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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/31/has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-12, 15, 17 and 19 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.
In claim 1, lines 7 and 8, “the groove” could refer to the “at least one groove” of the receiving member or the “at least one positioning groove”. Clarification is required.
In claim 3, line 1, “the grove” should be groove. Further, “the groove” could refer to the “at least one groove” of the receiving member or the “at least one positioning groove”. Clarification is required.
In claim 3, “the through-hole” lack antecedent basis as there is no through-hole in claim 1.
Claim 5, the depression is defined as a “through-hole” yet the specification does not show the bore hole going through the base body. Clarification is required.
In claims 4 and 7-11, “the base body centre” is not defined and lack antecedent basis. Is the “centre” a center point of the diameter of the cylinder or in the “centre” a midline in the thickness direction? Clarification is required.
In claim 7, line 1, “the groove” could refer to the “at least one groove” of the receiving member or the “at least one positioning groove”. Clarification is required.
In claims 8-11, “at least one lateral holding surface” which is a recess and extends “across a height of the lateral holding surface starting from the base body centre” does not make sense. Is the recess height from the body center to the cover surface? Is the holding surface of claim 10 between the body centre and the bottom surface? In claim 11, is the recess an indentation having upper and lower surfaces parallel to the cover surface?
In claim 12, the term “essentially” is vague. Is the base body a straight circular cylinder?
In claim 15, the claim does not further limit claim 1 as it is a “blank for producing a dental element”.
In claims 17 and 19, “the depressions” lacks antecedent basis as there is only one depression in the preceding claim.
Claim 19 is “a transport system” but depends from claim 18 which is “a storage system or clamping device”. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 12-13 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2016/0317258 (Steger).
Regarding claim 1: The reference discloses a blank for producing a dental element comprising a cylindrical base, a positioning groove, at least wo receiving grooves which do not extend the full height of the blank, a depression (bore). See Figure 3a-3g. Element 16 is the positioning groove, recesses 4 are the receiving grooves and 19 is the bore.
Regarding claim 2: See Figures 3a-3g. 19 is a bore.
Regarding claim 3: The grooves and recesses are semi-circular. See Figures 3a-3g.
Regarding claim 4: The receiving grooves 4 have surfaces parallel to the bottom and top surfaces. See Figures 3a-3g.
Regarding claim 6-7: See Figures for at least 4 receiving grooves having different heights.
Regarding claim 12: See base body in Figures.
Regarding claim 13: See {0042} for the machinable materials for the base body.
Regarding claims 16-19: Se Figures 5a and 5b for holding device having surfaces engaging a plurality of blanks. The clamping system is releasable.
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0317258 (Steger).
The reference discloses the blank as described in the above 102 rejection. It is recognized that the reference does not disclose a label on the blank. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a label. One would expect the ability to personalize, track, describe etc. the product.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH EVANS MULVANEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1527. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm M-F.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291.
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.
/ELIZABETH E MULVANEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1785