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
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has argued that Chen fails to provide for the new claim limitations, however Chen is now applied under 103 in view of Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370).
Further the new prior art of Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370) is cited.
Tipton is no longer relied upon.
Applicant has argued that Shanmugham fails to provide for the new combination of previous claims 7, 11, and 12 into claim 1, and further in combination with the new limitation of the channel formation by arguing that Shanmugham is cited for an outlet and a groove but no additional “formation”, however the formation limitation is addressed under 112(f) as being recited it he specification either as taking “any suitable form” (“the formation for channeling the coolant may take any suitable form” on page 25 lines 20-22 ) or to be the combination of the beveled/chamfered outlet and groove. The claim limitation of the function “channeling the coolant” is used as a verb and does not require a channel itself for the structure of the formation but only provide the function and in combination with the disclosure providing the structure can take any suitable form then the cited portion of Shanmugham, as well as Chen, and Himeno, provides for the claim limitation. Further the outlet cited in Shanmugam is only where the surface opening of 28 first opens and then there is a long transition in element 28 from an opening into a groove as clearly seen in figure 4 and thus the entire cited element 28 is not explicitly the outlet or the groove but sub-portions of 28 are cited to the opening and the groove. Applicant has cited to paragraph [0022] of Shanmugham, however this is only discussing the general structure of a delivery port label to 28 which does not remove the explicitly shown structure cited to in the drawings in the following action which a person of ordinary skill would reasonably understand as structure reading on the claimed limitations.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 07/06/2026. These drawings are unacceptable as failing to fully correct the objection in the action of 10/06/2025 and would add reference numeral 301 indicating the same portion as 306 and further present new matter as the manner in which the threading is shown is narrower than is supported in the original disclosure (showing specific forms of continuous threading at a rear opening where the original disclosure only states on page 26 the broad recitation of “The fastening may preferably comprise a threaded portion for fastening the connecting portion to the handpiece by screwing.” without any additional limitations disclosed as to the threading style, shape, exact location on which portion of the connection, such as internally or externally located threading , etc.). Any corrections to the drawings must clearly be supported by the original disclosure.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a fastening for fastening the connecting portion to the handpiece” from claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The amendments to the specification filed 07/06/2026 have been entered in part. The corrections to the abstract are appropriate. The amendments to the body of the specification would have entered new matter in relation to the drawings that have also not been entered.
The substitute specification filed 07/06/2026 has not been entered because it does not conform to 37 CFR 1.125(b) and (c) because: it contains new matter not supported by the original disclosure in relation to the new matter element 303 of the drawings amendment filed on 07/06/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 8-9 the limitation of “on the convex side of the tip” should read “on a convex side of the tip” for proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a formation for channeling coolant” and “a fastening for fastening the connecting portion to the handpiece” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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)(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 1, 3, 5, 6, 8-10, 13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370).
Regarding claim 1, Himeno discloses a tip for a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry (title and abstract, Fig. 6 element b1) the tip comprising a proximal inlet for receiving coolant (Fig. 6 opening end of 14 that connects to interior opening of 11a);
a distal working portion for being vibrated to aid scaling (See image below);
a proximal connecting portion for connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece, the working portion extending distally from the connection portion (See image below)
an outlet for delivering coolant received via the inlet to cool the working portion (Fig. 6 below element 15),
a formation for channeling coolant delivered from the outlet in a distal direction on a convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 below surface of 11b having opening connecting to element 16, Applicant discloses the formation as “the formation for channeling the coolant may take any suitable form” on page 25 lines 20-22 but also recites in lines 24-27 that the formation may also be formed by “the formation (e.g. beveled/chamfered outlet and/or groove” which appears to recite that the formation and the outlet and groove could additionally form part of the formation. Himeno discloses a formation for the function claimed as including a suitable formed surface at the surface of 11b having an opening to element 16 which would channel coolant at least by surface tension towards the distal direction. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Himeno disclose the formation as any suitable form for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the surface of Himeno would be functionally equivalent structure),
wherein the working portion defines a concave side and a convex side of the tip and the outlet is located on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 below showing a convex side with the outlet and a concave side),
wherein the inlet is located on the connection portion (Fig. 6 below proximal end of 13 is located on the connection portion), and the connecting portion comprises an interface for locating and connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece (Fig. 6 below interior of connection portion with interface having threads 13), the interface comprising the inlet (Fig. 6 below the interface internal portion of 11a with threads 13 having inlet proximal opening of 14), and further comprising a fastening for fastening the connection portion to the handpiece to receive vibrations therefrom (Fig. 6 below element 13 Applicant discloses the fastening as comprising a threaded portion on page 26 lines 15-17. Himeno discloses the interface for the function claimed as including a threads in column 5 lines 60-65. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Himeno disclose the fastening as a threading for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the threads of Himeno would be functionally equivalent structure).
PNG
media_image1.png
738
776
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Himeno further discloses wherein the outlet is located proximal to the working portion and distal to the inlet (Fig. 6 above location of 15).
Regarding claim 5, Himeno further discloses where the outlet is beveled or chamfered to channel coolant delivered from the outlet in a distal direction on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 above element 16a with column 145 lines 43-46 disclosing the grooved part of 16a with opening 15 can have a narrow angle and thus would be beveled or chamfered).
Regarding claim 6, Himeno further discloses wherein the working portion comprises a groove for channeling coolant delivered from the outlet in a distal direction on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 above element 16 being a groove into the surface).
Regarding claim 8, Himeno further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a body segment and a shoulder segment connecting the body segment with the working portion, the working portion extending distally from the shoulder segment (See image above).
Regarding claim 9, Himeno further discloses where the outlet is located on the shoulder segment of the connecting portion (See image above outlet 15 located within shoulder portion).
Regarding claim 10, Himeno further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a longitudinal axis extending from a proximal end of the connecting portion to a distal end of the connecting portion (Fig. 6 above, element 11a having a long centra axis), wherein at least part of the working portion diverges from the longitudinal axis of the connecting portion to define the concave side and the convex side of the device (Fig. 6 above element 11b diverges from the axis of 11a).
Regarding claim 13, Himeno further discloses wherein the connecting portion is integral with the working portion of the tip (Fig. 6 above elements 11a/11b are all a single integral piece).
Regarding claim 18, Himeno further discloses wherein the tip does not comprise a further outlet located on the concave side of the tip (Fig. 6 above there is only an outlet on the convex side).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Himeno further discloses a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry, comprising a scaler handpiece (Figs. 16/17 element 2) connected to a tip according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above which would connect to element 2 via similar to element 20c).
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-10, 13-15, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shanmugham et al. (US 2013/0216970 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shanmugham discloses a tip for a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry (title and abstract, Fig. 1 element 10) the tip comprising a proximal inlet for receiving coolant (Fig. 4 opening in proximal end of 12 that connects to interior opening 28);
a distal working portion for being vibrated to aid scaling (Fig. 4 element 16);
a proximal connecting portion for connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece, the working portion extending distally from the connecting portion (Figs. 4 showing connecting part elements 12/14).
an outlet for delivering coolant received via the inlet to cool the working portion (Fig. 4 proximal end of element 28 that directly forms the opening out of 14),
a formation for channeling coolant deliver from the outlet in a distal direction on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 4 showing in cross section the outlet transitions and a channel transition to a coolant contacting surface at the distal end of 28 similar to instant applications figures 3a/b, Applicant discloses the formation as “the formation for channeling the coolant may take any suitable form” on page 25 lines 20-22 and then recites in lines 24-27 that the formation may also form “the formation (e.g. beveled/chamfered outlet and/or groove” which appears to recite that the formation and the outlet and groove could additionally form part of the formation. Shanmugham discloses a formation for the function claimed as including a suitable formed surface at the surface 16 adjacent element 28 which would, by surface tension, channel the fluid along the tip towards the distal end. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Shanmugham disclose the formation as any suitable form for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the surface of Shanmugham would be functionally equivalent structure)
wherein the working portion defines a concave side and a convex side of the tip and the outlet is located on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 4 bottom of 16 side being concave, top side of 16 being convex with 28 on the convex side), and
wherein the inlet is located on the connecting portion (Fig. 4 showing inlet opening at proximal end ultimately of 12), and the connecting portion comprises an interface for locating and connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece the interface comprising the inlet (Fig. 4 inside of element 12, paragraph [0021] line 5), and further comprising a fastening for fastening the connecting portion to the handpiece to receive vibrations therefrom (Applicant discloses the fastening as comprising a threaded portion on page 26 lines 15-17. Shanmugham discloses the interface for the function claimed as including a threads or quick connect, or any other suitable means in paragraph [0021] lines 7-9. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Shanmugham disclose the fastening as a threading for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the threads of Shanmugham would be functionally equivalent structure).
Regarding claim 3, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the outlet is located proximal to the working portion and distal to the inlet (Fig. 28 location of 28).
Regarding claim 6, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the working portion comprises a groove for channeling coolant delivered from the outlet in a distal direction on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 1 distal end of 28).
Regarding claim 8, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a body segment with a larger cross-section than the working portion (Fig. 4 element 14), and a shoulder segment (Fig. 4 necking down diameter between 14 and 16) connecting the body segment with the working portion, the working portion extending distally from the shoulder segment (Fig. 4 element 16 extends distally from the shoulder segment).
Regarding claim 9, Shanmugham further discloses where the outlet is located on the shoulder segment of the connecting portion (Fig. 4 element 28).
Regarding claim 10, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a longitudinal axis extending from a proximal end of the connecting portion to a distal end of the connecting portion (Fig. 4 element 12/14 having a long centra axis), wherein at least part of the working portion diverges from the longitudinal axis of the connecting portion to define the concave side and the convex side of the device (Fig. 4 element 16 diverges from the axis of 12/14).
Regarding claim 13, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the connecting portion is integral with the working portion of the tip (Fig. 4 elements 12/14/16 are all a single integral piece).
Regarding claim 14, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the working portion comprises an arcuate segment and a substantially linear segment extending distally from the arcuate segment (Fig. 4 showing a part of the working portion has an arcuate part between 16 and 24 and a substantially linear part distal to the arcuate portion at 18).
Regarding claim 15, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the arcuate segment of the working portion extends distally from a shoulder segment of the connecting portion (Fig. 4 the arcuate part 16 is extending distally from a necking/shoulder segment that is a decreasing diameter area).
Regarding claim 18, Shanmugham further discloses wherein the tip does not comprise a further outlet located on the concave side of the tip (Fig. 4 there is only an outlet on the convex side).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Shanmugham further discloses a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry, comprising a scaler handpiece (paragraph [0009] all disclosing the invention can include an ultrasonic handpiece) connected to a tip according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 8-10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2011/0229845 A1) in view of Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a tip for a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry (title and abstract, Figs. 19/20) the tip comprising a proximal inlet for receiving coolant (Fig. 20 proximal end of element 371);
a distal working portion for being vibrated to aid scaling (Fig. 20 element 373);
a proximal connecting portion for connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece, the working portion extending distally from the connecting portion (Figs. 1 and 20 showing connecting portion 371 connecting to scaler 20),
an outlet for delivering coolant received via the inlet to cool the working portion (Fig. 20 distal part of element 372b that is at the surface ),
a formation for channeling coolant deliver from the outlet in a distal direction on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 20 showing in cross section the outlet and channel transitions into the surface at the distal end of 327b similar to instant applications figures 3a/b, , Applicant discloses the formation as “the formation for channeling the coolant may take any suitable form” on page 25 lines 20-22 but also recites in lines 24-27 that the formation may also be formed by “the formation (e.g. beveled/chamfered outlet and/or groove” which appears to recite that the formation and the outlet and groove could additionally form part of the formation. Chen discloses a formation for the function claimed as including a suitable formed surface at the surface adjacent to 372b which would channel coolant at least by surface tension towards the distal direction. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Chen disclose the formation as any suitable form for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the surface of Chen would be functionally equivalent structure)
wherein the working portion defines a concave side and a convex side of the tip and the outlet is located on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 20 right side being concave, left side being convex with 372b on the convex side),
the inlet is located on the connecting portion, preferably on a proximal face of the connecting portion (Fig. 20 showing inlet opening to the proximal face of 371).
Chen further discloses where the connection portion includes an interface for locating and connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece to receive vibrations from the handpiece and with the interface comprising the inlet (Fig. 20 inside opening of 371 with inlet at proximal end of 372b), but fails to explicitly disclose a fastening for fastening the connection portion to the handpiece
However Himeno discloses a tip for a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry (title and abstract, Fig. 6 element b1) the tip comprising a proximal inlet for receiving coolant (Fig. 6 opening end of 14 that connects to interior opening of 11a);
a distal working portion for being vibrated to aid scaling (See image below);
a proximal connecting portion for connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece, the working portion extending distally from the connection portion (See image below)
an outlet for delivering coolant received via the inlet to cool the working portion (Fig. 6 below element 15),
a formation for channeling coolant delivered from the outlet in a distal direction on a convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 below surface of 11b having opening connecting to element 16),
wherein the working portion defines a concave side and a convex side of the tip and the outlet is located on the convex side of the tip (Fig. 6 below showing a convex side with the outlet and a concave side),
wherein the inlet is located on the connection portion (Fig. 6 below proximal end of 13 is located on the connection portion), and the connecting portion comprises an interface for locating and connecting the tip to a scaler handpiece (Fig. 6 below interior of connection portion with interface having threads 13), the interface comprising the inlet (Fig. 6 below the interface internal portion of 11a with threads 13 having inlet proximal opening of 14), and further comprising a fastening for fastening the connection portion to the handpiece to receive vibrations therefrom (Fig. 6 below element 13 Applicant discloses the fastening as comprising a threaded portion on page 26 lines 15-17. Himeno discloses the interface for the function claimed as including a threads in column 5 lines 60-65. Because both applicant’s disclosure and Himeno disclose the fastening as a threading for performing the same function, the structures are considered to be identical structures under the 112f analysis. Should applicant disagree the structures are identical, examiner maintains the threads of Himeno would be functionally equivalent structure).
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 connection portion interface to have a fastening as taught by Himeno into the connecting portion as taught by Chen for the purpose of providing for a satisfactory connection between the working tip and ultrasonic vibration source to prevent vibration from being reflected or damped as taught by Himeno (column 9 lines 32-44).
Regarding claim 3, Chen further discloses wherein the outlet is located proximal to the working portion and distal to the inlet (Fig. 20 location of 372b).
Regarding claim 8, Chen further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a body segment with a larger cross-section than the working portion (Fig. 20 element 371 being larger diameter than 372), and a shoulder segment (Fig. 20 necking down diameter between 371 and 372) connecting the body segment with the working portion, the working portion extending distally from the shoulder segment (Fig. 20 element 372/373 extends distally from the shoulder segment).
Regarding claim 9, Chen further discloses wherein the outlet is located on the shoulder segment of the connecting portion (Fig. 20 element 372b is located on the shoulder).
Regarding claim 10, Chen further discloses wherein the connecting portion comprises a longitudinal axis extending from a proximal end of the connecting portion to a distal end of the connecting portion (Fig. 20 a longitudinal axis of element 371) wherein at least part of the working portion diverges from the longitudinal axis of the connecting portion to define the concave side and the convex side of the device (Fig. 20 element 372/373 diverges from axis of 371 to make the concave at outlet 374 and convex near 372 line).
Regarding claim 13, Chen further discloses wherein the connecting portion is integral with the working portion of the tip (Fig. 20 all parts are a single integral piece).
Regarding claim 14, Chen further discloses wherein the working portion comprises an arcuate segment and a substantially linear segment extending distally from the arcuate segment (Fig. 20 showing a part of the working portion has an arcuate part near line of 372 and a substantially linear part distal to the arcuate portion along 372a).
Regarding claim 15, Chen further discloses wherein the arcuate segment of the working portion extends distally from a shoulder segment of the connecting portion (Fig. 20 the arcuate part extends distally from a necking/shoulder segment that is a decreasing diameter area).
Regarding claim 17, Chen discloses a further outlet, the further outlet located on the concave side of the tip (Fig. 20 element 374).
Regarding claim 18, Tipton further discloses wherein the tip does not comprise a further outlet located on the concave side of the tip (Fig. 7 there is only an outlet on the convex side).
Regarding claim 19, Chen further discloses a vibrating scaler for use in dentistry, comprising a scaler handpiece (Fig. 1 element 20) connected to a tip according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 20, Chen further discloses wherein the scaler handpiece is an ultrasonic scaler handpiece (title and abstract , paragraph [0037]).
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2011/0229845 A1) in view of Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370) and further in view of Larsen et al. (US 2009/0191510 A1).
Regarding claims 21-23, Chen/Himeno further discloses the scaler has a coolant reservoir connected to the scaler handpiece, the coolant reservoir comprising a coolant (Chen figure 1 element 21, paragraph [0038] disclosing cord 21 transfers “the flow of compressed fluids”) but fails to explicitly disclose the coolant comprising a Newtonian fluid having a viscosity greater than water, as in claim 21, that is glycerin, as in claim 22, and nor is glycerin and water, as in claim 23.
However Larsen discloses a method of ultrasonic cleaning of teeth (title and abstract) using an ultrasonic transducer with a tip (paragraph [0004] lines 12-17 disclosing a cleaning material is applied to the teeth with an ultrasonic energy by a device shaped as a point or tip) to apply ultrasonic waves to teeth through fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin mixed together (Example Formulas 1 or 2 having water and glycerin).
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 fluid for ultrasonic cleaning being a fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin as taught by Larsen into the fluid reservoir as taught by Chen/Himeno for the purpose of providing for improved methods of penetrating to and treating teeth with bacteria responsible for causing disease as taught by Larsen (paragraph [0003] all).
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shanmugham et al. (US 2013/0216970 A1) in view of Larsen et al. (US 2009/0191510 A1).
Regarding claims 21-23, Shanmugham further discloses the scaler has a coolant reservoir connected to the scaler handpiece, the coolant reservoir comprising a coolant (paragraph [0022] lines 3-11 disclosing a fluid delivery system for water or any other biocompatible cooling fluid and with a fluid source thus a reservoir) but fails to explicitly disclose the coolant comprising a Newtonian fluid having a viscosity greater than water, as in claim 21, that is glycerin, as in claim 22, and nor is glycerin and water, as in claim 23.
However Larsen discloses a method of ultrasonic cleaning of teeth (title and abstract) using an ultrasonic transducer with a tip (paragraph [0004] lines 12-17 disclosing a cleaning material is applied to the teeth with an ultrasonic energy by a device shaped as a point or tip) to apply ultrasonic waves to teeth through fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin mixed together (Example Formulas 1 or 2 having water and glycerin).
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 fluid for ultrasonic cleaning being a fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin as taught by Larsen into the fluid reservoir as taught by Shanmugham for the purpose of providing for improved methods of penetrating to and treating teeth with bacteria responsible for causing disease as taught by Larsen (paragraph [0003] all).
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Himeno et al. (US 5,725,370) in view of Larsen et al. (US 2009/0191510 A1).
Regarding claims 21-23, Himeno further discloses a coolant reservoir connected to the scaler handpiece (fig. 1 element 2a showing connection of a coolant reservoir), the reservoir comprising a coolant comprising a fluid with a different viscosity than water (column 3 line 65-column 4 line 3 disclosing the fluid can be a chemical agent that is not water and thus would have a different viscosity), but fails to explicitly disclose the coolant comprising a Newtonian fluid having a viscosity greater than water, as in claim 21, that is glycerin, as in claim 22, and nor is glycerin and water, as in claim 23.
However Larsen discloses a method of ultrasonic cleaning of teeth (title and abstract) using an ultrasonic transducer with a tip (paragraph [0004] lines 12-17 disclosing a cleaning material is applied to the teeth with an ultrasonic energy by a device shaped as a point or tip) to apply ultrasonic waves to teeth through fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin mixed together (Example Formulas 1 or 2 having water and glycerin).
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 fluid for ultrasonic cleaning being a fluid of water and a Newtonian fluid of glycerin as taught by Larsen into the fluid reservoir as taught by Himeno for the purpose of providing for improved methods of penetrating to and treating teeth with bacteria responsible for causing disease as taught by Larsen (paragraph [0003] all).
Conclusion
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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 07/20/2026
/EDELMIRA BOSQUES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772
Prosecution Insights