DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
3. Claims 3 and 12-15 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.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites the connecting strands “extend in direction” of the holding element. This appears to be a typo.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites a method comprising at least one holding element and at least one artificial tooth. This is indefinite, because it is not clear as to how a method can comprise physical items. Furthermore, the wording of the “simultaneous manufacturing” step is generally narrative and indefinite, and fails to positively recite the steps of the method. For example, the terms “by means of”, “in particular”, and “a plurality of connecting strands are formed”, are narrative and do not positively establish the steps being performed.
Dependent claims 13-15 inherit the deficiencies of parent claim 12 through their dependencies, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-6, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baekgard et al. (US 2013/0059278 A1).
Regarding claims 1-6, 12 and 13, Baekgard discloses a three-dimensional model for simulating medical, in particular dental, treatments, comprising: at least one holding element for receiving artificial teeth (cavity and gap – see Par. 42, Fig. 2), at least one artificial tooth (3), wherein the artificial tooth comprises at least one artificial tooth root (conically shaped bottom – see Fig. 7, Par. 51), wherein the artificial tooth root is at least partly received in a recess of the holding element, characterized in that a plurality of connecting strands (bridge portions) is formed between the holding element and the artificial tooth, in particular between the artificial tooth root(Par. 45, Fig. 4) (as per claim 1),
the connecting strands are substantially formed to be distributed across the whole root area (Fig. 4) (as per claim 2),
the connecting strands extend in direction of the holding element (Fig. 4) (as per claim 3),
at least one connecting strand is formed laterally of the tooth root of the artificial tooth (Fig. 4) (as per claim 4),
the holding element, tooth, or strand comprises a synthetic polymer (Par. 18) (as per claim 5),
the model comprises a gingival mask, wherein the gingival mask at least partly covers the holding element (matrix band pressed into space representing gingival sulcus – Par. 20) (as per claim 6),
a method for producing a three-dimensional model for simulating medical, in particular dental, treatments, in particular according to one of the previous claims, comprising: at least one holding element for receiving artificial teeth, at least one artificial tooth, wherein the artificial tooth comprises at least one artificial tooth root, wherein the artificial tooth root is received at least partly in a recess of the holding element (see Fig. 2, 7, Par’s. 42, 51), characterized in that the method comprises: simultaneous manufacturing of the at least one holding element and of the at least one artificial tooth by means of an additive manufacturing method, in particular a print-in-place method (Par. 47 – model may be made in one piece for example by use of a material additive manufacturing technique), wherein a plurality of connecting strands are formed between the holding element and the artificial tooth, in particular the artificial tooth root (Par. 46) (as per claim 12), and
applying a gingival mask to the holding element (Par. 20) (as per claim 13).
6. Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kazemi (US 2011/0136090 A1).
Regarding claims 16-20, Kazemi discloses a three-dimensional model for simulating medical, in particular dental, treatments, comprising: at least one holding element, in particular for receiving artificial teeth (see Fig. 5B), an artificial nerve system comprising at least one artificial nerve, wherein the artificial nerve extends at least partly through the holding element (see Par’s. 125, 138, 143, 145, Fig. 5B), characterized in that the artificial nerve system is adapted to detect and/or to differentiate the injection of a fluid and/or damage of the artificial nerve (Par. 145 – generate pseudo pain signals simulating nerve damage and pain) (as per claim 16),
the artificial nerve system comprises a capacitive sensor (Par. 120) (as per claim 17),
the capacitive sensor comprises a coated wire, in particular a wire coated with varnish (Par. 148) (as per claim 18),
the nerve system comprises at least one indicator that is functionally coupled to the artificial nerve to indicate the injection of a fluid and/or damage of the artificial nerve (e.g. speaker 60 – Fig. 5B, Par. 97) (as per claim 19), and
the indicator comprises a visual and/or an acoustic indicator (60) (as per claim 20).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baekgard et al. (US 2013/0059278 A1) in view of Lee (US 2017/0004736 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, to the extent that Baekgard does not explicitly disclose the model comprises a textile fabric, in particular a gauze comprising cotton fibers, wherein the textile fabric is embedded at least partly in the gingival mask (as per claims 7 and 14), Kazemi discloses a dental model with a gingival tissue portion (Par. 34) that may be comprised of natural or synthetic fabrics (Par. 77). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Kazemi by utilizing a natural fabric like cotton, to obtain a more realistic representation of the soft tissues.
10. Claims 8-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baekgard et al. (US 2013/0059278 A1) in view of Kazemi (US 2011/0136090 A1).
Regarding claims 8-11 and 15, Baekgard does not appear to explicitly disclose, but Kazemi does disclose in a similar dental model, the model comprises an artificial nerve system with at least one artificial nerve, wherein the artificial nerve extends at least partly through the holding element (Par’s. 125, 138, 143, 145) (as per claim 8),
the artificial nerve system is adapted to detect and/or to differentiate the injection of a fluid and/or damage to the artificial nerve (Par. 145) (as per claim 9),
the artificial nerve system comprises at least one capacitive sensor (Par. 120) (as per claim 10),
the artificial nerve system comprises at least one indicator that is functionally coupled to the artificial nerve to indicate the injection of a fluid and/or damage to the artificial nerve (Par. 97) (as per claim 11), and
the method further comprises: integrating an artificial nerve system comprising at least one artificial nerve into the model, wherein the artificial nerve is at least partly guided through the holding element (Par. 125) (as per claim 15).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Kazemi by incorporating the artificial nerve system taught by Kazemi, to obtain predictable results of providing feedback regarding the performance of the user while performing procedures on the model.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER EGLOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-3548. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/Peter R Egloff/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715