receive teeth of a dental arch between the outside wall and the inside wall (see image below), the received teeth including at least a molar and incisor ( Figs, 1a/b, 5-11 all showing that the expansion devices include cavities for all the teeth including incisors and molars), the channel including indentations to receive at least some of the teeth of the dental arch (see image below), the inside wall extending so as to be parallel to bone structure supporting the received teeth of the dental arch (see image below, the inner wall generally follows the alveolar bone of the teeth the wall contacts and thus would be parallel to some of the bone), the inside wall being configured to apply pressure radially outward to the bone structure in a direction towards a surface defined by the outside wall and to apply outward radial pressure to lingual attached gingiva (Fig. 1a/b, 5-11 showing expansion towards the outer walls outer surface being radially outward and inner wall contacting lingual attached gingiva, paragraph [0092] all disclosing the configuration of the appliance structures apply force to the “each structure contacts at least one of a surface of a tooth or a surface of the patient’s gingiva and imparts force thereto” thus radially outward pressure applied to the lingual gingiva, paragraph [0050] and [0057] disclosing all teeth are expanded out and thus being radial outward pressure by the appliance);
wherein the dental appliances provide a succession of dental appliances each of the dental appliances in the succession having inside walls having a greater arch width and/or length than a prior dental appliance in the succession (paragraph [0092] all);
and wherein at least some of the dental appliances in the succession would be a first subset have at least some indentations positioned in the channel so as to provide linear and/or rotational pressure about a tooths long axis to teeth positioned in the indentations so as to reposition the teeth with respect to the dental arch ( paragraph [0077] all disclosing the configuration of the indentation/cavities providing linear and/or rotational pressures to the teeth by control tipping, rotation, translation which are along teeth’s long axis of controlled repositioning),
and a surface extending across the dental arch, the surface configured to conform to a shape of a palate of a wearer of the dental appliances, where an apex of the surface is configured to be offset by a predetermined distance from an apex of the palate to accommodate the palate drop (paragraph [0075] disclosing “the other side of the arch element can, for example, be adjacent to and/or in contact with a surface of the patient's mouth (e.g., the palate and/or floor of the patient's mouth). Further, as discussed herein, in some embodiments, using the patient's mouth mold and/or scan data, the trans-palatal arch may be designed to contact the palate (e.g., if more support is desired) or it may be designed not to have contact (e.g., for patient comfort)” making it clear that the apex of the surface is designed off of the patient’s mouth mold/scan is designed to have a clearance from the palate and that would include the apex of the palate as it would follow the contour of the palate and still be offset from it at the apex).
PNG
media_image1.png
469
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Further regarding claim 1, Kimura discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to disclose that the offset between the surface of the appliance and the palate is a predetermined amount between 0.25 mm and 1.0 mm.
However, Wu discloses dental appliances in series for expanding a jaw and repositioning teeth (title and abstract), where each expander has a maxillary appliance with a surface that extends across about a palate with an apex that is offset/clearance from the palate at a predetermined clearance offset distance including at 0.3mm, 0.5mm, or 1 mm at the apex of the surface and the palate (Fig. 1 element 127 at the apex, paragraph [0088] all)
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 predetermined offset clearance distance between the surface apex and the palate apex to be either 0.3mm, or 0.5mm, or 1mm as taught by Wu into the predetermined clearance offset distance Kimura for the purpose of ensuring the prevention of soft tissue irritation as taught by Wu(paragraph [0088] line 8).
Further regarding claim 1, Kimura/Wu discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the outside wall of at least one dental appliance of the plurality of dental appliances comprises a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance.
However, Shen discloses a jaw position and deformity correction system (tile and abstract) with a series of shells (page 3 lines 31-33 disclosing the use of shell-shaped dental instruments used in different treatment stages to gradually treat the jaw) including a stage of expansion (page 10 lines 5-6 disclosing horizontal expanding the arch) and at least one of the shells includes a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance (Figs. 3 and 4 showing a plurality of two hooks 14 and two corresponding elastics connected to the hooks and providing a radially forward force in figured 3).
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 outside wall of at least one dental appliance of the plurality of dental appliances comprises a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance as taught by Shen into the dental appliances as taught by Kimura/Wu for the purpose of providing for jaw bone repositioning in addition to occlusal restricting as taught by Shen (page 6 lines 8-9).
Further regarding claim 1, Kimura/Wu/Shen discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose where the appliances and elastics are a kit with a facemask with a portion that is coupled to the elastic bands of Kimura/Wu/Shen.
However, Kim discloses a kit with a composite device for front traction and orthodontic tooth repositioning (title and abstract), having a dental appliance tray for palatal expansion (Fig. 4 element 21) with a plurality of hooks on the front face of the device (Fig. 4 elements 231) where the hooks are attach by elastic bands (Fig. 3 element 41) that are connected to portion of a facemask (Fig. 3 element 41 connected to facemask 10) for providing traction force (page 3 lines 23-28).
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 actual use of a kit with a facemask for providing the traction force by the elastic bands as taught by Kim into the elastic bands and traction of the dental appliances as taught by Kimura/Wu/Shen for the purpose of providing for a maxillary tray with hooks to provide for effective maxillary correction of the maxillary dentition as taught by Kim (page 5 lines 26-27).
Regarding claim 2, Kimura further discloses wherein the indentations of at least some of the dental appliances of a first subset in the succession are positioned to apply linear and/or rotational pressure to teeth (paragraph [0077] all disclosing the configuration of the indentation/cavities providing linear and/or rotational pressures to the teeth by control tipping, rotation, translation which are along teeth’s long axis of controlled repositioning) such that the teeth have a mid-line in a middle of a user's face (Figs. 1a/b, 5-11 all showing the movements of the appliances with teeth positioning indentation cavities being in relation to the mid-line of the anatomy of the dental arch, see image above,).
Regarding claim 3, Kimura further discloses wherein the indentations of at least some of the dental appliances being a first subset in the succession are positioned to apply linear and/or rotation pressure to teeth so as to substantially position the teeth on a curve defined by the dental arch (Figs. 1a/b, 5-11 showing the appliances formed into an ideal arch curve for moving teeth, paragraph [0032] disclosing the arch of teeth including a curved row).
Regarding claim 4, Kimura further discloses wherein the indentations of at least some of the dental appliances in the succession are positioned to apply linear and/or rotational pressure to teeth so as to move teeth to obtain a predetermined spacing between teeth (Figs. 1a/b, 5-11, etc. showing the appliances formed into an ideal arrangement and spacing for moving the teeth, paragraph [0142] lines 1-8 disclosing defined spacing between teeth).
Regarding claim 5, Kimura discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above and further discloses that the inside wall is dimensioned to extend over and against the lingual attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the lingual attached gingiva ( figs. 1a/b, 5-10 element 104/105/504/604/904/1004 extending past and end, paragraph [0168]-[0170] all disclosing additional portions extending beyond the gum line over the gingival along the length of the appliance of the entire space of the appliance for rigidity or improved retention ), but fails to explicitly disclose where the inside wall that extends over and against the marginal and lingual attached gingiva is at least 3mm, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the extension of the inside wall to be at least 3 mm as it is supposed to cross over the palate and thus cover anatomically more that 3mm and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and Kimura discloses that the walls of the appliance can be used to control force or increased rigidity or improved retention and for applying force directly against the gingiva tissue itself to apply force to the bone surrounding the teeth to control tipping and thus the location and distance of the force would be included in the amount of extension of the walls (all disclosing additional portions extending beyond the gum line over the gingival along the length of the appliance of the entire space of the appliance for rigidity or improved retention, paragraph [0092] all disclosing the appliance contacting and applying force to the gingiva ) and thus is disclosed within Kimura a recognized result effective variable and would have been obvious to set to be at least 1mm. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claims 6 and 36, Kimura/Wu/Shen as combined discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above, including that portions of the outer wall extend beyond and against the buccal gumline (Kimura Fig. 8 elements 807) , but fails to disclose where the outside wall is dimension to extend over at least one 1mm or 3mm of buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch.
However, Wu further discloses where the buccal wall that extends over and against at least the buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch (Fig. 33 element 3313 extending well beyond and against the marginal gingiva and over the attached gingiva, paragraph [0142] lines 28-39 disclosing the extension of the buccal wall is beyond the buccal line which would be the marginal gingiva and over the gingiva itself).
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 outside wall is dimension to extend over and against the buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch as taught by Wu into the outer walls in the series of appliances as taught by Kimura/Wu/Shen for the purpose of providing for make the expander stronger and providing better attachment as taught by Wu (paragraph [0142] lines 34-35).
Further Regarding claims 6 and 36, Kimura/Wu/Shen discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed but fails to explicitly disclose where the outside wall that extends over and against the buccal marginal and attached gingiva has an extension that is at least 1 or 3 mm, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the extension of the outside wall to be at least 3 mm since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and both Kimura and Wu discloses that the outer walls of the appliance can be used to control force or increased rigidity or improved retention and for applying force directly against the gingiva tissue itself to apply force to the bone surrounding the teeth to control tipping and thus the location and distance of the force would be included in the amount of extension of the walls (paragraph [0162] all disclosing additional portions extending beyond the gum line over the gingival along the length of the appliance of the entire space of the appliance for rigidity or improved retention, and [0163] all disclosing the appliance contacting and applying force to the gingiva, Wu incorporated paragraph [0142] lines 28-39 ) and thus is disclosed within Kimura/Wu/Shen a recognized result effective variable and would have been obvious to set to be at least 1mm or 3mm. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 7, Kimura further discloses where each dental appliance in the succession has an arch width or length between 0.15 and 0.3 mm greater that an arch width/length of the immediately preceding appliance (paragraph [0069] disclosing the increase in width between successive appliance being 0.25 mm).
Regarding claim 8, Kimura further discloses wherein the dental appliances comprise maxillary dental appliances (paragraph [0076] all disclosing the appliances cover the upper/maxillary arch) .
Regarding claim 9, Kimura further disclose wherein the maxillary dental appliances include a surface extending across the dental arch, with the surface configured so as to be about a palate of an individual who is to wear the maxillary dental appliances (figs. 1a/b, 5-10 element 104/105/504/604/904/1004 etc. ) .
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Kimura further discloses wherein the surface extends from and connects the upper edges of the inside wall of the maxillary dental appliance (fig. 1a/b, 5-10 element 104/105/504/604/904/1004 extending from and connecting upper edges of inner wall)
Regarding claim 13, Kimura further discloses wherein the dental appliances comprise mandibular dental appliances (paragraph [0045] and [0046] further disclosing the appliances can cover the lower/mandibular arch).
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Kimura further discloses wherein the dental appliances are formed of an acrylic polymer (paragraph [0149] all disclosing the appliance made of a polymer and using a polyacrylic that is cured) .
Regarding claim 16, Kimura further discloses wherein the positions of the indentations for at least some of the teeth provide for orthodontic positioning of the at least some of the teeth by at least some of the different ones of the dental appliances (paragraph [0091] disclosing different stages where one may only be expansion and additional repositioning stages without expansion).
Regarding claims 17-19, Kimura further discloses wherein the indentations are dimensioned for teeth of a mixed dentition and thus some dimensioned for primary teeth and some for adult teeth (paragraph [0170]-[0172] all disclosing the use of the appliances with primary teeth being lost during treatment, the limitations of claims 17 and 18 by depending from claim 1 which recites the preamble of “comprising” does not exclude the presence of the other types of teeth and thus a mixed dentition reads on both).
Regarding claims, 31 and 32, Kimura discloses where the channel is configured to receive teeth of the dental arch extending from a left molar to a right molar, including canine teeth, bicuspid teeth and incisor teeth (Figs, fig. 1a/b, 5-11 all showing that the expansion devices include cavities for all the teeth including incisors, canines, bicuspids, and molars, paragraph [0045] all).
Regarding claim 33, Kimura discloses wherein at least some of the dental appliances in the succession of dental appliances have some portions of the inside wall extending further radially forward than other portions of the inside wall (See image above inner wall extend radially forward at different amounts for different teeth thus with some further than others, further paragraph [0092] all disclosing that the appliances are to correcting all teeth or only one tooth and thus some would be further radially positioned than other for corrected each individual tooth).
Regarding claim 34, Kimura further discloses wherein the indentations are each dimensioned to encapsulate each tooth beyond the gumline(Figs. 1a/b, 5-10 element 104/105/504/604/904/1004 extending past the marginal gumline, paragraph [0168] all disclosing additional portions extending beyond the gum line over the gingival along the length of the appliance of the entire space of the appliance).
Regarding claim 35, Kimura discloses wherein the indentations are each dimensioned to encapsulate each tooth to the extent possible, accounting for any contact between proximal tooth surfaces (paragraph [0059] lines 8 disclosing the appliance indentations have interproximal portions to encapsulate the teeth to the extent possible).
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 2016/0081769 A1) in view Izugami et al. (US 2015/0245887 A1) in view of Shen et al. (WO 2021/051701 A1, provided translation cited) and further in view of Kim et al. (KR 20180055168 A, provided translation cited).
Regarding claim 37, Kimura discloses dental appliances for jaw remodeling and at least partially simultaneous teeth positioning (paragraph [0042] all disclosing the remodeling of the jaw by palatal expansion, paragraph [0052] all disclosing expanding and repositioning being simultaneous) , comprising:
a successional plurality of dental appliances (paragraph [0055] lines 1-10) , each dental appliance including an outside wall and an inside wall (see image below), with a channel to receive teeth of a dental arch between the outside wall and the inside wall (see image below), the received teeth including at least a molar and incisor ( Figs, 1a/b, 5-11 all showing that the expansion devices include cavities for all the teeth including incisors and molars), the channel including indentations to receive at least some of the teeth of the dental arch (see image below), the inside wall extending so as to be parallel to bone structure supporting the received teeth of the dental arch (see image below, the inner wall generally follows the alveolar bone of the teeth the wall contacts and thus would be parallel to some of the bone), the inside wall being configured to apply pressure radially outward to the bone structure in a direction towards a surface defined by the outside wall and to apply outward radial pressure to lingual attached gingiva (Fig. 1a/b, 5-11 showing expansion towards the outer walls outer surface being radially, along a radius from the middle/center of the mouth, outward) and inner wall contacting lingual attached gingiva, (paragraph [0092] all disclosing the configuration of the appliance structures apply force to the “each structure contacts at least one of a surface of a tooth or a surface of the patient’s gingiva and imparts force thereto” thus radially outward pressure applied to the lingual gingiva, paragraph [0050] and [0057] disclosing all teeth are expanded out and thus being radial outward pressure by the appliance);
wherein the dental appliances provide a succession of dental appliances each of the dental appliances in the succession having inside walls having a greater arch width and/or length than a prior dental appliance in the succession (paragraph [0092] all);
and wherein at least some of the dental appliances in the succession would be a first subset have at least some indentations positioned in the channel so as to provide linear and/or rotational pressure about a tooths long axis to teeth positioned in the indentations so as to reposition the teeth with respect to the dental arch ( paragraph [0077] all disclosing the configuration of the indentation/cavities providing linear and/or rotational pressures to the teeth by control tipping, rotation, translation which are along teeth’s long axis of controlled repositioning).
PNG
media_image1.png
469
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kimura as discussed above discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above, including where portions of the outer wall extend beyond and against the buccal gumline (Kimura Fig. 8 elements 807), but fails to disclose where the outside wall that is dimension to extend over and against extends at least one 1mm of buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch.
However, Izugami discloses dental appliances in series for expanding a jaw and repositioning teeth (title and abstract, Fig. 11c, 12b, etc. paragraph [0056] all), having inside and outside walls and a channel between the walls to receive teeth (Fig. 2a etc. showing inside/lingual wall 10 and buccal/facial/labial wall at b through c) that extends over and against at least the buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch (Fig. 2a-d element b-c extending over the buccal gingiva pas the demarcating line between the marginal gingiva and buccal attached gingiva, paragraph [0067] lines 1-10 the appliance having a buccal gripping part that covers the crown, gums and alveolar bone parts thus extending beyond the demarcation between the marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva and thus has a configuration to prevent flaring and reduction of bone).
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 outside wall is dimension to extend over and against the buccal attached gingiva of a user past a line demarcating a boundary between marginal gingiva and the buccal attached gingiva, the outside wall being configured to prevent at least one of teeth flaring or reduction in bone between buccal walls of a jawbone and socket of the teeth of the dental arch as taught by Izugami into the series of appliances as taught by Kimura for the purpose of providing for correction of underdevelopment while reducing physical and aesthetic stress as taught by Izugami (paragraph [0039] lines 1-11).
Further regarding claim 37, Kimura/Izugami discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed but fails to explicitly disclose where the outside wall that extends over and against the buccal marginal and attached gingiva is at least 1mm, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the extension of the outside wall to be at least 1 mm since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and both Kimura and Izugami discloses that the outer walls of the appliance can be used to control force or increased rigidity or improved retention and for applying force directly against the gingiva tissue itself to apply force to the bone surrounding the teeth to control tipping and thus the location and distance of the force would be included in the amount of extension of the walls (paragraph [0162] all disclosing additional portions extending beyond the gum line over the gingival along the length of the appliance of the entire space of the appliance for rigidity or improved retention, and [0163] all disclosing the appliance contacting and applying force to the gingiva, Wu incorporated paragraph [0067] lines 1-14 ) and thus is disclosed within Kimura/Izugami a recognized result effective variable and would have been obvious to set to be at least 1mm. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Further regarding claim 37, Kimura/Izugami discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the outside wall of at least one dental appliance of the plurality of dental appliances comprises a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance.
However, Shen discloses a jaw position and deformity correction system (tile and abstract) with a series of shells (page 3 lines 31-33 disclosing the use of shell-shaped dental instruments used in different treatment stages to gradually treat the jaw) including a stage of expansion (page 10 lines 5-6 disclosing horizontal expanding the arch) and at least one of the shells includes a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance (Figs. 3 and 4 showing a plurality of two hooks 14 and two corresponding elastics connected to the hooks and providing a radially forward force in figured 3).
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 outside wall of at least one dental appliance of the plurality of dental appliances comprises a plurality of hooks on opposing sides of the at least one dental appliance, the plurality of hooks being coupled to a corresponding plurality of elastic bands, the plurality of elastic bands extending outwardly past a front portion of the dental appliance and configured to apply a radially forward force to the at least one dental appliance as taught by Shen into the dental appliances as taught by Kimura/Izugami for the purpose of providing for jaw bone repositioning in addition to occlusal restricting as taught by Shen (page 6 lines 8-9).
Further regarding claim 1, Kimura/Izugami/Shen discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above but fails to explicitly disclose the appliance and elastics are part of a kit with a facemask with a portion that is coupled to the elastic bands of Kimura/Izugami/Shen.
However, Kim discloses a kit with composite device for front traction and orthodontic tooth repositioning (title and abstract), having a dental appliance tray for palatal expansion (Fig. 4 element 21) with a plurality of hooks on the front face of the device (Fig. 4 elements 231) where the hooks are attach by elastic bands (Fig. 3 element 41) that are connected to portion of a facemask (Fig. 3 element 41 connected to facemask 10) for providing traction force (page 3 lines 23-28).
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 actual use of a kit with a facemask for providing the traction force by the elastic bands as taught by Kim into the elastic bands and traction of the dental appliances as taught by Kimura/Izugami/Shen for the purpose of providing for a maxillary tray with hooks to provide for effective maxillary correction of the maxillary dentition as taught by Kim (page 5 lines 26-27).
Further regarding claim 37, Kimura/Izugami/Shen/Kim, Kimura further discloses where the inside wall of a second dental appliance of the plurality of appliances is configured to be 0.1 to 0.5mm further radially forward as compared to a first dental appliance of the plurality of dental appliances with the first dental appliance preceding the second dental appliance in the succession of dental appliances (paragraph [0069] lines line 14 disclosing the expansion width of the arch element being 0.25mm than the width of the teeth and thus when a first appliance would be at the end of its force application the next appliance would be 0.25mm wider than the preceding appliance teeth ending width and thus have an inside wall radially further forward than the preceding appliance)
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 2016/0081769 A1) in view of Wu et al. (US 2018/0153649 A1) in view of Shen et al. (WO 2021/051701 A1, provided translation cited) in view of Kim et al. (KR 20180055168 A, provided translation cited) as applied to claim 10 above and further in view of Shanjani et al. (US 2018/0153648 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kimura/Wu/Shen/Kim as discussed above discloses structure substantially identical to the instant application as discussed above, but fails to disclose where each of the appliances in the succession has an apex 0.25-1mm below the apex of the immediately prior maxillary dental appliance.
However, Shanjani discloses dental appliances in series for expanding a jaw and repositioning teeth (title and abstract, paragraph [0017] all), where each expander has a maxillary appliance with a surface that extends across about a palate with an apex that is offset/clearance from the palate (Fig. 13a “gap”, paragraph [0040] lines 1-10) and that through the sequence or series of appliances the clearance will be larger from the initial to the final appliance (paragraph [0040] lines 12-20 disclosing the “maximum positive clearance” i.e. the maximum clearance between the apex of the surface and the palate, will be lower in earlier appliances and greater in the later appliances).
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 clearance between the apex and the palate increasing for each sequential appliance of the series of appliances as they are used thus providing an apex of a prior appliance to be higher than an apex of the appliance following it as taught by Shanjani into the series of appliances as taught by Kimura/Wu/Shen/Kim for the purpose of maintaining proper clearance as needed by a patient’s morphing palatal region as treatment progressed as taught by Shanjani (paragraph [0039] lines 11-15).
Further regarding claim 12, Kimura/Wu/Shen/Kim/Shanjani as combined discloses the claimed invention except for the succession of appliances with decreasing apexes is such the apex of each appliance is 0.25mm to 1mm below an immediately prior maxillary dental appliance in the sequence of dental appliances, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the decrease in apex of each appliance to be between 0.25 mm and 1mm below the apex of the immediately prior appliance, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, such as where Kimura discloses the apex/clearance of appliances being designed to not contact for comfort and thus an optimizable distance and Shanjani discloses that such clearance would vary by the apex of early appliances being higher and the apexes of later appliances being below the earlier appliances, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See 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, 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.
/M.P.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 02/04/2026
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772