DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 11, 13-17, and 19-25 are pending.
Claims 1-10, 12, and 18 are cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but it is moot in light of a new ground of rejection. See discussion below.
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.
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.
Claims 11, 13-15, and 19-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hultgren (US 20150305669 Al, April 24, 2014) in view of Shewman ("3-Dimensional Physiologic Postural Range of the Mandible: A Computerized-Assisted Technique-A Case Study," August 2013) and Kopelman et al. (US 20180168781 A1, 2018-06-21) (hereinafter “Kopelman”).
Regarding claims 11, 13-15, and 19-25, Hultgren teaches a method for facilitating a dental procedure, comprising: generating a three dimensional (3D) model of kinesiologic activity of a craniomandibular complex based upon a sensing of a plurality of wireless position sensors (e.g., para [0063], [0071]-[0075], Figs. 5, 6) while an upper and lower jaw are in motion with respect to each other; calculating a dental procedure needed to achieve a stable physiologic bite based upon the 3D model. See, e.g., para [0027], [0031], [0075], [0085], [0113]-[0118], [0124], [0145].
Note that Hultgren teaches use of various display devices, such as projectors (e.g., [0095]), applications for various types of dental treatments that remove and add material (e.g., [0123]), and updating data during treatment (e.g., [0139]).
Hultgren does not teach generating a 3D visualization to implement the dental procedure that depicts a portion of an individual tooth to be adjusted. Shewman teaches that jaw motion data may be useful in the construction of oral appliances for sleep apnea patients. For example, Shewman teaches that “[i]ntraoral lateral pterygoid recordings may lend important information in the construction of 'pullforward' appliances for sleep apnea patients to ensure the chosen appliance and/or position is within the physiologic range” (pp. 8-9).
Hultgren does not teach displaying within eyewear a graphic output corresponding to the dental procedure during the dental procedure. Kopelman teaches use of AR in the dental context. See, e.g., [0057] (“The AR display 150 may include lenses through which a wearer (e.g., a dental practitioner) may see a physical, real-world environment (e.g., a patient's oral cavity) and a projector for projecting visual elements onto the lenses. Examples of AR displays include HoloLens®, Google Glass®, Vuzix Smart Glasses®, and Sony SmartEyeGlass®. The AR display 150 may therefore overlay information for a dental practitioner onto the lenses in a position in the field of view of the practitioner that corresponds to a location of an identified area of interest. To determine where to display information, the AR display 150 may include one or more sensors to track the eyes of a user and/or determine a position of the user in relation to positions of objects viewed by the user. The AR display 150 may also use images provided from image capture device 160 to determine where to display information to the dental practitioner. In some embodiments the image capture device 160 is mounted to the AR display 150.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Shewman with that of Hultgren such that the invention further comprises generating a 3D visualization to implement the dental procedure that depicts a portion of an individual tooth to be adjusted, and displaying within eyewear a graphic output corresponding to the dental procedure during the dental procedure (as recited in claim 11); further comprising updating the 3D visualization during the dental procedure to reflect progress of the dental procedure (as recited in claim 13); wherein the dental procedure is removal of the portion of the individual tooth (as recited in claim 14); wherein the dental procedure is the addition of structure to the individual tooth (as recited in claim 15); further comprising fabricating, based upon the 3D model, a dental appliance to implement the dental procedure (as recited in claim 19); further comprising manufacturing the dental appliance based upon the 3D model by employing CAD/CAM software (as recited in claim 20); wherein the dental appliance is employed for treatment of sleep apnea (as recited in claim 21); wherein the dental appliance is a crown (as recited in claim 22); wherein the dental appliance is a filling (as recited in claim 23); wherein the dental appliance is dentures (as recited in claim 24); wherein the graphic output corresponding to the dental procedure appears within the eyewear over the individual tooth to be adjusted (as recited in claim 25) in order to improve the usability and functionality of the invention.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hultgren, in view of
Shewman, as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Teixeira (US 20120022844 Al, January 26,
2012).
Regarding claim 16, Hultgren teaches a method for facilitating a dental procedure, except further comprising correlating the 3D model with physiologic data. Teixeira teaches data fusion of various physiologic data corresponding to the patient in order to reduce the influence of multiple sources of signal noise affecting mechanical sensors. See, e.g., para [0031], [0254]-[0260], [0312]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Teixeira with the method taught by Hultgren such that the method further comprises correlating the 3D model with physiologic data (as recited in claim 16); wherein the physiological data of on one or more physiological dutum from a list, the list consisting of: pulse oximetry; heart rate; EKG of the heart; brain EEG; REM; blood pressure; skeletal muscle EMG; respiratory rate; pharyngometry; rhinometry; tooth contact sensors; cervical posturel; and vertebral posturel (as recited in claim 17) in order to enhance the diagnostic efficacy of the invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT T LUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1860. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm, M-F (generally).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gary Jackson, can be reached on 571-272-4697. 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, see http://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.
Scott Luan
/SCOTT LUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792