DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 19 recites a “computer-readable recording medium”, however, such medium is not limited to non-transitory media according to the applicant’s specification (page 26, 4th-5th paragraphs), therefore, the claim is directed to a program/software per se, and the claim as a whole is non-statutory. The examiner suggests amending claim 19 to explicitly recite “non-transitory computer-readable recording medium” or equivalent.
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 1-3, 8-12, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Renne (UPDATED How to quickly hollow and base models for printing, published 04/29/2020 via YouTube), link provided by the applicant.
Regarding claim 1, Renne discloses:
obtaining three-dimensional intraoral data that is data from scanning an object (see fig 1 below, obtaining 3D intraoral data by scanning an object);
generating a base, based on the three-dimensional intraoral data (see fig 2 below, generating teeth model including a base, by refining the 3D intraoral data);
generating, based on the base, a cylinder that penetrates through a wall of the base (see fig 3 below, generating and positioning cylinders such that each cylinder penetrates through at least one wall of the base);
generating a drain hole by deleting data corresponding to the cylinder from teeth model data including the base (see fig 4 below, generating holes by deleting data from the base of the teeth model where the cylinders lie, thereby generating a final teeth model; wherein the holes are drain ports for resin); and
displaying the teeth model data in which the drain hole is generated (see fig 4 below, displaying the final teeth model).
PNG
media_image1.png
570
615
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig.1, captured at 0:17
PNG
media_image2.png
603
840
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2, captured at 5:30
PNG
media_image3.png
567
637
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3, captured at 7:03
PNG
media_image4.png
471
522
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4, captured at 7:40
Regarding claim 2, Renne further discloses: wherein the generating of the cylinder comprises receiving a user input with respect to a number of cylinders, a diameter of the cylinder, and a distance from the base to the cylinder (see fig 5-7 below, the number of cylinders, the dimensions of the cylinders, and the position of the cylinders relative to the base are all subjectively determined by the user).
PNG
media_image5.png
347
397
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 5, captured at 5:55
PNG
media_image6.png
348
563
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 captured at 6:02
PNG
media_image7.png
496
577
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. 7 captured at 6:54
Regarding claim 3, Renne further discloses: wherein the generating of the cylinder comprises determining a position of the cylinder, based on a number of cylinders and a distance from the base to the cylinder (see fig 5-7 above, the position of the cylinders is subjectively determined by the user, and may be based on the number of cylinders and distance from the base).
Regarding claim 8, Renne further discloses: obtaining a teeth region including teeth in the three-dimensional intraoral data, wherein the generating of the drain hole comprises, based on whether or not the cylinder overlaps the teeth region, deleting data corresponding to the cylinder (see fig 2 above, the 3D intraoral data includes teeth regions; and see fig 4, deleting data where the cylinders lie, wherein the cylinders do not overlap with the teeth region).
Regarding claim 9, Renne further discloses: obtaining the teeth model data including the base, by generating mesh data extending from a boundary of the three-dimensional intraoral data to the base (see fig 1-7 above, Renne discloses using Meshmixer, a well-known 3D mesh editor).
Regarding claims 10-12 and 17-19, Renne discloses everything claimed as applied above (see rejection of claims 1-3, 8, and 9).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 9-12, 18, and 19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7-10, 12, and 20 of copending application Lee et al. (18/851786). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses:
obtaining three-dimensional intraoral data that is data from scanning an object (see Lee claim 1, “obtaining 3-dimensional oral cavity data by scanning an oral cavity including teeth”);
generating a base, based on the three-dimensional intraoral data (see Lee claim 1, “generating a base based on the 3-dimensioal oral cavity data”);
generating, based on the base, a cylinder that penetrates through a wall of the base (see Lee claim 1, “generating, based on a reference curve of the base, one or more cylinders that pass through a wall of the base”);
generating a drain hole by deleting data corresponding to the cylinder from teeth model data including the base (see Lee claim 1, “generating one or more drain holes by deleting data corresponding to the one or more cylinders from teeth model data including the base”); and
displaying the teeth model data in which the drain hole is generated (see Lee claim 7, “displaying the teeth model data in which the one or more drain holes are generated”).
Regarding claim 2, Lee further discloses: wherein the generating of the cylinder comprises receiving a user input with respect to a number of cylinders, a diameter of the cylinder, and a distance from the base to the cylinder (see Lee clam 9, “receiving a user input regarding a number of the one or more cylinders, diameters of the one or more cylinders, and distances from a reference surface of the base to the one or more cylinders”).
Regarding claim 3, Lee further discloses: wherein the generating of the cylinder comprises determining a position of the cylinder, based on a number of cylinders and a distance from the base to the cylinder (see Lee claim 10, “wherein the generating of the one or more cylinders further comprises determining positions of the one or more cylinders, based on the number of the one or more cylinders and the distances from the reference surface of the base to the one or more cylinders”).
Regarding claim 9, Lee further discloses: obtaining the teeth model data including the base, by generating mesh data extending from a boundary of the three-dimensional intraoral data to the base (see Lee claim 8, “obtaining the teeth model data by generating mesh data extending from an edge of the 3-dimensional oral cavity data to the base”).
Claims 10-12, 18, and 19 recite subject matter similar to claims 1-3 and 9, therefore, are also rejected in view of Lee’s claims 1 and 7-10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 13-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Narcisse et al. (EP3673863A1) discloses deleting non-essential data of an intraoral 3D model prior to 3D printing, for reducing printing burden.
Chavez et al. (USPAPN 2020/0306017) discloses a 3D intraoral model with hollow cylinders.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SJ PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-3569. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, ANDREW MOYER can be reached at 571-272-9523. 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.
/SJ Park/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2675