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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the "first direction, the "second direction," and the "sensor" as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites the word “and” in the final line. No additional clause is introduced—the Examiner recommends deleting the word to improve the clarity of the record.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the second direction" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shachar (US 8202090 B2).
Regarding claim 2, Shachar discloses a denture cleaning system for cleaning and disinfecting a denture and a mouth of a user, the denture cleaning system comprising: a reservoir tank (reservoir 201), the reservoir tank comprising an inlet (refill duct 302, col. 5 ll. 63-65) and an outlet (delivery duct 102), the reservoir tank configured to: be disposed inside an opening within a denture of a user (embedded in a prosthetic tooth or dental appliance, col. 1 ll. 57-59); and receive and hold a mouthwash solution (wherein the prior art device is capable of containing mouthwash without modification, col. 6 ll. 1-8, wherein mouthwash is a fluid to be utilized intraorally; see MPEP 2115); a piston (plunger 203) disposed slidably inside the reservoir tank (refer to figs. 1A and 2), the piston configured to move back and forth inside the reservoir tank and along a first axis (via worm gear arrangement formed by plunger 203 and driver pipe 204); an actuating rod (driver pipe 204) connected to the piston (figs. 1A and 2), a first end of the actuating rod attached to the piston (fig. 2, portion of 204 which drives and connects to 203); an actuator (drive wheel 205) connected to the actuating rod (fig. 2, fig. 8D, and col. 6 ll. 32-38), a second end of the actuating rod attached to the actuator (end connecting to 300 which drives 204 and 203), the actuator configured to urge the actuating rod to move back and forth along the first axis (col. 6 ll. 9-31); a nozzle connected to the outlet of the reservoir tank (col. 6 ll. 9-31), the nozzle in fluid communication with the reservoir tank through the outlet of the reservoir tank (perforation holes of perforated duct 102), the nozzle configured to be attached to an inner side of the denture (refer to location of 102—as shown in fig. 1A—in fig. 2); and a check valve (refill valve 301—defined as unidirectional, col. 2 ll. 53-55) connected to the inlet of the reservoir tank, the check valve configured to be attached to an outer side of the denture (refer to the annotated figure below),
PNG
media_image1.png
626
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the check valve configured to: allow flowing of the mouthwash solution into the reservoir tank and through the inlet of the reservoir tank (allows the flow of liquid into the reservoir, col. 5 ll. 63-65); and prevent the mouthwash solution discharge from the reservoir tank and through the inlet of the reservoir tank (via unidirectional designation of the valve, col. 2 ll. 53-55); wherein the actuator is configured to discharge the mouthwash solution into the mouth of the user through the outlet of the reservoir tank and the nozzle by urging the piston to move along the first axis and in a first direction inside the reservoir tank (col. 5 l. 66 to col. 6 l. 8, col. 6 ll. 9-30, and figs. 8e) and.
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the limitations of claim 2, Shachar further discloses a controller board (electronic regulator 30), wherein: the controller board comprises one or more processors (microcontroller 1); the controller board is configured to be disposed inside the denture of the user (disposed within the artificial tooth/dental appliance, as depicted in at least fig. 8A); the controller board is connected to the actuator through a connecting cable (via servo closed loop modality 53, wherein one skilled in the art would be capable of utilizing hardwired connections); and the one or more processors are configured to send commands associated with movements of the actuating rod to the actuator (col. 12 ll. 1-15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar (US 8202090 B2) and Heller et al. (US 20170172961 A1) in view of Wolff et al. (CN 1997421 A).
Regarding claim 1, Shachar discloses a denture cleaning system for cleaning and disinfecting a denture and a mouth of a user, the denture cleaning system comprising: the reservoir tank (reservoir 201) comprising an inlet (refill duct 302, col. 5 ll. 63-65) and an outlet (delivery duct 102), the reservoir tank configured to: be disposed inside a denture of a user (embedded in a prosthetic tooth or dental appliance, col. 1 ll. 57-59); and receive and hold a mouthwash solution (wherein the prior art device is capable of containing mouthwash without modification, col. 6 ll. 1-8, wherein mouthwash is a fluid to be utilized intraorally; see MPEP 2115); a piston (plunger 203) disposed slidably inside the reservoir tank (refer to figs. 1A and 2), the piston configured to move back and forth inside the reservoir tank and along a first axis (via worm gear arrangement formed by plunger 203 and driver pipe 204); an actuating rod (driver pipe 204) connected to the piston (figs. 1A and 2), a first end of the actuating rod attached to the piston (fig. 2, portion of 204 which drives and connects to 203); an actuator (drive wheel 205) connected to the actuating rod (fig. 2, fig. 8B, and col. 6 ll. 32-38), a second end of the actuating rod attached to the actuator (end connecting to 300 which drives 204 and 203), the actuator configured to urge the actuating rod to move back and forth along the first axis (col. 6 ll. 9-31); a nozzle connected to the outlet of the reservoir tank (col. 6 ll. 9-31), the nozzle in fluid communication with the reservoir tank through the outlet of the reservoir tank (perforation holes of perforated duct 102), the nozzle configured to be attached to an inner side of the denture (refer to location of 102—as shown in fig. 1A—in fig. 2); a check valve connected to the inlet of the reservoir tank (refill valve 301—defined as unidirectional, col. 2 ll. 53-55), the check valve configured to be attached to an outer side of the denture (refer to the annotated figure below),
PNG
media_image1.png
626
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the check valve configured to: allow flow of the mouthwash solution into the reservoir tank and through the inlet of the reservoir tank (allows the flow of liquid into the reservoir, col. 5 ll. 63-65); and prevent the mouthwash solution discharge from the reservoir tank and through the inlet of the reservoir tank (via unidirectional designation of the valve, col. 2 ll. 53-55); a controller board (electronic regulator 30), the controller board comprising one or more processors (microcontroller 1); the controller board configured to be disposed inside the denture of the user (disposed within the artificial tooth/dental appliance, as depicted in at least fig. 8A); the controller board connected to the actuator through a connecting cable (via servo closed loop modality 53, wherein one skilled in the art would be capable of utilizing hardwired connections); the one or more processors are configured to send commands associated with movements of the actuating rod to the actuator (col. 12 ll. 1-15); and a sensor (figs. 8D-E and col. 10 ll. 39-47) wherein: the actuator is configured to discharge the mouthwash solution into the mouth of the user through the outlet of the reservoir tank and the nozzle by urging the piston to move along the first axis and in a first direction inside the reservoir tank and (col. 5 l. 66 to col. 6 l. 8, col. 6 ll. 9-30, and figs. 8e). However, Shachar remains silent to a cylindrical shaped reservoir tank with a capacity of 1 milliliter, and a sensor disposed inside the reservoir tank, the sensor configured to send a first set of data to the one or more processors, the first set of data associated with an amount of the mouthwash solution in the reservoir tank; the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a first set of commands from a user through a wireless connection; send a second set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the first direction based on the first set of commands; and send a third set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the second direction based on the first set of commands.
Heller teaches a cylindrical shaped reservoir tank (para. 0306, fig. 5B or fig. 13A) with a capacity of 1 milliliter (para. 0040, wherein the volume of the drug reservoir is between 0.1-1 mL, 1-5 mL, 0.5-1 mL, or 1-2 mL) but remains silent to and a sensor disposed inside the reservoir tank, the sensor configured to send a first set of data to the one or more processors, the first set of data associated with an amount of the mouthwash solution in the reservoir tank; and the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a first set of commands from a user through a wireless connection; send a second set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the first direction based on the first set of commands; and send a third set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the second direction based on the first set of commands.
Wolff teaches a sensor disposed inside the reservoir tank, the sensor (state sensor 185) configured to send a first set of data to the one or more processors, the first set of data associated with an amount of the mouthwash solution in the reservoir tank (translation: p. 18 para. 3) and the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a first set of commands from a user through a wireless connection (via remote control unit 402 configured to communicate with the device, at least, the delivery rate, translation: p. 31 para. 7); send a second set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod (in response to the delivery rate) along the first axis and in the first direction based on the first set of commands (refer to the annotated figure below);
PNG
media_image2.png
294
510
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and send a third set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the second direction based on the first set of commands (refer to the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
294
492
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the volume of Heller to be 1 milliliter as Applicant appears to have placed no criticality on 1 milliliter (See Applicant’s Specification, where the capacity of the reservoir tank “may” be 1 milliliter).The courts have held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Additionally, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify the device to include a sensor already capable of communicating with the computer system of the device as well as replacing the unidirectional piston with a bi-directional piston. In doing so, it advantageously allows for the user to ensure the device is in proper operating condition (p. 18 para. 3) while also allowing for a metered amount of fluid in a continuous and repeatable fashion (Wolff, translation: p. 11 para. 6).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar (US 8202090 B2), as applied in claim 3, in view of Wolff et al. (CN 1997421 A).
Regarding claim 4, in addition to the limitations of claim 3, Shachar further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a first set of commands from a user (col. 3 ll. 47-51 and col. 9 ll. 31-50, wherein the device is capable of receiving user instructions and processing such with software control); send a second set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the first direction based on the first set of commands (refer to fig. 8D and col. 9 l. 66 to col. 10 l. 19), however, remains silent to receive a first set of commands from a user through a wireless connection and send a third set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the second direction based on the first set of commands. Wolff teaches receiving a first set of commands from a user through a wireless connection (via remote control unit 402 configured to communicate with the device, at least, the delivery rate, translation: p. 31 para. 7); send a second set of commands (pertaining to the delivery rate) to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the first direction based on the first set of commands (refer to the annotated figure below);
PNG
media_image2.png
294
510
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and send a third set of commands to the actuator associated with movement of the actuating rod along the first axis and in the second direction based on the first set of commands (refer to the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
294
492
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to replacing the unidirectional piston with a bi-directional piston. In doing so, the device is capable of dispensing a metered amount of fluid in a continuous and repeatable fashion (Wolff, translation: p. 11 para. 6).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar (US 8202090 B2) and Wolff et al. (CN 1997421 A), as applied in claim 4, further in view of Ruedisueli et al. (US 11281816 B2).
Regarding claim 5, in addition to the limitations of claim 4, the already modified device remains silent to the nozzle is an atomizing nozzle; however, Ruedisueli teaches the nozzle is an atomizing nozzle (fluid nozzle outlet 940 configured to output in a fluid spray, col. 20 l. 60 to col. 21 l. 5). It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the output of the device to include a spray nozzle. In doing so, the substitution advantageously allows for an even dispersion of fluid into the user oral cavity.
Regarding claim 6, in addition to the limitations of claim 5, Shachar remains silent to a sensor disposed inside the reservoir tank, the sensor configured to send a first set of data to the one or more processors, the first set of data associated with an amount of the mouthwash solution in the reservoir tank. However, Wolff teaches a sensor disposed inside the reservoir tank, the sensor (state sensor 185) configured to send a first set of data to the one or more processors, the first set of data associated with an amount of the mouthwash solution in the reservoir tank (translation: p. 18 para. 3). It would have been prima facie obvious to modify the device to include a sensor already capable of communicating with the computer system of the device. In doing so, it advantageously allows for the user to ensure the device is in proper operating condition (p. 18 para. 3).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar (US 8202090 B2), Wolff et al. (CN 1997421 A), and Ruedisueli et al. (US 11281816 B2), as applied in claim 6, further in view of Heller et al. (US 20170172961 A1).
Regarding claim 7, in addition to the limitations of claim 6, the already modified device remains silent to a capacity of the reservoir tank is 1 milliliter; however, Heller teaches a capacity of the reservoir tank is 1 milliliter (para. 0040, wherein the volume of the drug reservoir is between 0.1-1 mL, 1-5 mL, 0.5-1 mL, or 1-2 mL). It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the volume of Heller to be 1 milliliter as Applicant appears to have placed no criticality on 1 milliliter (See Applicant’s Specification, where the capacity of the reservoir tank “may” be 1 milliliter).The courts have held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lefkowitz (US 4676752 A) for the inclusion of a cylindrical reservoir containing mouthwash, disposed in a denture, and Yoon et al. (US 20140248574 A1) for oral prosthetic process controls and dispensing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER STEVEN PARISI whose telephone number is (571)270-5490. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00 EST.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER S. PARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754