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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous rejection(s) of the claims have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. Applicant contends that claim 1 differs in the cited prior art because the language requires a feedback relationship. The claim language is paraphrased – but the feedback the applicant appears to be referring to is the “based on the received detected plurality of spectral channels”. The examiner notes that as applicant describes in the last paragraph of Page 7 of 13, of the Remarks dated 31 December 2025, Konno moves forward through each step S3-S7 based on the prior step’s, and based on the received detected plurality of spectral channels at S4, the light source is adjusted by turning off the nth LED, and then turning on the next nth LED in the following recursive step. The examiner notes that Konno is clear in that these steps are not limited to a single LED or spectral channel, and could be a plurality of spectral channels as identified in Fig. 7 and ¶¶ 562 with a plurality of different spectral channels used in each recursive step. During each of the recursive steps, the light emitted is adjusted, and with the spectral channel LED adjustment, at least one of a signal to noise ratio or image calibration of the subsequent spectral image would necessarily occur, as it is a different wavelength. Lastly, step S6 causes the sensor to capture and store the spectral image in the appropriate memory slot.
Accordingly, the examiner believes that the present claim language does not require the specific feedback relationship which applicant’s arguments appear to rely upon. Although Konno procedure may be pre-scripted, each step moves forward based on the previous step being completed, which would read on the feedback required by the present claim language.
With regard to the intraoral device specified in the preamble – the examiner notes that the prior art is clear that the device is photographing teeth and would require a light source about the oral cavity / jaw / teeth as required in the body of the claim – also see ¶¶ 270, 284, 502, etc.
Regarding claim 2, applicant does not contend against or mention the ¶¶ 474 cited in the rejection, which explicitly recites a component to cause light to be reflected. Regarding claim 3, ¶¶ 555-571 discuss the importance of maintaining a proper spectral image with a flat regular reflection. Regarding claim 10, the examiner notes that the photography device 1 consists of a tray 4 configured to be worn within the oral cavity, and reads on the claimed limitations, which do not require that the tray houses the claimed imaging components. Lastly, regarding claim 17, the spectral sensor of Konno detects the full bandwidth of visible light 380nm-800nm – which covers the 430nm range required for fluorescence detection for tooth color and plaque in the present application – see ¶¶ 460 and cited paragraphs in the rejection.
Accordingly, the rejection is maintained below.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Konno et al. (US 2006/0251408; hereinafter “Konno”).
Regarding claim 1, Konno discloses an intraoral device for determining the oral health characteristics of an oral cavity, the intraoral device comprising: a light source configured to emit light in a plurality of wavelengths within or about the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 189); a matrix array multispectral sensor configured to detect a plurality of spectral channels of a spectral image relating to the oral cavity, each of the plurality of spectral channels allowing transmission of a corresponding wavelength (e.g. ¶¶ 190); and a processor configured to: receive the detected plurality of spectral channels of the spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 190-210); based on the received detected plurality of spectral channels, cause the light source to adjust the light emitted within or about the oral cavity to modify an image calibration of a subsequent spectral image (e.g. ¶¶ 18-19, 507, 537, etc.); and cause the matrix array multispectral sensor to capture the subsequent spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 238-246).
Regarding claim 19, Konno teaches a method for determining the oral health characteristics of an oral cavity, the method comprising: emitting, via a light source, light in a plurality of wavelengths within or about the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 189-190); detecting, via a matrix array multispectral sensor, a plurality of spectral channels of a spectral image relating to the oral cavity, each of the plurality of spectral channels allowing transmission of a corresponding wavelength and receiving the detected plurality of spectral channels of the spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 190-210); based on the received detected plurality of spectral channels, causing the light source to adjust the light emitted within or about the oral cavity to modify an image calibration of a subsequent spectral image (e.g. ¶¶ 18-19, 507, 537, etc.); and causing the matrix array multispectral sensor to capture a subsequent spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 238-246).
Regarding claim 2, Konno discloses one or more reflective elements positioned within or about the intraoral device, wherein the one or more reflective elements are configured to reflect portions of the oral cavity into a field of view of the matrix array multispectral sensor (e.g. ¶¶ 474, 502, etc.).
Regarding claim 3, Konno discloses the one or more reflective elements comprise at least one of a flat reflector, a concave reflector, or a convex reflector, wherein the flat reflector is configured to prevent elongation or shrinkage of the spectral image relating to the oral cavity and the concave or convex reflectors are configured to adjust a magnification or a curvature of the spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 481, 597, 611).
Regarding claim 4, Konno discloses the processor is further configured to: determine a spectral transmission via the subsequent spectral image relating to the oral cavity in the adjusted emitted light; and perform a determination of a hard tissue condition based on the determined spectral transmission (e.g. ¶¶ 320, 486, etc.).
Regarding claim 5, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor and the light source each comprise at least one polarizer configured to cross-polarize light emitted by the light source, the cross-polarizing of the light removing a specular reflection incident upon the matrix array multispectral sensor (e.g. ¶¶ 210, 568-580, etc.).
Regarding claim 6, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor is mounted on at least one of an outside wall of the intraoral device, a top of a mount of the intraoral device, or a bottom of the mount of the intraoral device (e.g. ¶¶ 502).
Regarding claim 7, Konno discloses one or more color calibration devices configured to perform a color calibration of the spectral image relating to the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 507).
Regarding claim 8, Konno discloses the one or more calibration devices comprise a plurality of color calibration squares positioned in the field of view of the matrix array multispectral sensor (e.g. ¶¶ 507).
Regarding claim 9, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor comprises a fisheye lens configured to provide an ultrawide and close-up large field of view image of the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 481, 597, 611).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Konno discloses the intraoral device is a tray configured to be worn within the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 502).
Regarding claim 11, Konno discloses the processor is configured to cause the subsequent spectral image relating to the oral cavity in the adjusted emitted light to be displayed upon a display (e.g. ¶¶ 201-202).
Regarding claim 12, Konno discloses the processor is configured to diagnose, via artificial intelligence techniques, a tissue relating to the oral cavity based on the subsequent spectral image relating to the oral cavity in the adjusted emitted light (e.g. ¶¶ 320, 486, etc.).
Regarding claim 13, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor comprises at least one of an RGB, RGB-IR, multispectral, or hyperspectral camera (e.g. ¶¶ 222-223, 247-248, etc.).
Regarding claim 14, Konno discloses the light source comprises one or more of a light emitting diode, superluminescent diode, laser, or arc lamp (e.g. ¶¶ 211).
Regarding claim 15, Konno discloses at least one of a bite bar, tooth rest, or tongue retractor configured to accept portions of the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 502).
Regarding claim 16, Konno discloses the light source comprises a broadband light source (e.g. ¶¶ 91, 236, 244, etc.).
Regarding claim 17, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor is configured to detect fluorescence or a biofilm on or about a tooth within the oral cavity (e.g. ¶¶ 308 – coating material; ¶¶ 349 – tooth color reference).
Regarding claim 18, Konno discloses the matrix array multispectral sensor is a distance sensor (e.g. ¶¶ 63, 683).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael D’Abreu whose telephone number is (571) 270-3816. The examiner can normally be reached on 7AM-4PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Hamaoui can be reached at (571) 270-5625. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL J D'ABREU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights