DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action for U.S. Patent Application No. 18/605,466 is responsive to communications filed on 05/13/2026, in reply to the Non-Final Rejection of 02/24/2026. Currently, claims 1-22 are pending, in which claims 1-12 have been elected without traverse, and claims 13-22 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Response to Arguments
In regard to claim 1, the Applicant submits that the claim limitations have been amended to recite "positioning projectors in projector openings formed by a projector frame disposed within one or more covers of an intraoral scanner" and "responsive to the positioning of the projectors, soldering the projectors disposed in the projector openings to a printed circuit board (PCB) of the intraoral scanner," and that the cited references do not teach or suggest these claim elements. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In regard to "positioning projectors in projector openings formed by a projector frame disposed within one or more covers of an intraoral scanner", the teachings of Pulido include disclosure that reads upon the amended limitation. The figures attached below are Figs. 7, 8A, and 3B-C of Pulido, which show a transmitter (e.g. a light source for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target) 703/801 positioned on an extension arm (projector frame) in an opening designed to receive it (projector openings), as highlighted in the reproduced figures. As shown in Figs. 3B-C, these extension arms are part of projector frames that are positioned within the intraoral scanner, disposed underneath one or more covers, as highlighted in the reproduced figures. As such, it can be seen that the teachings of Pulido include all of the limitations in the amended line "positioning projectors in projector openings formed by a projector frame disposed within one or more covers of an intraoral scanner," and additionally, the addition of “disposed in the projector openings” in lines 4-5 of the amended claim.
PNG
media_image1.png
712
1106
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As such, upon further search and consideration of the cited references, it can be seen that the teachings of Pulido and Saphier include all of the limitations presented in the amended claim 1. As such, the claim shall remain rejected.
In regard to claim 7, the Applicant submits that this claim has been amended similarly to the amendments presented in claim 1. As such, since the arguments and amendments relating to claim 1 have been found to be sufficient to overcome the claim’s rejection, claim 7 shall also remain rejected for similar reasons to those discussed above in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claims 2-6 and 8-12, these claims are dependent upon the independent claims 1 or 7, respectively. Since the arguments and amendments relating to the independent claims have been found to be insufficient to overcome their rejections, these claims are not dependent upon an allowable base claim, and as such, are not in condition for allowance by virtue of their dependency. As such, these dependent claims shall also remain rejected.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pulido et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0181815), hereinafter referred to as Pulido, in view of Saphier et al.(U.S. Publication No. 2020/0404243), hereinafter referred to as Saphier.
In regard to claim 1, Pulido teaches a method (Pulido paragraph 58 noting a method of providing the scanning device as described) comprising:
positioning projectors (Pulido Fig. 7 showing transmitter 703) in projector openings formed by a projector frame (Pulido Figs. 7 and 8A showing transmitters 703/801 positioned at the end of extension arm 701/804, inset into an opening at the end of the arm, which in different embodiments can be a through-hole to allow for the projector to be connected through the hole, as shown in Fig. 7) disposed within one or more covers (Pulido Figs. 3B-C showing the projector frame with transmitters attached at the end of extension arms (same as shown zoomed in Fig. 7) being disposed within a cavity of the intraoral scanner, and showing cover piece 302 as well as side and front walls 305 and 308 which could also be described as “covers” that cover the projector frame disposed in the cavity of the intraoral scanner) of an intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting an intraoral scanner probe head comprising extension arms that carry transmitters, e.g. a light source for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and receiver arms that hold receivers, e.g. a camera for receiving light or radiation generated by the transmitters and reflected off the scan target. The probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; and Pulido paragraph 110 noting FIG. 9A shows a side cross-sectional view of a scanner probe head 900 having base 901 and transmitter extension arms 902 holding and positioning transmitters 908 and receiver extension arms 903 holding and positioning receivers 906); and
responsive to the positioning of the projectors, soldering the projectors disposed in the projector openings (Pulido Figs. 7 and 8A showing transmitters 703/801 positioned at the end of extension arm 701/804, inset into an opening at the end of the arm, which in different embodiments can be a through-hole to allow for the projector to be connected through the hole, as shown in Fig. 7) to the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm).
However, Pulido does not expressly disclose to a printed circuit board (PCB).
In the same field of endeavor, Saphier teaches to a printed circuit board (PCB) (Saphier paragraph 513 noting cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 are all coupled to a flexible printed circuit board (PCB) so as to accommodate angular positioning of cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 within probe 28).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier because both disclosures relate to the field of intraoral scanners that scan targets with a probe head consisting of light sources and camera receivers, and perform a process of projecting structured light onto a target and cameras to capture the image based on the light reflected off the target. Both disclosures include probe head apparatuses that have positioned transmitters and receivers and are situated in specific positions to achieve this goal. As such, modified to incorporate the teachings of Saphier, the teachings of Pulido include all of the limitations of claim 1.
In regard to claim 2, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the intraoral scanner is configured to provide a plurality of intraoral scans of a dental site during an intraoral scanning session (Pulido paragraph 13 noting a 3D scanning device and system especially useful in the field of stomatology, dentistry, or orthodontics, and particularly to dental prosthetics manufacturing. The device and system of the invention is particularly applicable for imaging the surface characteristics of an object, including arbitrarily shaped objects, such as dental structures (e.g., teeth, gingiva, and the like), for generating a three-dimensional (3D) image and surface model of the object or objects. More specifically, the subject invention includes an intraoral 3D dental scanning device and method for imaging and visualizing teeth).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 3, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 2 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the plurality of intraoral scans are generated by projecting, via the projectors, a structured light comprising a plurality of features onto the dental site and capturing the plurality of features on the dental site (Pulido paragraph 26 noting the simplest structured light pattern is simply a spot of light, typically produced by a laser. The geometry of the setup between the light projector and the position of the camera observing the spot of light reflected from the target object's surface enables the calculation of the relative range of the point on which the light spot falls by trigonometry. Other light projection patterns such as a stripe or two-dimensional patterns such as a grid of light dots can be used to decrease the required time to capture the images of the target surface).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 4, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 3 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the plurality of features comprise a plurality of spots (Pulido paragraph 26 noting the simplest structured light pattern is simply a spot of light, typically produced by a laser. The geometry of the setup between the light projector and the position of the camera observing the spot of light reflected from the target object's surface enables the calculation of the relative range of the point on which the light spot falls by trigonometry. Other light projection patterns such as a stripe or two-dimensional patterns such as a grid of light dots can be used to decrease the required time to capture the images of the target surface).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 5, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the positioning of the projectors in the frame of the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting an intraoral scanner probe head comprising extension arms that carry transmitters, e.g. a light source for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and receiver arms that hold receivers, e.g. a camera for receiving light or radiation generated by the transmitters and reflected off the scan target. The probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; and Pulido paragraph 110 noting FIG. 9A shows a side cross-sectional view of a scanner probe head 900 having base 901 and transmitter extension arms 902 holding and positioning transmitters 908 and receiver extension arms 903 holding and positioning receivers 906) comprises:
positioning a first projector in a first orientation in the frame; positioning a second projector in a second orientation in the frame; and positioning a third projector in a third orientation in the frame (Pulido Fig. 6 showing an embodiment of the scanner probe head comprising four transmitters 602, e.g. light sources for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and showing the orientation that the transmitters are positioned in the frame of the scanner probe head; and Pulido Fig. 3C showing that this scanner probe head is in the frame of the intraoral scanner).
However, Pulido does not expressly disclose wherein the second orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the first orientation; and wherein the third orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the second orientation.
In the same field of endeavor, Saphier teaches wherein the second orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the first orientation; and wherein the third orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the second orientation (Saphier Figs. 2B, 2D, 2E showing embodiments of the orientations of the structured light projectors 22, and the orientations of embodiments that contain three or more light projectors, and showing the angles of which they are oriented to be within about 3 to about 28 degrees; and paragraph 508 noting that the angle between two respective optical axes of at least two structured light projectors is less than 35 degrees).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 6, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the soldering of the projectors comprises securing the first projector in the first orientation, the second projector in the second orientation, and the third projector in the third orientation in the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; Pulido paragraph 110 noting that the extension arms are skewed to provide appropriate angles for the transmitters and receivers; and Figs. 4A through 8B showing that the orientations of the light sources are set, and they are affixed to remain in specific locations).
However, Pulido does not expressly disclose secured to the PCB.
In the same field of endeavor, Saphier teaches secured to the PCB (Saphier paragraph 513 noting cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 are all coupled to a flexible printed circuit board (PCB) so as to accommodate angular positioning of cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 within probe 28).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 7, Pulido teaches a method (Pulido paragraph 58 noting a method of providing the scanning device as described) comprising:
positioning a first projector (Pulido Fig. 7 showing transmitter 703; and Pulido Fig. 6 showing an embodiment of the scanner probe head comprising four transmitters 602, e.g. light sources for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and showing the orientation that the transmitters are positioned in the frame of the scanner probe head; and Pulido Fig. 3C showing that this scanner probe head is in the frame of the intraoral scanner) in a first orientation in a first projector opening formed by a projector frame (Pulido Figs. 7 and 8A showing transmitters 703/801 positioned at the end of extension arm 701/804, inset into an opening at the end of the arm, which in different embodiments can be a through-hole to allow for the projector to be connected through the hole, as shown in Fig. 7) disposed within one or more covers (Pulido Figs. 3B-C showing the projector frame with transmitters attached at the end of extension arms (same as shown zoomed in Fig. 7) being disposed within a cavity of the intraoral scanner, and showing cover piece 302 as well as side and front walls 305 and 308 which could also be described as “covers” that cover the projector frame disposed in the cavity of the intraoral scanner) of an intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting an intraoral scanner probe head comprising extension arms that carry transmitters, e.g. a light source for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and receiver arms that hold receivers, e.g. a camera for receiving light or radiation generated by the transmitters and reflected off the scan target. The probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; and Pulido paragraph 110 noting FIG. 9A shows a side cross-sectional view of a scanner probe head 900 having base 901 and transmitter extension arms 902 holding and positioning transmitters 908 and receiver extension arms 903 holding and positioning receivers 906):
positioning a second projector in a second orientation in a second projector opening formed by the projector frame (Pulido Figs. 7 and 8A showing transmitters 703/801 positioned at the end of extension arm 701/804, inset into an opening at the end of the arm, which in different embodiments can be a through-hole to allow for the projector to be connected through the hole, as shown in Fig. 7); and positioning a third projector in a third orientation in a third projector opening (Pulido Figs. 7 and 8A showing transmitters 703/801 positioned at the end of extension arm 701/804, inset into an opening at the end of the arm, which in different embodiments can be a through-hole to allow for the projector to be connected through the hole, as shown in Fig. 7) formed by the projector frame (Pulido Fig. 6 showing an embodiment of the scanner probe head comprising four transmitters 602, e.g. light sources for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and showing the orientation that the transmitters are positioned in the frame of the scanner probe head; and Pulido Fig. 3C showing that this scanner probe head is in the frame of the intraoral scanner); and
securing the first projector in the first orientation, second projector in the second orientation, and the third projector in the third orientation in the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; Pulido paragraph 110 noting that the extension arms are skewed to provide appropriate angles for the transmitters and receivers; and Figs. 4A through 8B showing that the orientations of the light sources are set, and they are affixed to remain in specific locations).
However, Pulido does not expressly disclose wherein the second orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the first orientation; wherein the third orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the second orientation.
In the same field of endeavor, Saphier teaches wherein the second orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the first orientation; and wherein the third orientation is rotated about 3 to about 28 degrees from the second orientation (Saphier Figs. 2B, 2D, 2E showing embodiments of the orientations of the structured light projectors 22, and the orientations of embodiments that contain three or more light projectors, and showing the angles of which they are oriented to be within about 3 to about 28 degrees; and paragraph 508 noting that the angle between two respective optical axes of at least two structured light projectors is less than 35 degrees).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 8, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the first projector in the first orientation, the second projector in the second orientation, and the third projector in the third orientation reduces ambiguity of scanning of a dental site via the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraph 110 noting that the extension arms are skewed to provide appropriate angles for the transmitters and receivers; and Figs. 4A through 89B showing that the orientations of the light sources are set, and they are affixed to remain in specific locations, and Fig. 9A showing that the angles and orientation of the scanning are each different, and there is no ambiguity which pattern comes from which projector).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 9, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the intraoral scanner is configured to provide a plurality of intraoral scans of a dental site during an intraoral scanning session (Pulido paragraph 13 noting a 3D scanning device and system especially useful in the field of stomatology, dentistry, or orthodontics, and particularly to dental prosthetics manufacturing. The device and system of the invention is particularly applicable for imaging the surface characteristics of an object, including arbitrarily shaped objects, such as dental structures (e.g., teeth, gingiva, and the like), for generating a three-dimensional (3D) image and surface model of the object or objects. More specifically, the subject invention includes an intraoral 3D dental scanning device and method for imaging and visualizing teeth).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 10, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the plurality of intraoral scans are generated by projecting, via the projectors, a structured light comprising a plurality of features onto the dental site and capturing the plurality of features on the dental site (Pulido paragraph 26 noting the simplest structured light pattern is simply a spot of light, typically produced by a laser. The geometry of the setup between the light projector and the position of the camera observing the spot of light reflected from the target object's surface enables the calculation of the relative range of the point on which the light spot falls by trigonometry. Other light projection patterns such as a stripe or two-dimensional patterns such as a grid of light dots can be used to decrease the required time to capture the images of the target surface);
the plurality of projectors comprising two or more of the first projector, the second projector, or the third projector (Pulido Fig. 6 showing an embodiment of the scanner probe head comprising four transmitters 602, e.g. light sources for transmitting light or radiation towards and onto a scan target, and showing the orientation that the transmitters are positioned in the frame of the scanner probe head; and Pulido Fig. 3C showing that this scanner probe head is in the frame of the intraoral scanner; Pulido paragraph 110 noting that the extension arms are skewed to provide appropriate angles for the transmitters and receivers; and Figs. 4A through 89B showing that the orientations of the light sources are set, and they are affixed to remain in specific locations, and Fig. 9A showing that the angles and orientation of the scanning are each different, and there is no ambiguity which pattern comes from which projector).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 11, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 10 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the plurality of features comprise a plurality of spots (Pulido paragraph 26 noting the simplest structured light pattern is simply a spot of light, typically produced by a laser. The geometry of the setup between the light projector and the position of the camera observing the spot of light reflected from the target object's surface enables the calculation of the relative range of the point on which the light spot falls by trigonometry. Other light projection patterns such as a stripe or two-dimensional patterns such as a grid of light dots can be used to decrease the required time to capture the images of the target surface).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
In regard to claim 12, Pulido and Saphier teach all of the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above. In addition, Pulido teaches wherein the securing of the first projector in the first orientation, the second projector in the second orientation, and the third projector in the third orientation comprises soldering the first projector, the second projector, and the third projector of the intraoral scanner (Pulido paragraphs 103-106 noting probe head can be affixed to the scanner extension arm via adhesive, solder, or welding, or can include a means for affixing the probe head to the scanner arm; Pulido paragraph 110 noting that the extension arms are skewed to provide appropriate angles for the transmitters and receivers; and Figs. 4A through 8B showing that the orientations of the light sources are set, and they are affixed to remain in specific locations; and Fig. 9A showing that the angles and orientation of the scanning are each different, and there is no ambiguity which pattern comes from which projector).
However, Pulido does not expressly disclose secured to a printed circuit board (PCB).
In the same field of endeavor, Saphier teaches secured to a printed circuit board (PCB) (Saphier paragraph 513 noting cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 are all coupled to a flexible printed circuit board (PCB) so as to accommodate angular positioning of cameras 24 and structured light projectors 22 within probe 28).
It would have been obvious, for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to combine the teachings of Pulido with the teachings of Saphier for the same reasons as discussed in regard to claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Pesach et al. – U.S. Publication No. 2020/0060550
Method for intraoral scanning including scanner head with at least one light emitter and image sensor, and noting different designs and mounting alignments for the components on the scanner, such as staggered arrays along different ring shaped surfaces such as in Figs. 17-18. Methods for scanning relate to acquiring a 3D scan of a tooth in an oral cavity.
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 TYLER B EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2738. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 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, Sathyanarayanan Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
/TYLER B. EDWARDS/
Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/SATH V PERUNGAVOOR/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights