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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raslambek U.S. Patent/PG Publication 10631954.
Regarding claim 1 (independent):
A method, comprising: receiving, by one or more processors, (Raslambek C8 L10-30 The functions of the various elements shown in the figures, including any functional block labeled as a “processor”, may be provided through the use of dedicated hardware as well as hardware capable of executing software in association with appropriate software.)
a first series of three-dimensional (3D) representations of an upper dental arch and a lower dental arch, (Raslambek C19 L15-25 STEP 310: obtaining a 3D model of upper teeth of an upper archform and lower teeth of a lower archform of a subject)
the first series of 3D representations showing a progression of teeth in the upper dental arch and the lower dental arch from an initial position to a final position (Raslambek C19 L35-45 The 3D model 312 of the teeth 16 may be representative of a proposed orthodontic treatment for the plurality of teeth 16, and may include information relating to one or more of: the initial position 42 of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16, the desired position 44 of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16, and the trajectory 46 defining the path of movement of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16 to move from the initial position 42 to the desired position 44.) where the desired position is the final position.
determining, by the one or more processors, for a first 3D representation of the first series of 3D representations, a distance between at least one tooth from the upper dental arch and a corresponding at least one tooth from the lower dental arch (Raslambek C24 L5-15 In certain embodiments, the iterative execution comprises updating the point cloud representation 316 of the plurality of teeth 16 with an adjusted position of the plurality of teeth 16 following the adjusted simulated orthodontic treatment, and determining whether there is collision or not between opposing teeth 16 of the upper and lower archforms 302, 304, until it is determined that there is no collision between the teeth 16.)(Raslambek C24 L55-65 The method 300 comprises identifying whether there is collision between the orthodontic appliance 10 and the one or both of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b in the simulated position by: in the 3D grid 326 in the simulation space 328 onto which the plurality of the vector points 319 representative of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b have been mapped, identifying the cells 332 of the 3D grid 326 containing vectors points 319 representative of the one or both of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b; identifying cells of the 3D grid 326 containing vectors points 319 representative of the orthodontic appliance 10; applying a first mask to the cells in the 3D grid which include vector points representative of the one or both of the upper teeth and the lower teeth; applying a second mask to the cells in the 3D grid which include vector points representative of the orthodontic appliance; and determining if there is at least one cell in the 3D grid which includes both the first mask and the second mask.).
determining, by the one or more processors, using a transformation, a movement of at least one of the upper dental arch or the lower dental arch to decrease the distance between the at least one tooth from the upper dental arch and the corresponding at least one tooth from the lower dental arch (Raslambek C23 L60-65 In certain embodiments, the adjusted simulated movement comprises an iterative movement of one or both of the upper archform 302 and the lower archform 304 away from one another, until there is not further collision determined between the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b.) since it is moving to reach the smallest non-collision distance.
generating, by the one or more processors, a second 3D representation of the plurality of upper teeth and the plurality of lower teeth based on the determined movement to reflect the decreased distance (Raslambek C23 L35-50 In certain embodiments, the method 300 further comprises executing a simulation of the movement of the teeth 16 according to the adjusted orthodontic treatment, to obtain an adjusted 3D model of the teeth 16. In the example illustrated in FIG. 16B, the simulation of the movement of the teeth 16 according to the adjusted orthodontic treatment comprises movement of the tooth 16c in the first direction for the first distance and in the second direction for the second distance.).
and generating, by the one or more processors, a visualization comprising the second 3D representation, the visualization depicting the progression of the teeth in the upper dental arch and the lower dental arch (Raslambek C24 L25-35 In certain embodiments, the method further comprises sending instructions to a display device, such as the display 202, operably connected to the processor 150, to display the collision as a pictorial representation of the collision or an alphanumerical representation of the collision (FIGS. 17A and 17B).).
Raslambek discloses the above elements in several embodiments. With the embodiments being disclosed in a single reference, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention being aware of one embodiment would also have been aware of the others, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have combined these elements from two or more embodiments into a single arrangement for the benefit of enjoying the advantages of all the embodiments disclosed combined into a single arrangement.
Regarding claim 2:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein determining the movement of at least one of the upper dental arch or the lower dental arch includes determining a movement from a first contact position having a first occlusal contact to a second contact position having a second occlusal contact (Raslambek C24 L5-15 In certain embodiments, the iterative execution comprises updating the point cloud representation 316 of the plurality of teeth 16 with an adjusted position of the plurality of teeth 16 following the adjusted simulated orthodontic treatment, and determining whether there is collision or not between opposing teeth 16 of the upper and lower archforms 302, 304, until it is determined that there is no collision between the teeth 16.)(Raslambek C24 L55-65 The method 300 comprises identifying whether there is collision between the orthodontic appliance 10 and the one or both of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b in the simulated position by: in the 3D grid 326 in the simulation space 328 onto which the plurality of the vector points 319 representative of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b have been mapped, identifying the cells 332 of the 3D grid 326 containing vectors points 319 representative of the one or both of the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b; identifying cells of the 3D grid 326 containing vectors points 319 representative of the orthodontic appliance 10; applying a first mask to the cells in the 3D grid which include vector points representative of the one or both of the upper teeth and the lower teeth; applying a second mask to the cells in the 3D grid which include vector points representative of the orthodontic appliance; and determining if there is at least one cell in the 3D grid which includes both the first mask and the second mask.).
Regarding claim 3:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein the transformation is a rigid body transformation comprising a parameterization of at least one of a translational or a rotational movement of at least one of the upper dental arch or the lower dental arch (Raslambek C20 L40-45 The trajectory 46 is defined, in certain embodiments, by a distance of movement and a direction of movement. The direction of movement may be defined relative to x, y, z planes in a simulation space 315.)(Raslambek C10 L45-55 Depending on the initial and desired positions 42, 44 of the tooth 16, a trajectory 46 of the movement of the tooth 16 from the initial position 42 to the desired position 44 is defined. In certain embodiments, the trajectory is one or more of a direct linear path, a plurality of stepped linear paths and a rotational path.).
Regarding claim 4:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches further comprising:
receiving, by the one or more processors, from a treatment planning terminal, inputs (Raslambek C10 L64-67 In summary, it is contemplated that in at least some embodiments of the present technology, the system 100 may or may not require operator input or interaction for generating 3D representations of at least some orthodontic appliances 10)
for moving at least one tooth from among the plurality of upper teeth and the plurality of lower teeth relative to an occlusal axis and determining, by the one or more processors, the distance between the at least one tooth from the upper dental arch and the corresponding at least one tooth from the lower dental arch in response to receiving the inputs for moving the at least one tooth from among the plurality of upper teeth and the plurality of lower teeth relative to the occlusal axis (Raslambek C10 L45-50 A desired position 44 of the teeth 16 is then identified. This can be performed manually, semi-automatically or automatically.)(Raslambek C9 L15-25 The brackets 12 are provided on respective teeth 16 (shown individually as 16a, 16b, 16c, 16d, 16e in FIG. 2), and the archwire 14 extends between, and is connected to, each of the brackets 12. In the illustrated example, the subject has a malocclusion—that is, a misalignment—of the tooth 16c for which the orthodontic treatment includes an upward movement of the tooth 16c so that the tooth 16c is aligned with neighboring the teeth 16a, 16b, 16d, 16e.) (Raslambek C11 L15-25 However, in some cases, the movement of the given tooth 16 from the initial position 42 to the desired position 44 along the trajectory 46 which is a direct linear path may not be possible due to a possible collision with another tooth 16 or another structure, such as a part of the orthodontic appliance applied to the teeth, whilst moving from the initial position 42 to the desired position 44.).
Regarding claim 5:
The method of claim 4, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein the inputs for moving the one or more upper teeth and the one or more lower teeth relative to the occlusal axis comprise an intrusion movement (Raslambek C8 L50-55 Orthodontic treatments are used for treating different conditions relating to teeth misalignment or malocclusion, including but not limited to one or more of: tooth rotation, tooth intrusion/extrusion, tooth translation, and interdental space management).
Regarding claim 6:
The method of claim 4, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein determining the distance between the at least one tooth from the upper dental arch and the corresponding at least one tooth from the lower dental arch is based on the inputs received from the treatment planning terminal (Raslambek C10 L45-50 A desired position 44 of the teeth 16 is then identified. This can be performed manually, semi-automatically or automatically.)(Raslambek C20 L45-55 In certain embodiments, the method 300 comprises the processor 150 determining the trajectory 46 based on the initial position 42 and the desired position 44 of the tooth 16. Alternatively, the method 300 comprises acquiring the trajectory 46 as an input from the user or from another source.)(Raslambek C8 L50-60 Orthodontic treatments are used for treating different conditions relating to teeth misalignment or malocclusion, including but not limited to one or more of: tooth rotation, tooth intrusion/extrusion, tooth translation, and interdental space management. Interdental space management may include one or more of closing embrasures, creating interproximal contacts, opening embrasures, and eliminating interproximal contacts.)
Regarding claim 7:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein the decreased distance is a minimum distance defined by a maximum contact between the plurality of teeth of the upper dental arch and the plurality of teeth of the lower dental arch (Raslambek C22 L60-C23 L2 The adjustment is made to avoid collision between the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b during the proposed orthodontic treatment, or to keep the extent of collision within a predetermined limit. In certain embodiments, the predetermined limit may be defined as contact between the upper teeth 16a and the lower teeth 16b that does not cause a malocclusion or bad bite.)(Raslambek C24 L10-20 In certain embodiments, when there is no collision detected, one or both of the upper archform 302 and the lower archform 304 are brought towards one another, and the method 300 repeated until a collision is detected. This can help to determine an optimal spacing of the upper archform 302 and the lower archform 304 from another.).
Regarding claim 8:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches further comprising:
determining, by the one or more processors, for the first 3D representation of the first series of 3D representations, the distance between the at least one tooth from the upper dental arch and the corresponding at least one tooth from the lower dental arch is a minimum distance (Raslambek C24 L5-15 In certain embodiments, the iterative execution comprises updating the point cloud representation 316 of the plurality of teeth 16 with an adjusted position of the plurality of teeth 16 following the adjusted simulated orthodontic treatment, and determining whether there is collision or not between opposing teeth 16 of the upper and lower archforms 302, 304, until it is determined that there is no collision between the teeth 16.)
and generating, by the one or more processors, the second 3D representation of the plurality of upper teeth and the plurality of lower teeth to reflect the minimum distance (Raslambek C19 L35-45 The 3D model 312 of the teeth 16 may be representative of a proposed orthodontic treatment for the plurality of teeth 16, and may include information relating to one or more of: the initial position 42 of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16, the desired position 44 of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16, and the trajectory 46 defining the path of movement of one or more teeth 16 of the plurality of teeth 16 to move from the initial position 42 to the desired position 44.)
Regarding claim 9:
The method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Raslambek. Raslambek further teaches wherein generating the second 3D representation of the plurality of upper teeth and the plurality of lower teeth includes rendering the second 3D representation on a user interface (Raslambek C24 L25-35 In certain embodiments, the method further comprises sending instructions to a display device, such as the display 202, operably connected to the processor 150, to display the collision as a pictorial representation of the collision or an alphanumerical representation of the collision (FIGS. 17A and 17B).)(Raslambek C15 L20-30 The visual output may include one or more images pertaining to the manufacturing of the orthodontic appliance 10, bending of the archwire 14, information relating to the orthodontic treatment including images of: the lower arch and/or the upper arch 24, a digital model of the lower arch and/or the upper arch 24 in a current teeth configuration, a digital model of the lower arch and/or the upper arch 24 in a desired teeth configuration, a digital model of a desired aligner 22.).
Regarding claim 10 (independent):
The claim is a parallel version of claim 1. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 11:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 2. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 12:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 3. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 13:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 4. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 14:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 5. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 15:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 6. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 16:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 7. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 17:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 8. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 18:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 9. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 19 (independent):
The claim is a parallel version of claim 1. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 20:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 9. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Conclusion
For the prior art referenced and the prior art considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure but not relied upon, see PTO-892 “Notice of References Cited”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON PRINGLE-PARKER whose telephone number is (571) 272-5690 and e-mail is jason.pringle-parker@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30am-5:00pm est Monday-Friday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, King Poon can be reached on (571) 270-0728. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, seehttp://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASON A PRINGLE-PARKER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights