Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/341,067

DENTAL ALIGNER

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 26, 2023
Priority
Aug 11, 2020 — provisional 63/064,158 +2 more
Examiner
WALTERS JR, ROBERT S
Art Unit
1717
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BIXBY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
OA Round
2 (Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allowance Rate
565 granted / 1099 resolved
-13.6% vs TC avg
Strong +50% interview lift
Without
With
+50.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
74 currently pending
Career history
1173
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
75.1%
+35.1% vs TC avg
§102
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1099 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status of Application Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. 1. Claims 6, 8-12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 6 and 17 recite the total area is greater than or equal to 35,000,000 pound-force-hour. However, parent claims 5 and 16 actually require greater than 35,000,000 pound-force-hour. Therefore, claims 6 and 17 actually broadens parent claims 5 and 16 rather than specifying a further limitation. Claims 8-12 recite the dental aligner comprising bluing dye agents. However, parent claim 7 recites that the monolayer “consists” of a thermoplastic material. Therefore, additional elements are excluded from the monolayer of the dental aligner. Claims 8-12 broaden the parent claim by including additional elements. Therefore, claims 8-12 fail to further limit the subject matter of the parent claim. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) 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. 2. Claims 1-20 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. Claims 1 and 7 recite a property based on a 4% stress-relaxation protocol at room temperature. However, the resultant property will be contingent on various unrecited variables. For example, the shape of the sample and the pressure will affect the results of a stress-relaxation test. As these variables and the specific conditions at which the protocol is conducted are not defined, it is unclear as to the specific range that is being claimed for the property. Thus, claims 1 and 7 are indefinite. Claims 2-6 and 8-20 depend from either claim 1 or 7 and are indefinite for the same reasons. Conclusion Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 are rejected. 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 ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5. 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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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. /ROBERT S WALTERS JR/ June 23, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 26, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Apr 07, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 07, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 23, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 25, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12679981
ADHESION PROMOTER COMPOSITIONS TO ELIMINATE SUBSTRATE PREPARATION AND METHODS FOR THE SAME
4y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680162
CVD DEVICE PUMPING LINER
3y 12m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680158
SELECTIVE COBALT DEPOSITION ON COPPER SURFACES
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12668875
ATOMIC LAYER DEPOSITION METHOD OF METAL (II), (0), OR (IV) CONTAINING FILM LAYER
4y 3m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12662738
COMPOSITION FOR DEPOSITING A PALLADIUM COATING ON A SUBSTRATE
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+50.4%)
3y 6m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1099 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month