DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Salah et al. US 2018/0303580 hereinafter referred to as Salah.
In regards to claim 1, Salah teaches:
“An intraoral adaptor comprising a collapsible body”
Salah paragraph [0080] teaches the imaging device 10 shown in FIG. 1 includes a support 12, taking the form of an, optionally telescopic, box, a dental retractor 14, preferably at least one mirror 16, and fastening means 18 of an image acquisition apparatus 19, shown in FIG. 2.
“wherein the collapsible body comprises (i) a proximal end configured to couple the intraoral adapter to at least a portion of a subject's mouth”
Salah paragraph [0098] and Figure 1 teaches The retractor 14 may have the features of conventional retractors. It conventionally includes a rim 34 extending around the retractor opening 24 and arranged in such a way that the patient's lips may rest on it, leaving the patient's teeth visible through said retractor opening. In the embodiment shown, the retractor 14 also includes lobes 36 that are arranged so as to spread the cheeks away from the teeth and right 38a and left 38b tabs, which are substantially perpendicular to the X axis, facilitating the handling thereof. Salah paragraph [0099] teaches The rim 34 has the shape of a channel configured to hold the patient's lips. The Examiner interprets that the end of the device that provides for these features is equivalent to a proximal end because this is the end that is attached to the mouth.
“(ii) a distal end”
Salah Figure 1-2 and paragraph [0097] teach the means 18 for fastening the acquisition apparatus. The Examiner interprets that this end of the device 10 is equivalent to a distal end because it is the opposite end of the proximal end.
“and (iii) a viewing channel located between said proximal end and said distal end”
Salah Figures 1-3 and paragraph [0176] teach the device is then in a service position and the image acquisition apparatus 19 views a composite image I.sub.c of the type of that shown in FIG. 3. In this figure, the composite image includes a direct image I.sub.d and eight reflected images I.sub.r reflected by the various mirrors 16 positioned in the chamber 20.
“wherein the viewing channel is configured to define a field of view of an intraoral region of the subject's mouth”
Salah Figure 3 illustrates the view of the subjects mouth.
“wherein the collapsible body is configured to transform between an extended position and a collapsed position along an axis extending from the proximal end of the collapsible body to the distal end of the collapsible body”
Salah Figures 1-2 and paragraph [0083] teaches the support 12 defines a chamber 20, the length of which along the X axis depends on the relative position of the male and female portions of the support 12 when the box is telescopic. Salah paragraph [0169] teaches If the box is telescopic, the operator then adjusts the position, along the X axis, of the female portion with respect to the male portion 12a, according to the image acquisition apparatus 19 and its settings.
In regards to claim 2, Salah teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
“wherein the collapsible body comprises at least a first portion and a second portion, wherein the second portion is configured to retract into the first portion when the collapsible body is in the collapsed position”
Salah Figures 1-2 and paragraph [0083] teaches the support 12 defines a chamber 20, the length of which along the X axis depends on the relative position of the male and female portions of the support 12 when the box is telescopic.
In regards to claim 4, Salah teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
“wherein the distal end comprises a mounting mechanism, wherein the mounting mechanism is configured to reversibly couple the intraoral adaptor to a mobile device comprising a camera”
Salah paragraph [0090] teaches The fastening means 18 are configured so that the image acquisition apparatus may be fastened in an acquisition position in which its objective faces the acquisition opening 26, or else obturates the acquisition opening 26. The Examiner notes that the term reversibly coupling does not appear to be defined by the specification. Applicant specification paragraph [0098] states “Mounting mechanism 20 can be configured to reversibly couple intraoral adaptor 10 to a mobile device 22 (shown in FIGs. 3A-3E) comprising a camera 24.” The Examiner interprets that based on Figures 3A to 3E the intraoral device is coupled to the camera. The Examiner interprets the term “reversibly coupling” as merely a labeling since it does not appear to have any physical characteristics associated other than the coupling of the adapter and the phone.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salah in view of Smith et al. US 2018/0054565 hereinafter referred to as Smith.
In regards to claim 3, Salah teaches all the limitations of claim 2 but does not explicitly teach:
“wherein a proximal end of the second portion is wider than a distal end of the first portion, such that the distal end of the first portion is configured to be inserted into the proximal end of the second portion”
The portion of the telescoping device which inserts into the other portion would be considered a routine implementation based on application. This feature does not provide any unpredictable results. It has been held that “[t]he combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does not more than yield predictable results.” KSR., 127 S. Ct. at 1739, 82 USPQ2d at 1395 (2007) (Citing Graham, 383 U.S. at 12).
Smith paragraph ]0021] teaches FIGS. 1A and 1B are perspective view illustrations of a dermal camera attachment 100 piggybacking on a mobile computing device 105, in accordance with an embodiment of the disclosure. The illustrated embodiment of dermal camera attachment 100 includes a light shield 110 and a housing 115. Smith paragraph [0022] teaches light shield 110 is collapsed or retracted into a stowed position to facilitate capture of far field images using the integrated camera of mobile computing device 105. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Salah in view of Smith to have included the features of “wherein a proximal end of the second portion is wider than a distal end of the first portion, such that the distal end of the first portion is configured to be inserted into the proximal end of the second portion” because conventional devices used to take pictures are typically limited in the type of imaging information that can be captured (Smith [0003]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salah in view of Ricci et al. US 11,948,685 hereinafter referred to as Ricci.
In regards to claim 20, Salah teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
“A method for assessing a condition of at least a portion of an intraoral region of a remote subject, comprising: providing an intraoral adaptor according to claim 1”
See claim 1.
“providing a mobile phone comprising a camera and a processor”
Salah paragraph [0147] teaches e image acquisition apparatus 19 is a personal device commonly available on the market, for example a mobile phone
“acquiring from the subject one or more images or videos of the intraoral region using the intraoral adaptor coupled to the mobile phone”
Salah Figure 3
Salah does not explicitly teach:
“and analyzing at least one oral landmark of the subject present in the one or more images or videos”
However, analyzing an image for a landmark is known in the field of dentistry. Ricci teaches in column 7 lines 56-63 a dental image with an identified dental image landmark may be matched to a supervised and/or unsupervised dental image landmark dataset and/or a supervised and/or unsupervised annotated dental image landmark dataset. Further, the dental image may be matched directly to a supervised and/or unsupervised annotated dental image landmark dataset. A supervised and/or unsupervised annotated dental image landmark dataset may be obtained and/or annotated from at least one of a dental professional, a health care professional, an individual, e-commerce organization. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Smith in view of Ricci to have included the features of “and analyzing at least one oral landmark of the subject present in the one or more images or videos” because there is a need for improved systems and methods for generating a dental recommendation based on image processing that may overcome one or more of the above-mentioned problems and/or limitations (Ricci column 1 lines 23-26).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL E TEITELBAUM, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-5996. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM EST.
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, John Miller can be reached at 571-272-7353. 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.
/MICHAEL E TEITELBAUM, Ph.D./ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2422