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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group III in the reply filed on 19 March 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Examiner rejoins Group IV to Group III and examines them together as indistinct processes for manufacturing a dental implant.
Claims 1-11, now cancelled, are considered withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 19 March 2026.
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) 12, 14, 17-19, and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (KR 101853646B1).
Regarding Claims 12, 14, and 19, Lee et al. (KR’646) teach a method of modifying the surface of a zirconia material (e.g. dental implant made of zirconia), including the steps of: (a) filling a plasma generating device with a carrier gas; (b) generating plasma in the plasma generating device; and (c) irradiating the generated plasma to zirconia [0026-0028,0048-0049].
Regarding Claims 17 and 23, KR’646 teaches that the plasma is radiated at room temperature and at atmospheric pressure [0001].
Regarding Claims 18 and 24, KR’646 teaches that the plasma is irradiated to the implant for 60 to 300 seconds (i.e. 60 seconds to 5 minutes).
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) 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 101853646B1) in view of Ruan et al. (CN 108380890).
Regarding Claims 13 and 20, KR‘646 fails to teach carbon content. Ruan et al. (CN’890) is analogous art in the field of dental implants and treatments thereof (Abstract). CN’890 suggests controlling carbon and oxygen content to ensure uniform composition, high relative density, and no impurity phases and to avoid biocompatibility issues [0025]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the process of KR’646 to provide a surface-modified zirconia material with a surface ratio of carbon to oxygen within the recited range through routine optimization to avoid impurities and issues with biocompatibility.
Claim(s) 15 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 101853646B1) in view of Ahn et al. (KR 20200047062A).
Regarding Claims 15 and 21, KR’646 teaches an argon primary inert gas [0048]. KR’646 fails to teach N2 gas. Ahn et al. (KR’062) is analogous art in the field of treating implants with plasma (Abstract), recognizing, in particular, plasma treatment of zirconia implants [0003], and suggests that either argon or nitrogen gas can be used as a carrier gas for a discharge gas used in a plasma treatment [0015-0016]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the process of KR’646 either by substituting nitrogen for argon or by using both nitrogen and argon as carrier gases, because KR’062 suggests that argon and nitrogen can both be used as a carrier gas for a treatment plasma in an analogous process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 22 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.
Regarding Claims 16 and 22, KR’646 teaches a voltage of 27 V and a frequency of 900 MHz. No prior art has been identified which teaches a voltage and a frequency within the recited ranges.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER M WEDDLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5346. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:30.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
ALEXANDER M WEDDLE
Examiner
Art Unit 1712
/ALEXANDER M WEDDLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights