Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/624,107

APPARATUSES AND METHODS FOR INTRAORAL PRESSURE SENSING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 01, 2024
Examiner
MESSERSMITH, ERIC J
Art Unit
3791
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Align Technology, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
503 granted / 720 resolved
At TC average
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
746
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.9%
-33.1% vs TC avg
§103
41.2%
+1.2% vs TC avg
§102
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 720 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 11-15, 20, 37, 43, 47, and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2020/0060611 A1 to Radmand. As to claim 1, Radmand discloses a dental appliance comprising: a body forming one or more tooth-receiving cavities configured to be worn on a subject's teeth (see Fig 2, element 25 and [0041]); a sealed pressure sensor module coupled to the body, the sealed pressure sensor module including: an airtight encapsulated cavity, wherein the airtight encapsulated cavity is encapsulated by one or more fluid-resistant materials, wherein at least a portion of the one or more fluid-resistant materials forms a deformable surface (see [0044] – “The one or more pressure sensors 32 may be electrically sealed and/or impervious to liquids, saliva and/or oral tissue.”); a pressure sensor encapsulated within the airtight encapsulated cavity and configured to measure pressure within the airtight encapsulated cavity (see [0044]), wherein the sealed pressure sensor module is held within a subject's mouth when the one or more tooth-receiving cavities are worn on the subject's teeth ([0044] -- “According to an aspect, the one or more pressure sensors 32 are configured to detect signs of clenching and/or grinding by the user that occur, for example, while the user is asleep.”. As to claim 2, Radmand further discloses a processor configured to receive pressure data from the pressure sensor and configured to modify, store and/or transmit the pressure data (see Fig 2, element 50 and [0059]). As to claim 5, Radmand further discloses a palatal region extending between a first tooth-receiving cavity and a second tooth-receiving cavity of the one or more tooth-receiving cavities (see Fig 7, element 122 and [0066]). As to claim 11, Radmand further discloses one or more additional sensors within the sealed pressure sensor module (see [0044] – (“According to an aspect, the number of pressure sensors 32 provided is 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or more.”). As to claim 12, Radmand further discloses one or more of: a temperature sensor, a photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor, a force sensor, and/or an accelerometer (see [0043]). As to claim 13, Radmand further discloses wherein the airtight encapsulated cavity has a volume of between about 0.1 cm3 and 100 cm3 in an uncompressed configuration (see Fig 2, element 32). As to claim 14, Radmand further discloses wherein the deformable surface comprises a polymeric material having a durometer of between about 20 and about 90 Shore 00 (see [0038]). As to claim 15, Radmand further discloses wherein the deformable surface has a surface area of between about 1 mm2 and 1.5 cm2 (see Fig 2, element 32). As to claim 20, Radmand further discloses wherein the sealed pressure sensor module is laminated to a body forming the one or more tooth-receiving cavities (see [0044]). Claim 37 is rejected for the reasons laid out in the treatment of claim 1. As to claim 43, Radmand further discloses determining, from the intraoral pressure, if the subject is experiencing bruxism [0044]). As to claim 47, Radmand further discloses generating the signal by deforming a deformable outer surface of the pressure sensor module while the dental appliance is worn by the subject to change the internal pressure within the airtight encapsulated cavity (see [0044]). As to claim 49, Radmand further discloses applying the dental appliance to the subject's mouth so that a pair of tooth-receiving portions fit onto the subject's teeth and the pressure sensor module is positioned adjacent to the subject's palate (see Fig 7). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 10 and 79-80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radmand in view of US 2023/0277078 A1 to Danno et al. (“Danno”). As to claim 10, it is not clear that Radmand discloses wherein the sealed pressure sensor module is positioned on a buccal or lingual side of the body. Radmand does, however, state that several pressure sensors may be placed in the device ([0044]). Sensor placement on a buccal or lingual side of the body was known as shown by Danno (see [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor of Radmand in order to achieve the predictable result disclosed by Danno of measuring perioral muscle pressures. As to claim 79, Radmand discloses a dental appliance comprising: a body forming one or more tooth-receiving cavities configured to be worn on a subject's teeth (see Fig 2, element 25 and [0041]); a sealed pressure sensor module coupled to the body, the sealed pressure sensor module including an airtight encapsulated cavity that is encapsulated by one or more fluid-resistant materials, wherein at least a portion of the one or more fluid resistant materials forms a deformable surface (see [0044] – “The one or more pressure sensors 32 may be electrically sealed and/or impervious to liquids, saliva and/or oral tissue.”), and a pressure sensor encapsulated within the airtight encapsulated cavity and configured to measure pressure within the airtight encapsulated cavity (see [0044]); a power source (Fig 4, element 70); a processor configured to receive pressure data from the pressure sensor and configured to process and store the pressure data (see Fig 7, element 50 and [0059]); and a circuitry configured to transmit information associated with the pressure data to an external device (see [0069]); wherein the power source and circuitry are arranged along a curve of a lingual side the body that is configured to be positioned along a lingual portion of the subject's dental arch when the one or more tooth-receiving cavities are worn on the subject's teeth (see Fig 4, elements 50 and 70). Radmand fails to teach wherein the sealed pressure sensor module is further included along a curve of a lingual side of the body. Radmand does, however, state that several pressure sensors may be placed in the device ([0044]). Sensor placement on a buccal or lingual side of the body was known as shown by Danno (see [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor of Radmand in order to achieve the predictable result disclosed by Danno of measuring perioral muscle pressures. As to claim 80, Radmand fails to disclose wherein the sealed pressure sensor module, power source, and circuitry are within a pocket formed on the lingual side of the body. Radmand does, however, state that several pressure sensors may be placed in the device ([0044]). Sensor placement on a buccal or lingual side of the body was known as shown by Danno (see [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor of Radmand in order to achieve the predictable result disclosed by Danno of measuring perioral muscle pressures. Claim(s) 38-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radmand in view of US 2023/0277135 A1 to Kibler et al. (“Kibler”). As to claims 38-42, Radmand discloses a method of determining intraoral pressure using an intraoral pressure sensor, but fails to disclose wherein determining intraoral pressure further comprises determining a respiration pattern; wherein determining intraoral pressure further comprises determining one or more of: mouth breathing, nasal breathing, snorting, and/or apnea; wherein determining the respiration pattern comprises determining physical activity; monitoring a patient for a respiratory disorder based on the intraoral pressure; or determining if the intraoral pressure indicates if the subject is snoring or experiencing apnea. However, in a very similar invention, Kibler discloses wherein determining intraoral pressure further comprises determining a respiration pattern (see [0096] – using airflow analysis in determining sleep apnea detection inherently involves the determination of a respiratory pattern); wherein determining intraoral pressure further comprises determining one or more of: mouth breathing, nasal breathing, snorting, and/or apnea (see [0096]); wherein determining the respiration pattern comprises determining physical activity (see [0096] and Fig 4, element 404); monitoring a patient for a respiratory disorder based on the intraoral pressure (see [0096] – apnea is a respiratory disorder); or determining if the intraoral pressure indicates if the subject is snoring or experiencing apnea (determining whether intraoral pressure is indicative of apnea). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the intraoral pressure sensing method of Kibler in order to achieve the predictable result of improving patient health by determining the existence and/or extent of sleep apnea. As to claim 81, Radmand fails to disclose a temperature sensor that is located at an anterior position of the body. However, Kibler shows this (see Fig 2, element 120e and [0049]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the mouthpiece and sensors of Radmand with the temperature sensor of Kibler in order to achieve the predictable result of informing the user of fever. Claim(s) 82 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radmand in view of Danno and further in view of US 2023/0030704 A1 to Weinstein et al. (“Weinstein”). As to claim 82, neither Radmand nor Danno discloses a substrate including a serpentine and/or zig-zag pattern configured to flex. However, such a substrate is shown by Weinstein (see Figs. 11a-c and [0293]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the mouthpiece of Radmand/Danno with the substrate having a serpentine and/or zig-zag pattern shown by Weinstein in order to achieve the predictable result of allowing considerable flex and/or stretching capabilities when connecting the various electronics of the device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Messersmith whose telephone number is (571)270-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 830am-5pm. 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, JACQUELINE CHENG can be reached at 571-272-5596. 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. /ERIC J MESSERSMITH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 01, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582772
LQG ARTIFICIAL PANCREAS CONTROL SYSTEM AND RELATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576212
MEDICINE INJECTION AND DISEASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569168
SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS FOR ANALYTE MONITORING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12544017
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NUMERICALLY EVALUATING VASCULATURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12544014
ALERT SYSTEM FOR HYPO AND HYPERGLYCEMIA PREVENTION BASED ON CLINICAL RISK
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+24.3%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 720 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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