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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 3 is 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. Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the second height is greater than the first height” which is recited in Claim 1. 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 § 102
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 1-13 and 16-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuo et al. (US 20190080029, hereinafter Kuo).
Regarding Claim 1 and claim 3, Kuo discloses a method of generating a treatment plan to correct a patient's bite (abstract), the method comprising: generating the treatment plan to adjust a patient's bite toward a desired bite position (paragraph [0093]), wherein generating the treatment plan comprises generating intermediate dentition models corresponding to stages along a treatment path (paragraphs [0044] and [0081]), and generating intermediate aligner models configured to implement the stages of the treatment plan (paragraphs [0044] and [0081]), wherein the intermediate aligner models comprise: a first intermediate aligner model (paragraph [0044]) configured to apply a first repositioning force on a first intermediate dentition model in accordance with a first stage of the treatment plan(paragraph [0044]), wherein the first intermediate aligner model includes a first bite adjustment feature (paragraph [0044] discloses a plurality of virtual restorations) having a first height (the veneer on tooth Y; paragraph [0058] disclose the dentist applying a veneer size based on the current orientation of the dentition to a tooth (tooth Y) that is not as far out of alignment as the second tooth(tooth x); Tooth X is a thicker veneer as it is further out of alignment than tooth; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed) wherein the first intermediate aligner model is configured to modify the patient's bite by a first amount toward the desired bite position (paragraphs [0044] and [0058]) and a second intermediate aligner model (paragraph [0044] discloses a plurality of restorations) configured to apply a second repositioning force on a second intermediate dentition model in accordance with a second stage of the treatment plan, wherein the second intermediate aligner model includes a second bite adjustment feature having a second height greater than the first height (paragraph [0058] discloses that Tooth X is thicker; Tooth X is a thicker veneer as it is further out of alignment than tooth Y; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed), wherein the second intermediate aligner model is configured to modify the patient's bite by a second amount toward the desired bite position (paragraph [0058]); and forming a first aligner (figure 9, step S12 and S20 discloses creating intermediate aligners, therefore, inherently there is more than one aligner and a “first aligner”) for implementing the first stage of the treatment plan and a second aligner for implementing the second stage of the treatment plan (figure 9, step S12 and S20 disclose a final aligner/restoration to be Affixed to the teeth, therefore the second is the final aligner).
Regarding Claim 2, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses occlusal surfaces of the first and second intermediate aligner models are substantially flat (figures 1-7).
Regarding Claim 5, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses morphing the first intermediate aligner model to include the first bite adjustment feature (paragraphs [0039], [0044] and [0066]-[0069]) and morphing the second intermediate aligner model to include the second bite adjustment feature (paragraphs [0039], [0044] and [0066]-[0069]).
Regarding Claim 6, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses morphing the first intermediate dentition model to include the first bite adjustment feature and morphing the second intermediate dentition model to include the second bite adjustment feature (paragraphs [0039], [0044] and [0066]-[0069]).
Regarding Claim 7, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses the first and second intermediate dentition models are virtual three-dimensional (3D) models (paragraph [0039] and [0063]).
Regarding Claim 8, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses the first bite adjustment feature is on an occlusal wall (paragraph [0045]) of the first intermediate aligner model, and the second bite adjustment feature is on an occlusal wall of the second intermediate aligner model(paragraph [0045]).
Regarding Claim 9, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses the first bite adjustment feature is on a buccal wall (paragraph [0045]) of the first intermediate aligner model (paragraph [0045]), and the second bite adjustment feature is on a buccal wall of the second intermediate aligner model(paragraph [0045]).
Regarding Claim 10, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses wherein the first bite adjustment feature (tooth Y; paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0058], [0060], [0084]-[0088]) has a lesser thickness than the second bite adjustment feature (tooth x; paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0058], [0060], [0084]-[0088]).
Regarding Claim 11, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses forming an anchor model on each of the first and second intermediate dentition models (paragraph [0067] discloses individual attachments on teeth), the anchor model corresponding to an anchor (paragraph [0067]) configured to cooperate with each of the first and second aligner models to achieve movement of one or more teeth in a desired direction (paragraph [0067]).
Regarding Claim 12, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 1. Kuo discloses the first aligner has a first physical bite adjustment feature (paragraphs [0142]) corresponding to the first bite adjustment feature (paragraph [0133]), and the second aligner has a second physical bite adjustment feature (paragraphs [0044] and [0142]) corresponding to the second bite adjustment feature wherein each of the first and second bite physical adjustment features (paragraph [0133]), has a different color than a majority of the corresponding first and second aligners (paragraph [0039], [0044], [0060], [0083]-[0088], and [0109]; paragraph [0109] discloses the color modification of the veneer).
Regarding Claim 13, Kuo discloses a treatment system to correct a patient's bite (paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0057]-[0058], [0060]-[0066], [0083]-[0089], [0132]), the treatment system comprising a series of aligners (paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0066]-[0068]) configured to implement a treatment plan on the patient's dentition (paragraph [0044]), wherein the treatment plan includes adjusting the patient's bite toward a desired bite position (paragraph [0067]), wherein the series of aligners comprises a first aligner (figure 9, step S12 and S20 discloses creating intermediate aligners, therefore, inherently there is more than one aligner and a “first aligner”; paragraph [0173]) having a shape to implement a first stage of the treatment plan (paragraph [0173]), wherein the first aligner includes a first bite adjustment feature (tooth Y; paragraphs [0060]-[0066], [0083]-[0088]) having a first height (paragraph [0058] disclose the dentist applying a veneer size based on the current orientation of the dentition to a tooth (tooth Y) that is not as far out of alignment as the second tooth(tooth x); Tooth X is a thicker veneer as it is further out of alignment than tooth; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed), wherein the first aligner is configured to modify the patient's bite by a first amount toward the desired bite position (paragraph [0058]) and a second aligner (figure 9, step S12 and S20 disclose a final aligner/restoration to be Affixed to the teeth, therefore the second is the final aligner) having a shape to implement a second stage of the treatment plan(figure 9) wherein the second aligner includes a second bite adjustment feature having a second height (the veneer on tooth X; paragraph [0058]) that is larger than the first size (paragraph [0058] discloses that Tooth X is thicker; Tooth X is a thicker veneer as it is further out of alignment than tooth) wherein the second aligner is configured to modify the patient's bite by a second amount toward the desired bite position (paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 17, Kuo discloses an treatment system (paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0057]-[0058], [0060]-[0066], [0083]-[0089], [0132]) comprising: a series of aligners(paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0066]-[0068]) configured to implement a treatment plan on a patient's dentition (paragraph [0044]), wherein the series of aligners comprises: a first aligner (figure 10; paragraph [0039] discloses the iterative steps of aligners; paragraphs [0066]-[0068]; figure 9, step S12 and S20 discloses creating intermediate aligners, therefore, inherently there is more than one aligner and a “first aligner”) having walls that are configured to apply a first repositioning force (paragraphs [0066]-[0069]) on one or more teeth of the patient's dentition in accordance a first stage of the treatment plan (paragraphs [0039], [0044], [0066]-[0069]), the first aligner including a first bite adjustment feature (tooth Y; paragraph 0056]-[0057])having a first height (paragraph [0058] disclose the dentist applying a veneer size based on the current orientation of the dentition to a tooth (tooth Y) that is not as far out of alignment as the second tooth(tooth x); Tooth X is a thicker veneer as it is further out of alignment than tooth; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed), wherein when the first aligner worn, first bite adjustment feature is arranged to modify the patient's bite by a first amount toward a desired bite position (paragraph [0067]) and a second aligner(figure 10; figure 9, step S12 and S20 disclose a final aligner/restoration to be Affixed to the teeth, therefore the second is the final aligner) having walls that are configured to apply a second repositioning force on the one or more teeth of the patient's dentition in accordance a second stage of the treatment plan (paragraphs [0066]-[0069]), the second aligner including a second bite adjustment feature (the veneer on tooth X; paragraph [0058]) having a second height (paragraphs [0054]-[0058] discloses the planned dental restoration or final dental restoration is thinner as it is a reduced version of both teeth X and Y; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed), wherein when the second aligner worn, second bite adjustment feature is arranged to modify the patient's bite by a second amount toward the desired bite position (paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 18, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 17. Kuo discloses wherein the first bite adjustment feature is on an occlusal wall (paragraph [0045]) of the first aligner, and the second bite adjustment feature is on an occlusal wall of the second aligner (paragraph [0045]).
Regarding Claim 19, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 17. Kuo discloses wherein the second height is greater than the first height(paragraphs [0054]-[0058] discloses the planned dental restoration or final dental restoration is thinner as it is a reduced version of both teeth X and Y; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed).
Regarding Claim 20, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 17. Kuo discloses the first bite adjustment feature and/or the second bite adjustment feature is arranged to span occlusal surfaces of more than one of the patient's teeth (paragraph [0058] discloses the veneers are placed on teeth X and Y).
Regarding Claim 21, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 17. Kuo discloses the first aligner and/or the second aligner includes multiple bite adjustment features (paragraph [0056]-[0058] discloses the veneers are placed on teeth X and Y and aligners cover both X and Y).
Regarding Claim 22, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 17. Kuo discloses the first and second bite adjustment features have a different color than a color of a remainder of the first and second aligners (paragraph [0039], [0044], [0060], [0083]-[0088], and [0109]; paragraph [0109] discloses the color modification of the veneer).
Regarding Claim 23, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 13. Kuo discloses the first and second bite adjustment features are tooth colored. (paragraph [0039], [0044], [0060], [0083]-[0088], and [0109]; paragraph [0109] discloses the color modification of the veneer).
Regarding Claim 24, Kuo discloses the device of Claim 13. Kuo discloses the second height is greater than the first height (paragraphs [0054]-[0058] discloses the planned dental restoration or final dental restoration is thinner as it is a reduced version of both teeth X and Y; The Examiner notes that “height” is being interpreted as “D” in figures 5-8 as the height is relative to the orientation viewed).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/17/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to Applicant’s arguments that 2, 12, 16, and 19 where rejected under 112(b), the Examiner notes that 16 is now canceled. The remaining claims 2, 12, and 19 are no longer rejected under 112(b).
In regards to Applicant’s arguments that Claims 1-19 are rejected under 101, The Examiner notes that there is no longer a 101 rejection.
In regards to Applicant’s arguments that Kuo does not disclose the elements of Claims 1, 13, and 17, the Examiners that Application provides no reasoning other than a mere statement of assertion that the claimed elements are not within the prior art of record Kuo.
With regards to Applicant’s limitation regarding “a first height” and “a second height”, the Examiner suggests adding structural limitations as to the surface of the tooth that the “height” of the veneer is located on.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Sydney J Pulvidente whose telephone number is (571)272-8066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m..
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, Eric Rosen can be reached at (571) 270-7855. 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.
/SYDNEY J PULVIDENTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3772 /ERIC J ROSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3772