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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 14 July 2023 fails to comply with 37 CFR 2. 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non- patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. No copies were provided of the Foreign Patent Documents with the Cite. No. 3 EP 0400932 A3, Cite. No. 18 JP 2009504247 A, Cite. No. 24 WO 2011103669 A1, and Cite. No. 2 AU 2021290322 A1. Examiner suggests submitting copies of these documents and English translations of these documents if applicable.
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 11, 15-18, and 20-24 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 11 recites the limitation “wherein at least one of the first indentations, the second indentations, or the recesses are configured to detachably receive the orthodontic appliance or the two or more teeth, respectively” in lines 1-3. This limitation is unclear as it is unclear how the term “respectively” applies to the limitations, as there are three possible limitations which can be configured to detachably receive (the first indentations, the second indentations, or the recesses) but only two limitations which can be received (the orthodontic appliance or the two or more teeth). For purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret claim 11 line 3 as “two or more teeth,
Claims 15 and 20-24 recite the limitation “the first groove”. This limitation is unclear as claim 13 recites the limitation “a plurality of first grooves” in line 9, and it is unclear if the limitation “the first groove” is intended to refer to one of the plurality of first grooves, all of the plurality of first grooves, or to another groove separate from the plurality of first grooves. For purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret the limitations claims 15 and 20-24 as “the first grooves”, referring to the plurality of first grooves, and suggests amending to clarify.
Claims 16-18 and 20 recite the limitation “the second groove”. These limitation is unclear as claim 13 recites the limitation “a plurality of second grooves” in line 12, and it is unclear if the limitation “the second groove” is intended to refer to one of the plurality of second grooves, all of the plurality of second grooves, or to another groove separate from the plurality of second grooves. For purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret the limitations claims 16-18 and 20 as “the second grooves”, referring to the plurality of second grooves, and suggests amending to clarify.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “wherein at least one of the first groove, the second groove, or the indentation is configured to detachably receive the orthodontic device or the two or more teeth, respectively” in lines 1-3. This limitation is unclear as it is unclear how the term “respectively” applies to the limitations, as there are three possible limitations which can be configured to detachably receive (the first groove, the second groove, or the indentation) but only two limitations which can be received (the orthodontic device or the two or more teeth). For purposes of examination, Examiner will interpret claim 11 line 3 as “two or more teeth,
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.
Claims 8-10, 12-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (KR 20190031652 A and translated PDF).
PNG
media_image1.png
653
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
432
501
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 8, Lee discloses an installation unit for installing an orthodontic treatment device in a patient's mouth (Figs. 1-11, Abstract), the installation unit comprising:
a device (410 in Fig. 10, para. 0027) capable of being temporarily secured to two or more of the patient's teeth (Fig. 10, para. 0027), the device comprising a first coupling region (1st region in annotated Fig. 10), a second coupling region (2nd region in annotated Fig. 10), and a third coupling region (3rd region in annotated Fig. 10), wherein:
the first coupling region comprises first indentations (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) in a surface of the device that are shaped to detachably receive at least a portion of an orthodontic appliance comprising a structure (20 in Fig. 10) capable of repositioning the patient's teeth (para. 0030, 0035, 0039),
the second coupling region comprises second indentations (2nd indentations in annotated Fig. 10) in a surface of the device that are shaped to detachably receive a bracket (10 in Fig. 10, para. 0027, tube or the like; an indentation for a tube would also be capable of receiving at least part of a bracket of similar size and shape), and the third coupling region comprises recesses (recesses in annotated Fig. 10, Fig. 11) in a surface of the device that are shaped to detachably receive at least a portion of the two or more of the patient's teeth (Figs. 10 and 11, para. 0039), wherein the first indentations extend continuously between adjacent second indentations and/or adjacent recesses (Fig. 10, paras. 0028, 0030, 0035-0036 and 0039);
wherein the installation unit is capable of temporarily retaining the orthodontic appliance in a position relative to the installation unit such that, when the installation unit is placed on the patient's teeth, the orthodontic appliance is automatically aligned with the patient's teeth in a desired position for connecting to the teeth (para. 0043).
In regard to claim 9, Lee discloses the invention of claim 8. Lee further discloses wherein the device comprises a flexible cover (cover in annotated Fig. 10, para. 0035 and 0038, silicone or rubber) capable of fitting over the two or more teeth (Fig. 10).
In regard to claim 10, Lee discloses the invention of claim 8. Lee further discloses wherein the device comprises an outer surface (outer surface in annotated Fig. 11) and an inner surface (inner surface in annotated Fig. 11) capable of being in apposition with at least a portion of the two or more teeth (Figs. 10 and 11) when the installation unit is secured to the two or more teeth (Figs. 10 and 11, para. 0043), and wherein the first indentations, the second indentations, and the recesses are in the inner surface (annotated Figs. 10 and 11).
In regard to claim 12, Lee discloses the invention of claim 8. Lee further discloses wherein the device further comprises one or more fourth coupling regions (Fig. 8, para. 0034, region not shown but would be the region formed around 34 in Fig. 8 when transfer tray is formed, Fig. 10, para. 0035) capable of detachably receiving all or a portion of a platform (see 34 in Fig. 8; platform is not necessarily 34 but the coupling region formed would at least be of a structure that is able to receive at least a portion of a platform).
In regard to claim 13, Lee discloses an installation unit for installing an orthodontic treatment device in a patient's mouth (Figs. 1-11, Abstract), the installation unit comprising:
a shell (410 in Figs. 10 and 11, para. 0027) having a shape that corresponds to two or more teeth in one of the patient's jaws (Fig. 10, para. 0027), wherein the shell is capable of holding an orthodontic device (device in annotated Fig. 10) during installation of the device on the patient's teeth (para. 0043), the orthodontic device comprising a structure capable of repositioning the patient's teeth (20 in Fig. 10, paras. 0030, 0035, 0039), and wherein the shell has an outer surface (outer surface in annotated Fig. 11), an inner surface (inner surface in annotated Fig. 11), and a recess (3rd region in annotated Figs. 10 and 11) defined by the inner surface (Figs. 10 and 11), wherein the inner surface includes:
a plurality of first grooves (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) capable of receiving at least a portion of the orthodontic device (Fig. 10),
a plurality of second grooves (2nd indentations in annotated Fig. 10) capable of receiving a bracket (10 in Fig. 10, para. 0027, tube or the like; an indentation for a tube would also be capable of receiving at least part of a bracket of similar size and shape), and
a plurality of indentations (recessed in annotated Fig. 10) shaped to detachably receive at least a portion of two or more of the patient's teeth (Figs. 10 and 11, para. 0039), wherein the first grooves extend continuously between adjacent second grooves and/or adjacent indentations (Fig. 10, paras. 0028, 0030, 0035-0036 and 0039):
wherein the installation unit is capable of temporarily retaining the orthodontic device in a position relative to the installation unit such that, when the installation unit is placed on the patient's teeth, the orthodontic device is automatically aligned with the patient's teeth in a desired position for connecting to the teeth (para. 0043).
In regard to claim 14, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the orthodontic device (device in Fig. 10) is capable of being secured to the two or more of the patient's teeth (Fig. 10, para. 0043) and apply a force to the two or more of the patient's teeth to reposition the two or more teeth (Fig. 10, para. 0001, correction device).
In regard to claim 15, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the first grooves (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably coupling directly to the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, paras. 0042-0043).
In regard to claim 16, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the second grooves (2nd indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably coupling to at least a portion of one or more brackets while the one or more brackets (10 in Fig. 10) are coupled to the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, paras. 0042-0043).
In regard to claim 17, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the second grooves (2nd indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably coupling to at least a portion of one or more brackets (10 in Fig. 10) and a portion of the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, portion of 20 threaded inside 10, paras. 0042-0043) while the one or more brackets are coupled to the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, paras. 0042-0043).
In regard to claim 18, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the second grooves (2nd indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably coupling to at least a portion of one or more brackets (10 in Fig. 10) and all or a portion of the orthodontic device while the one or more brackets are coupled to the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, portion of 20 threaded inside 10, paras. 0042-0043), and while the orthodontic device is coupled to a platform (see 30 in Fig. 10, para. 0031; platform is not necessarily 30 but the second groove formed would at least be of a structure that is capable of detachably coupling to at least a portion of one or more brackets and all or a portion of the orthodontic device while the orthodontic device is coupled to a platform).
In regard to claim 19, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the inner surface (inner surface in annotated Fig. 11) is capable of being in apposition with at least a portion of the two or more teeth when the installation unit is secured to the two or more teeth (Figs. 10 and 11, para. 0043).
In regard to claim 21, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the first grooves (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) comprise a first region (part 1 in annotated Fig. 10), a second region (part 2 in annotated Fig. 10), and a third region (part 3 in annotated Fig. 10).
In regard to claim 22, Lee discloses the invention of claim 21. Lee further discloses wherein the first region (part 1 in annotated Fig. 10) of the first grooves comprises a first shape for an anchor portion of the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, part 1 is the side of 1st indentation touching one bracket 10, para. 0039).
In regard to claim 23, Lee discloses the invention of claim 21. Lee further discloses wherein the second region (part 2 in annotated Fig. 10) of the first grooves comprises a second shape for an arm of the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, part 2 is a section for wire 20, para. 0039).
In regard to claim 24, Lee discloses the invention of claim 21. Lee further discloses wherein the third region (part 3 in annotated Fig. 10) of the first grooves comprises a third shape for an attachment portion of the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, part 3 is the side of 1st indentation touching other bracket 10 and clip 30, para. 0039).
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.
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Doyle (U.S. Patent No. 5,863,198 A).
In regard to claim 11, Lee discloses the invention of claim 8. Lee further discloses wherein the first indentations (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic appliance (Fig. 10, paras. 0042-0043). Lee does not disclose that it is via a snap fit arrangement.
Doyle teaches an apparatus (20 in Fig. 2) for installing an orthodontic treatment device (Abstract) comprising first indentations (20d in Fig. 2) wherein the first indentations are capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic appliance via a snap fit arrangement (col. 4 lines 54-57).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of indirect bonding jigs. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first indentations of Lee by fabricating the first indentations so that the first indentations are capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic appliance via a snap fit arrangement as taught by Doyle in order to allow for the installation unit to securely engage the appliance while allowing the unit to be removed from the appliance with the application of a predetermined amount of force (col. 4 lines 57-61).
In regard to claim 20, Lee discloses the invention of claim 13. Lee further discloses wherein the first grooves (1st indentations in annotated Fig. 10) are capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic device (Fig. 10, paras. 0042-0043). Lee does not disclose that it is via a snap fit arrangement.
Doyle teaches an apparatus (20 in Fig. 2) for installing an orthodontic treatment device (Abstract) comprising a first groove (20d in Fig. 2) wherein the first groove is capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic device via a snap fit arrangement (col. 4 lines 54-57).
The references and the claimed invention are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of indirect bonding jigs. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first grooves of Lee by fabricating the first grooves so that the first groove is capable of detachably receiving the orthodontic device via a snap fit arrangement as taught by Doyle in order to allow for the installation unit to securely engage the device while allowing the unit to be removed from the device with the application of a predetermined amount of force (col. 4 lines 57-61).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 14 November 2025 with respect to the rejections of the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant is directed to the rejections in view of the amendments.
Conclusion
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 COURTNEY N HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-7219. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5:00PM (EST) flex, 2nd Friday off.
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.
/COURTNEY N HUYNH/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772