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 .
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.
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, 8-11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WIECHMANN et al (EP 2949289).
As per claim 1, Wiechmann teaches the claimed “computer-implemented method of generating a three-dimensional (3D) model for additive fabrication of a bite opening device (BOD),” the method comprising: “obtaining, using at least one processor, a 3D model of one or more teeth of a patient” (Wiechmann, [0051] - the bracket design is performed in a workstation that stores a three-dimensional virtual model of the patient's dentition and preferably treatment planning software for moving the teeth in the virtual model to desired finish positions); “determining, using the at least one processor, a position of a BOD with respect to the one or more teeth and based at least in part on a desired occlusion of the one or more teeth” (Wiechmann, [0053] - to use a software algorithm that automatically or semi-automatically calculates an appropriate bracket bonding pad area by analyzing the curvature of the tooth surface and determining a surface that is large enough to cover substantial curvature features to allow for reliable manual positioning of the bracket onto the tooth surface; [0056] - If a patient has a significant overbite and it is desired to prevent him/her from completely closing the jaw, so-called bite planes can be integrated into the bracket. To illustrate this, Figure 5 shows appliances called bite turbos 32. These appliances 32 are not brackets, but only serve the purpose of providing such a bite plane in order to prevent both jaws from closing completely); “generating, using the at least one processor, a 3D model of a customized BOD at least in part by geometrically subtracting at least part of the 3D model of the one or more teeth from the 3D model of the BOD according to the determined position of the BOD” (Wiechmann, [0056] - If a patient has a significant overbite and it is desired to prevent him/her from completely closing the jaw, so-called bite planes can be integrated into the bracket. To illustrate this, Figure 5 shows appliances called bite turbos 32. These appliances 32 are not brackets, but only serve the purpose of providing such a bite plane in order to prevent both jaws from closing completely) Noted: Wiechmann’s use of Boolean operation to form the 3D object (e.g., [0076] - The Magics™ software provides "Boolean" operations that include unite functions and subtraction functions) suggests the generation of the bite tubos 32 can be performed using Boolean operation; furthermore, the subtracting a part of tooth model from a 3D model forms a shape of the tooth’s surface on the 3D model; and “generating instructions for an additive fabrication device that, when executed by the additive fabrication device, cause the additive fabrication device to fabricate the customized BOD” (Wiechmann, [0061]-[0062] - There are already a wide variety of appropriate rapid prototyping techniques that are well known in the art. They include stereolithography apparatus ("SLA"), laminated object manufacturing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, solid ground curing, and 3-D inkjet printing… It would also be possible to create SLA models and use these as cores in a mold… The powdery substance could be plastic, thus creating cores for a mold, or it could be metal, thus directly fabricating the brackets). Thus, it would have been obvious to use Boolean operation to geometrically subtract a part of tooth model from a 3D model to form a shape of the tooth’s surface on the BOD. The purpose is to match the surface of the BOD and the tooth which the BOD is attached for a strong bond (Wiechmann, [0071] - For each tooth, the area to be covered by the pad 18 is selected by using the cutting functionality. This is shown in Figures 9A and 9B. By clicking at multiple points 50 on the surface of the tooth forming the desired boundary of the bracket bonding pad, this portion of the tooth model is selected for forming the surface at which the bracket bonding pad will be bonded to the tooth. The points 50 are connected by lines 52 automatically. The resulting 3-D polygon is smoothed and the surface enclosed by a line. This surface is turned into an independent surface object in the computer).
Claim 8 adds into claim 1 “wherein determining the position of the BOD with respect to the one or more teeth is based at least in part on user input indicating a relative position in three-dimensional space between the BOD and the one or more teeth” (Wiechmann, [0029] - Figure 7 is simulated on a computer workstation implementing a bracket design program and allows the user to position the bracket body on the bracket bonding pad in any arbitrary location in order to optimize the placement of the bracket body for the individual patient; [0076] - If a patient has a significant overbite and it is desired to prevent him/her from completely closing the jaw, so-called bite planes can be integrated into the bracket. To illustrate this, Figure 5 shows appliances called bite turbos 32. These appliances 32 are not brackets, but only serve the purpose of providing such a bite plane in order to prevent both jaws from closing completely)
Claim 9 adds into claim 1 “wherein the instructions, when executed by the additive fabrication device, cause the additive fabrication device to fabricate the customized BOD from a material comprising at least one polymer” (Wiechmann, [0061]-[0062] - There are already a wide variety of appropriate rapid prototyping techniques that are well known in the art. They include stereolithography apparatus ("SLA"), laminated object manufacturing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, solid ground curing, and 3-D inkjet printing… The powdery substance could be plastic, thus creating cores for a mold, or it could be metal, thus directly fabricating the brackets).
Claim 10 adds into claim 1 “wherein the additive fabrication device is a first additive fabrication device, wherein the instructions are first instructions” (Wiechmann, [0061]-[0062] - There are already a wide variety of appropriate rapid prototyping techniques that are well known in the art. They include stereolithography apparatus ("SLA"), laminated object manufacturing, selective laser sintering, fused deposition modeling, solid ground curing, and 3-D inkjet printing… It would also be possible to create SLA models and use these as cores in a mold… The powdery substance could be plastic, thus creating cores for a mold, or it could be metal, thus directly fabricating the brackets), and wherein the method further comprises: “obtaining, using the at least one processor, a 3D model of at least part of an arch of the patient; generating, using the at least one processor, a 3D model of a custom bonding tray at least in part by geometrically subtracting at least part of the 3D model of the BOD from a 3D model of a generic bonding tray according to the determined position of the BOD; and generating second instructions for a second additive fabrication device that, when executed by the second additive fabrication device, cause the second additive fabrication device to fabricate the custom bonding tray” (Wiechmann, [0072] - Next, the function "Offset Part" in the Magics software is used. Option "Create Thickness" is activated,
that uses the normal vectors of the triangles forming the surface 54 to offset the shell 54 and in this way to create a second shell which forms the opposite surface 26 of the bracket bonding pad 18, which is then combined to one continuous surface by closing the gap around the outer edges of the shell. In this way, the three-dimensional shape of the pad 18 is defined; [0084] - The 3D models of the finished customized brackets in STL format are exported and fed into a wax printer. Such a wax printer is designed similar to an inkjet printer and builds up the object in a large number of thin layers. The bottom layer is "printed" first: a fine jet blows liquid wax onto a base plate. The portions that are part of the object to be fabricated are printed using a wax with a high melting temperature. The remaining portions are filled with a wax of a low melting temperature. Then, the surface of the first layer is milled to receive a planar layer of a precisely defined thickness. Afterwards, all further layers are applied in the same manner. After this is complete, the low-melting portions are removed by exposing them to a heated solvent) (Noted: Wiechmann’s pad 18 is equivalent to the claimed “BOD,” furthermore, Wiechmann’s wax combined 3D model (i.e., the claimed generic bounding tray) of the high-temperature melt pad 108 (i.e., the BOD) and the low-temperature melt part (the custom bonding tray) implies the claimed BOD and the custom bonding tray in which the 3D model of the custom bonding tray is generated at least in part by geometrically subtracting at least part of the 3D model of the BOD from a 3D model of the generic bonding tray according to the determined position of the BOD.
Claim 11 adds into claim 10 “wherein the first additive fabrication device and the second additive fabrication device are the same additive fabrication device, and wherein the first instructions, when executed by the additive fabrication device, cause the additive fabrication device to fabricate the customized BOD from a first material, and wherein the second instructions, when executed by the additive fabrication device, cause the additive fabrication device to fabricate the custom bonding tray from a second material, different from the first material” (Wiechmann, [0084] - The 3D models of the finished customized brackets in STL format are exported and fed into a wax printer. Such a wax printer is designed similar to an inkjet printer and builds up the object in a large number of thin layers. The bottom layer is "printed" first: a fine jet blows liquid wax onto a base plate. The portions that are part of the object to be fabricated are printed using a wax with a high melting temperature. The remaining portions are filled with a wax of a low melting temperature. Then, the surface of the first layer is milled to receive a planar layer of a precisely defined thickness. Afterwards, all further layers are applied in the same manner. After this is complete, the low-melting portions are removed by exposing them to a heated solvent) (Noted: the portions that are part of the object to be fabricated printed using a wax with a high melting temperature is the BOD, and the remaining portions filled with a wax of a low melting temperature is the custom bonding tray).
Claim 20 claims a non-transitory computer-readable media based on the method of claims 1, 8-11; therefore, they are rejected under a similar rationale.
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WIECHMANN et al (EP 2949289) in view of MURRELL (US 2020/0146781 A1).
Claim 2 adds into claim 1 “wherein generating the 3D model of the customized BOD further comprises generating a plurality of retentive structures at the intaglio surface of the customized BOD” which Wiechmann suggests in the pad 18 which is attached to a tooth (Wiechmann, [0071] - For each tooth, the area to be covered by the pad 18 is selected by using the cutting functionality. This is shown in Figures 9A and 9B. By clicking at multiple points 50 on the surface of the tooth forming the desired boundary of the bracket bonding pad, this portion of the tooth model is selected for forming the surface at which the bracket bonding pad will be bonded to the tooth. The points 50 are connected by lines 52 automatically. The resulting 3-D polygon is smoothed and the surface enclosed by a line. This surface is turned into an independent surface object in the computer) (see also Murrell, [0212] - In accordance with the present invention, the base portion 12 is provided with at least one cavity 34 formed in the rear tooth abutting surface 24 thereof; [0215] - The at least one cavity 34 or plurality of cavities 34 can have any shape known to persons skilled in this art that achieves the purpose of allowing the adhesive to penetrate into the base portion 12. The porous geometry of the at least one cavity 34 or plurality of cavities 34, imparts various strengths, surface areas, and/or other characteristics to the base portion 12. For example, these porous geometries can be used to control the shape, type, degree, density, and size of porosity within the structure of the base portion 12. In some embodiments, such porous geometric designs can be of a regular shape, such as, for example, circular, triangular, square, rectangular, dodecahedral, octahedral, tetrahedral (diamond), as well as many other various geometric shapes). Thus, it would have been obvious, in view of Murrell, to configure Weichmann’s method as claimed by generating retentive structures at the intaglio surface of the customized BOD. The purpose is to facilitate the bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive (Murrell, Abstract - The retentive orthodontic dental appliances of the present invention comprise structures formed on, and/or in, the tooth abutting surfaces of the base portions thereof to facilitate the bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive).
Claim 3 adds into claim 2 “wherein the retentive structures comprise a lower surface and a plurality of walls that rise from the lower surface to the intaglio surface” (Murrell, figures 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, [0221] - In some embodiments, the at least one cavity 34 formed in the rear tooth abutting surface 24 of the base portion 12 forms at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion. The at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may have a root or stem section having a base integrally formed with the tooth abutting surface 24 and a head or apex section buccolingually extending from the root/stem section. As may be appreciated, each protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may, on its own, present an undercut, or may be further deformed at its outer extremity, thereby forming an undercut, proximate the outer extremity, which undercut is adapted to receive adhesive, that once cures or hardens, forms a mechanical bond or interlock between the appliance 10 and the adhesive). The purpose is to facilitate a strong bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive (Murrell, Abstract - The retentive orthodontic dental appliances of the present invention comprise structures formed on, and/or in, the tooth abutting surfaces of the base portions thereof to facilitate the bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive).
Claim 4 adds into claim 3 “wherein the plurality of retentive structures are wider at the intaglio surface than at the lower surface” (Murrell, Figure 3B, [0215] - For example, these porous geometries can be used to control the shape, type, degree, density, and size of porosity within the structure of the base portion 12. In some embodiments, such porous geometric designs can be of a regular shape, such as, for example, circular, triangular, square, rectangular, dodecahedral, octahedral, tetrahedral (diamond), as well as many other various geometric shapes… In other embodiments, the porous geometry may assume a combination of any number of different geometries… In comparison, certain porous geometries may have different mechanical performance than other porous geometries). The purpose is to facilitate a strong bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive (Murrell, Abstract - The retentive orthodontic dental appliances of the present invention comprise structures formed on, and/or in, the tooth abutting surfaces of the base portions thereof to facilitate the bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive).
Claim 5 adds into claim 3 “wherein the lower surface is offset a constant distance from the intaglio surface” (Murrell, figures 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, [0221] - In some embodiments, the at least one cavity 34 formed in the rear tooth abutting surface 24 of the base portion 12 forms at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion. The at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may have a root or stem section having a base integrally formed with the tooth abutting surface 24 and a head or apex section buccolingually extending from the root/stem section. As may be appreciated, each protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may, on its own, present an undercut, or may be further deformed at its outer extremity, thereby forming an undercut, proximate the outer extremity, which undercut is adapted to receive adhesive, that once cures or hardens, forms a mechanical bond or interlock between the appliance 10 and the adhesive). The purpose is to facilitate a strong bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive (Murrell, Abstract - The retentive orthodontic dental appliances of the present invention comprise structures formed on, and/or in, the tooth abutting surfaces of the base portions thereof to facilitate the bonding of the appliances to the surface of teeth with an adhesive).
Claim 6 adds into claim 2 “wherein generating the plurality of retentive structures comprises projecting and/or overlaying a geometric pattern onto the intaglio surface of the customized BOD subsequent to geometrically subtracting the 3D model of the one or more teeth from the 3D model of the BOD” (Murrell, figures 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, [0221] - In some embodiments, the at least one cavity 34 formed in the rear tooth abutting surface 24 of the base portion 12 forms at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion. The at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may have a root or stem section having a base integrally formed with the tooth abutting surface 24 and a head or apex section buccolingually extending from the root/stem section. As may be appreciated, each protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may, on its own, present an undercut, or may be further deformed at its outer extremity, thereby forming an undercut, proximate the outer extremity, which undercut is adapted to receive adhesive, that once cures or hardens, forms a mechanical bond or interlock between the appliance 10 and the adhesive; Weichmann, [0076] - The Magics™ software provides "Boolean" operations that include unite functions and subtraction functions). Noted: Weichmann’s Figure 17 shows the use of Boolean operation to create and/or modify 3D object; e.g., to create a surface such as the pad 18 to match with a tooth, the subtraction Boolean operation can be used by removing the tooth’s shape from a 3D block to create a surface on the BOD matching that tooth’s surface.
Claim 7 adds into claim 6 “wherein generating the plurality of retentive structures further comprises subtracting the geometric pattern from the intaglio surface of the customized BOD” which Weichmann suggests in the use of Boolean operation to form a 3D object (Weichmann, [0076] - The Magics™ software provides "Boolean" operations that include unite functions and subtraction functions) (see also Murrell, figures 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, [0221] - In some embodiments, the at least one cavity 34 formed in the rear tooth abutting surface 24 of the base portion 12 forms at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion. The at least one protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may have a root or stem section having a base integrally formed with the tooth abutting surface 24 and a head or apex section buccolingually extending from the root/stem section. As may be appreciated, each protrusion, peg, projection and/or overhanging portion may, on its own, present an undercut, or may be further deformed at its outer extremity, thereby forming an undercut, proximate the outer extremity, which undercut is adapted to receive adhesive, that once cures or hardens, forms a mechanical bond or interlock between the appliance 10 and the adhesive). The motivation is to create a surface on the BOD matching that tooth’s surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU K NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7645. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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, Daniel F. Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
/PHU K NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616