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 § 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.
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) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Misao et al. (JP 2005-170813), wherein the machine English translation is used for citation.
Regarding claims 1 and 3; Misao et al. teaches a dental curable composition comprising (A) a polymerizable monomer, (B) an inorganic filler, and (C) a chemical polymerization initiator composed of a tertiary amine and an organic peroxide [018]. Misao et al. teaches the (A) polymerizable monomer, in a preferred embodiment is BisGMA (2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloyloxypropoxy)phenyl] propane) and is employed in an amount of 60 parts by mass [092; Ex1]. Misao et al. teaches the (B) inorganic filler includes (B-1) irregular inorganic particles having an average particle diameter of 1 micron or more and 6 microns or less (instant B-2), (B-2) a spherical inorganic particle having an average particle diameter of 0.05 microns or more and 1 micron or less (instant B-1), and (B-3) an amorphous (i.e. irregular) inorganic particle having a particle size of less than 0.05 microns (instant B-3); blended in a range of (B-1) 40-90% by mass (instant B-2), (B-2) 10-60% by mass (instant B-1), and (B-3) 0-10% by mass [028]. Misao et al. teaches the particles (B-1) and (B-2) have a hydrophobic surface for the purpose of improving dispersibility in the polymerizable monomer, achieved via hydrophobizing treatment [039]. Misao et al. teaches the (C) chemical polymerization initiator is a photoinitiators [057].
Misao et al. teaches all of the above required components, however fails to explicitly disclose each in a preferred embodiment. A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including the non-preferred embodiments. See Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.); MPEP §2123. Misao et al. does not specifically disclose an embodiment containing the polymerizable monomer (A), fillers (B-1), (B-2), and (B-3), and photoinitiator (C). However, at the time of invention a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to prepare a composition containing polymerizable monomer (A), fillers (B-1), (B-2), and (B-3), and photoinitiator (C), based on the invention of Misao et al., and would have been motivated to do so since MIsao et al. suggests that the composition can contain polymerizable monomer (A), fillers (B-1), (B-2), and (B-3), and photoinitiator (C).
The Examiner makes note that monomer (A-1a) and filler (B-3) are merely optional components as set forth by the claim language.
Regarding claim 2; the limitations of the claim merely further define an optional component, thus not explicitly required by the claim language.
Regarding claims 4-7; Misao et al. teaches the hydrophobizing agent is, for example, gamma-methacryloyloxyalkyltrimethoxysilane or gamma-methyltrimethoxysilzne [040].
Regarding claim 8; Misao et al. teaches the composition may comprise monomers, such as (meth)acrylic acid [020].
Regarding claim 9; Misao et al. teaches the composition may further comprise chemical polymerization initiators [073].
Regarding claim 10; Misao et al. teaches a first paste and a second paste; wherein paste (I) comprises a polymerizable monomer, filler, and tertiary amine accelerator, and paste (II) comprises a polymerizable monomer, filler, and CQ photoinitiator [Ex].
Regarding claim 11; Misao et al. teaches the composition may further comprise a polymerization accelerator, such as sodium benzenesulfinate or lithium benzenesulfinate [073].
Regarding claims 12-13; Misao et al. teaches the composition is suitable for use in a dental abutment and/or dental adhesive (i.e. cement) [03, 027].
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA ROSWELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5453. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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.
/JESSICA M ROSWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767
