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(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 24 recites the limitation "'generating a model of said dental features from said plurality of close range images and said at least one wide range image' has no antecedent basis, and is therefore unclear in the scope of the claim. No where is a close range image mentioned in the previous claim limitations. The examiner has interpreted 'close' to be equivalent to 'narrow’.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Therefore, claim 24-34 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
Claim(s) 24-26, 29-30, and 32-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Prakash et al teaches, a method of dental scanning (Abst, or imaging an oral cavity of a subject include a bracket comprising a mouthpiece and a camera mount. i.e. dental scanning method): coupling an add-on to a portable electronic device including an imager (Fig 2C, add-on is bracket 200, cell phone is portable electronic device including an imager), said coupling aligning an optical path of said add-on to a FOV of said imager (Fig 2C, optical path 223 couples to cell phone camera aperture 264), where said optical path emanates from a distal portion of said add-on which is sized and shaped to be placed within a human mouth (Fig 2C, mouthpiece 210 is optical path that emanates from the bracket (add-on) and is placed within a human mouth).
Prakash et al does not teach, acquiring, using said imager: a plurality of narrow range images of one or more dental feature; at least one wide range image of said one or more dental feature, where said wide range image is acquired from a larger distance from said dental feature than said plurality of narrow range images; and generating a model of said dental features from said plurality of close range images and said at least one wide range image. However, Prakash does teach capturing either narrow or wide-angle intraoral images and generating a 3D model based on the intraoral scans (Fig 4B and Para 76, 88, 91, 95-96), but does not specifically teach capturing both wide and narrow images and combining them in image processing to create a model.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park et al teaches, acquiring, using said imager: a plurality of narrow range images of one or more dental feature (Fig 7 and Para 81, operation S50 of acquiring 2D scan image of a narrow area, also see. i.e. plurality of narrow range images of one or more dental feature);
at least one wide range image of said one or more dental feature, where said wide range image is acquired from a larger distance from said dental feature than said plurality of narrow range images (Fig 7 and Para 81-82, operation S20 of acquiring 2D scan image of a wide area, operation S30 of generating 3D scan data of a wide area. i.e. the wide range image is acquired from a larger distance from said dental feature than said plurality of narrow range images, wide range image captures much more of the oral image);
and generating a model of said dental features from said plurality of close range images and said at least one wide range image (Fig 7 and s40-s70 and Para 83-87, generating a model of said dental features from close range images and wide range images).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) so that the method includes generating a model of said dental features from said plurality of close range images and said at least one wide range image. Doing so would reduce the cumulative error when 3D scan data is registered, and reduce the accumulated errors occurring when the 3D scan data is registered (Para 7, Park et al).
Regarding claim 25, Prakash et al does not teach, the method of dental scanning according to claim 24, wherein said plurality of narrow range images and said at least one wide range image are acquired through said add-on.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park et al teaches, the method of dental scanning according to claim 24, wherein said plurality of narrow range images and said at least one wide range image are acquired through said add-on (Fig 2, add-on is 54, which is considered a detector member which is coupled to the device 20, see Para 40-46, and Para 58-59, in the 3D intraoral scanner 10 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the 2D scan image that is acquired from the entire reflected light incident through the light inlet 25 by the image sensing unit 40 when the reflector member 50 is installed on the case 20 may be the 2D scan image 42 of the wide area including the 2D scan image 44 of the narrow area. Furthermore, see Para 59, in this case, 3D scan data with respect to the 2D scan image of the narrow area may be generated by selecting only the 2D scan image 44 of the narrow area of the 2D scan image 42 of the wide area that is acquired when the reflector member 50 is installed on the case 20. i.e. both the wide image and the narrow scan image are obtained with the reflector member 50 (add-on) is installed on the case 20), the narrow images and wide range image are acquired through the add-on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) so that the method includes acquiring a plurality of narrow range images and said at least one wide range image are acquired through said add-on. Doing so would reduce the cumulative error when 3D scan data are registered, and reduce the accumulated errors occurring when the 3D scan data are registered (Para 7, Park et al).
Regarding claim 26, Prakash et al does not teach, the method of dental scanning according to claim 24, wherein said acquiring comprises: acquiring a plurality of narrow range images through said add-on; and acquiring at least one wide range image by said portable electronic device.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park et al teaches, the method of dental scanning according to claim 24, wherein said acquiring comprises: acquiring a plurality of narrow range images through said add-on; and acquiring at least one wide range image by said portable electronic device (Para 51 and Fig 2, 2D scan image that is acquired from the reflected light reflected on the reflector 52 by the image sensing unit 40 may be referred to as a 2D scan image of a narrow area when the reflector member 50 is installed on the case 20, and a 2D scan image that is acquired from the reflected light incident through the light inlet 25 by the image sensing unit 40 is referred to as a 2D scan image of a wide area when the reflector member 50 is not installed on the case 20. i.e. the narrow range images can be acquired through add-on reflector member 50 and the wide range image can be acquired by the portable electronic device 20 without said add-on 50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) so that said acquiring comprises: acquiring a plurality of narrow range images through said add-on; and acquiring at least one wide range image by said portable electronic device. Doing so would reduce the cumulative error when 3D scan data are registered, and reduce the accumulated errors occurring when the 3D scan data are registered (Para 7, Park et al).
Regarding claim 29, Prakash et al teaches the method according to claim 24, wherein said portable electronic device is an electronic communication device having a screen (See Fig 5A-5D, dental imaging device attached to add-on is a phone with a screen).
Regarding claim 30, Prakash et al teaches, the method according to claim 24, wherein said model is a 3D model (Para 88-89 and Fig 4B and Para 76, 88, 91, 95-96, step 481, one or more standard images of the oral cavity in bright field or fluorescence mode, or both, are generated and displayed on the GUI, such as on the display of the cell phone. If a 3-D mesh has been computed, in some embodiments the 3-D mesh is optionally displayed over the image. […] In some embodiments that use the 3-D mesh, the volume of diseased tissue, such as the volume of a tumor, is determined during step 483. i.e. 3D model is generated using intraoral scanner).
Regarding claim 32, Prakash et al does not teach, the method according to claim 24,wherein said plurality of images are acquired of dental features illuminated with patterned light.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park et al teaches, the method according to claim 24,wherein said plurality of images are acquired of dental features illuminated with patterned light (Para 44 and Fig 1-2, the light output unit 30 may be a component that is disposed in the case 20 and outputs predetermined light, for example, patterned light having a pattern or structural light into an oral cavity through the light outlet 23, but the present disclosure is not limited by the arrangement of the light output unit 30 in the case 20, and the 3D intraoral scanner 10 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may include a first optical system 33 disposed in the case 20 and configured to guide light output from the light output unit 30 to the light outlet 23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) so that said plurality of images are acquired of dental features illuminated with patterned light. Doing so would reduce the cumulative error when 3D scan data are registered, and reduce the accumulated errors occurring when the 3D scan data are registered (Para 7, Park et al).
Regarding claim 33, Prakash et al does not teach, the method according to claim 24, wherein said add-on optical path transfers patterned light produced by a pattern projector to dental surfaces.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park et al teaches, the method according to claim 24, wherein said add-on optical path transfers patterned light produced by a pattern projector to dental surfaces (Para 44 and Fig 1-2, the light output unit 30 may be a component that is disposed in the case 20 and outputs predetermined light, for example, patterned light having a pattern or structural light into an oral cavity through the light outlet 23, but the present disclosure is not limited by the arrangement of the light output unit 30 in the case 20, and the 3D intraoral scanner 10 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure may include a first optical system 33 disposed in the case 20 and configured to guide light output from the light output unit 30 to the light outlet 23. i.e. optical path transfers patterned light produced by a pattern projector to dental surfaces).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) so that said add-on optical path transfers patterned light produced by a pattern projector to dental surfaces. Doing so would reduce the cumulative error when 3D scan data are registered, and reduce the accumulated errors occurring when the 3D scan data are registered (Para 7, Park et al).
Regarding claim 34, Prakash et al teaches, the method according to claim 24, wherein said at least one wide range image includes dental features not illuminated by patterned light (Para 91, In step 445, it is determined whether the current image frame was taken with a material lens, such as through an optical path that includes a removable fish eye lens. If not, control passes to step 451, described below. If so, then control passes to step 447 to determine the distance of each pixel from the digital camera based on the focus, also see Para 34, mounted to the front of the head mount 110 is a light source 114 that illuminates the oral cavity when the mouth of the subject 190 is opened. The light emitted in two directions is captured in the two receptors of the binocular loupes 116 with optical filters. The two images are collected by the compact color camera 118, which is often a digital camera. i.e. wide range (wide angle) image is not illuminated by patterned light).
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) and Uthoff et al (NPL: Point-of-care, smartphone-based, dual-modality, dual-view, oral cancer screening device with neural network classification for low-resource communities).
Regarding claim 27, Prakash et al and Park et al does not teach, the method according to claim 24, wherein said at least one wide range image is acquired through said add-on using an imager FOV which emanates from said add-on distal portion with larger extent than an imager FOV used to acquire said narrow range images.
In a similar field of endeavor, Uthoff et al teaches, the method according to claim 24, wherein said at least one wide range image is acquired through said add-on using an imager FOV which emanates from said add-on distal portion with larger extent than an imager FOV used to acquire said narrow range images (Fig 1 and 2. Materials, wide image (whole cavity imaging, (b)), or wide image, is acquired using an add-on that has an FOV which emanates from sad add-on distal portion with larger extent (the LENS/optical path is wider and larger and allows for a wide-range image to be taken), than the imager FOV used to capture narrow images, which is clearly much smaller as can be seen in (a)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) and Uthoff et al (NPL: Point-of-care, smartphone-based, dual-modality, dual-view, oral cancer screening device with neural network classification for low-resource communities) so that wherein said at least one wide range image is acquired through said add-on using an imager FOV which emanates from said add-on distal portion with larger extent than an imager FOV used to acquire said narrow range images. Doing so would allow for a wider field of view and longer depth of field of the intraoral probe to improve area recognition and image quality, helping to orient the remote specialist during diagnosis (Uthoff et al., Page 16).
Claim(s) 28 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) and Cramer et al (US 11991439 B2).
Regarding claim 28, Prakash et al and Park et al do not teach, the method according to claim 24, wherein said at least one wide range image is acquired using an imager of said electronic device not coupled to said add-on.
In a similar field of endeavor, Cramer et al teaches The method according to claim 24, wherein said at least one wide range image is acquired using an imager of said electronic device not coupled to said add-on (Col 21 lines 30-45, image-based systems and methods as described herein may allow for remote assessment and follow-up with a patient during orthodontic treatment. The systems and methods allow a doctor to quickly and accurately assess a patient's progress or lack thereof based on photos or images the patient has taken. The photos or images to be taken outside the doctor's office or other clinical offices and instead may be taken by, for example, a handheld device such as a smart phone or digital camera. The assessment may include tracking the actual movement and position of a patient's teeth during orthodontic treatment as compared to the expected movement and position of the patient's teeth during orthodontic treatment. Furthermore, see Col 22 lines 4-60, For example, the three buccal photos may include an anterior image of the patient's teeth in occlusion, a left buccal image of the patient's teeth in occlusion, and a right buccal image of the patient's teeth in occlusion. In some embodiments, the buccal photos may also include images of the teeth in a neutral bite or non-occluded position. The two-dimensional images 624 may also include occlusal photos of the patient's teeth. For example, the two-dimensional images 624 may include an image of the occlusal surfaces of teeth of the patient's upper arch and an image of the occlusal surfaces of teeth of the patient's lower arch. i.e. wide range image (con be considered 2D image that includes patient's upper or lower arch) acquired using an image of electronic device (smartphone) not coupled with an add-on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) and Cramer et al (US 11991439 B2) so that at least one wide range image is acquired using an imager of said electronic device not coupled to said add-on. Doing so would improve the field of orthodontic treatment by analyzing data to efficiently target treatment areas and providing patients with access to more practitioners than conventionally available (Col 1 lines 45-50).
Regarding claim 31, Prakash et al and Park et al do not teach, the method according to claim 24,wherein said generating comprises generating a model using said narrow range images, and correcting said model using said at least one wide range image.
In a similar field of endeavor, Cramer et al teaches, the method according to claim 24,wherein said generating comprises generating a model using said narrow range images (Col 25 line 30-35 and Fig 7 702, the patient's dentition is scanned with the three-dimensional intraoral scanner in order to generate a three-dimensional model of the patient's dentition. The three-dimensional model of the patient's dentition may include individually segmented teeth representing each of the patient's teeth of their upper and lower arches. An assessment may be made as to desired final positions of the patient's teeth based on the initial position of the patient's teeth obtained from the intraoral scan. A series of intermediate tooth positions of the patient's teeth may be generated to incrementally move the teeth through a series of stages from the initial positions towards the final positions. i.e. the dental model is first created from intraoral scanning of individually segmented teeth, which can be considered narrow range images);
and correcting said model using said at least one wide range image (Col 26 lines 15-35 and Fig 7, at step 704 the process may register the three-dimensional model of the patient's dentition at the current stage of treatment with the two-dimensional image or images of the patient's teeth. The registration and other processes that occur during step 704 may be carried out by one or more modules of the system described herein, for example by the registration module 604. The registration module 604 may register the patient's three-dimensional dentition, including the three-dimensional segmented models, to the two-dimensional images in many ways. i.e. a 2D image of the patients teeth (which includes multiple teeth, can be considered a wide image compared to the narrow individually segmented teeth images of Fig 7 702) are registered to the 3D image of patients teeth, and an error image is generated (see Fig 7 708). The dentition 3D model as generated is corrected using at least one wide range 2D image).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1) and Cramer et al (US 11991439 B2) so that said generating comprises generating a model using said narrow range images, and correcting said model using said at least one wide range image. Doing so would improve the field of orthodontic treatment by analyzing data to efficiently target treatment areas and providing patients with access to more practitioners than conventionally available (Col 1 lines 45-50).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 35-38 allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 35, the prior art fails to anticipate, disclose, or render obvious the specific limitations presented in claim 35, alone or in combination. The applicant has claimed in the independent claim 35: a method of dental scanning comprising: coupling an add-on to a portable electronic device including an imager, said coupling aligning an optical path of said add-on to a FOV of said imager, where said optical path emanates from a distal portion of said add-on which is sized and shaped to be placed within a human mouth; controlling image data acquired said imager by performing one or more of: disabling one or more automatic control feature of said electronic device imager; and determining image processing compensation for said one or more automatic control feature; acquiring, using said imager, a plurality of images of one or more dental feature; if imaging processing compensation has been determined, processing said plurality of images according to said processing compensation.
The closest prior art(s) of reference is the combination of Prakash et al (US 20130209954 A1) in view of Park et al (US 20220061786 A1), which teaches a method of dental scanning using an electronic device including an imager, with an add-on that aligns an optical path and is coupled to the imager (see Abstract and Fig 2A-2C). However, Prakash et al and Park et al do not teach the specific claimed limitations regarding controlling image data acquired said imager by performing one or more of: disabling one or more automatic control feature of said electronic device imager; and determining image processing compensation for said one or more automatic control feature; acquiring, using said imager, a plurality of images of one or more dental feature; if imaging processing compensation has been determined, processing said plurality of images according to said processing compensation.
Therefore, claim 35 is allowed. Claims 36-38 are allowed based on dependency.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-20230020528-A1
US-20210353154-A1
US-20210282634-A1
US-20190029784-A1
US-20210077233-A1
WO-2021236616-A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK PETER KRAYNAK whose telephone number is (703)756-1713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 AM - 5 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, Vu Le can be reached at (571) 272-7332. 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.
/JACK PETER KRAYNAK/Examiner, Art Unit 2668
/UTPAL D SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights