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 § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pokotilov et al. (US 20180263733 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pokotilov et al. discloses a method for adjusting an image of a smile, comprising:
receiving a three-dimensional (3D) digital model of a dental arch of a patient (initial tooth contours 4674 are extracted from the 3D model of the patient’s teeth area, para. 0233);
receiving a digital facial image of the patient which includes an image of one or more teeth of the patient when smiling (receiving a facial image a patient, para. 0050, 0195, figures 6, 13B);
registering the 3D digital model to the one or more teeth of the patient from the digital facial image (aligning the tooth contours from the 3D model with the tooth contours of the teeth within the image, para. 0043);
correcting the 3D digital model for scale and distortion to create a corrected 3D digital model (include adjusting and/or scaling the models and/or representations of teeth so that specific parts of the 3D model have the same size/shape/perspective, etc. as similar parts of 2D images (include adjusting and/or scaling the models and/or representations of teeth so that specific parts of the 3D model have the same size/shape/perspective, etc. as similar parts of 2D images, para. 0192);
overlaying the corrected 3D digital model onto the digital facial image (a rendering of the 3D model may be inserted into the mouth opening based on the alignment of the tooth contours from the 3D model with the tooth contours of the teeth within the image of the mouth region of the patient's face, para. 0036);
generating a smile curve or arc which corresponds to a curve or arc of a lower lip of the patient when the lower lip is formed into a smile in the digital facial image (the distance between the target position of the inferior incisal edge point of the upper central incisors 1960 and the superior border of the lower lip intersecting the facial midline 2010 may be less than or equal to 1 millimeter. This distance may be less than or equal to 2 mm, for example, when the patient's lower lip is a dynamic or V-shaped lip in a social smile expression, para. 0283); and
adjusting one or more teeth from the corrected 3D digital model according to the smile curve or arc (the clinical final position determined, for example, according to an orthodontic treatment plan, a blurred initial image of the patient's teeth 4810, and a color coded image 4812 of the 3D model of the patient's teeth in the clinical final position, para. 0324).
Regarding claim 2, Pokotilov et al. discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising overlaying the smile curve or arc in proximity to the one or more teeth on the digital facial image prior to adjusting the one or more teeth from the corrected 3D digital model (Panel 4750 shows the extracted single pixel width lip contour 7452 along with four basic points of the lip contours. The four basic points may correspond to the left-most point 4757 of the lip contour 4752, the middle point of upper lip contour 4755 of the lip contour 4752, the right-most point 4754 of the lip contour 4752, and the middle point of lower lip contour 4756 of the lip contour 4752, para. 0246).
Regarding claim 3, Pokotilov et al. discloses the method of claim 2 further comprising adjusting one or more parameters of the smile curve or arc (the distance between the target position of the inferior incisal edge point of the upper central incisors 1960 and the superior border of the lower lip intersecting the facial midline 2010 may be less than or equal to 1 millimeter. This distance may be less than or equal to 2 mm, para. 0283).
Regarding claim 4, Pokotilov et al. discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising:
estimating a facial anatomy from the digital facial image of the patient (identifying facial landmarks on the facial image, the facial landmarks including lip landmarks and other landmarks, para. 0037);
identifying one or more areas of the facial anatomy affected by a correction treatment of the one or more teeth (combine the 3D model of the patient's dentition with the image of the patient, particularly the dentition portion of the image of the patient. Such a combination may include identification of sizes, shapes, and/or perspectives of the various teeth modeled in the 3D model and/or represented in the image(s) of the patient's dentition, para. 0192);
adjusting the one or more areas of the facial anatomy corresponding to the correction treatment (Combination may include adjusting and/or scaling the models and/or representations of teeth, para. 0192.
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.
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pokotilov et al. (US 20180263733 A1) in view of Andreiko et al. (US 20140122027 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Pokotilov et al. does not expressly disclose the method claim 1 further comprising identifying one or more parameters relating to smile optimization; and generating a smile score based on the one or more parameters.
Andreiko et al. teaches that mini-aesthetics rules relate to one or more factors selected from a group consisting of incisor display, crowding, smile symmetry, transverse smile, gingival display, vermilion display, smile arc, occlusal space cant, and buccal corridor, para. 0028; and that the application provides weightings to one or more factors selected from a group consisting of smile index, incisor display, commissure width, philtrum length, crown height, incisor at rest characteristics, gingiva display on smile characteristics, lip incompetence and facial symmetry, to generate a composite score for the aesthetic smile, para. 0025.
Pokotilov et al. in view of Andreiko et al. are analogous art because they are from the similar problem solving area of smile aesthetics. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add the evaluating identified parameters of Andreiko et al. to the method of Pokotilov et al. in order to obtain parameters. The motivation for doing so would be to improve a smile.
Regarding claim 6, Pokotilov et al. does not expressly disclose the method of claim 5 further comprising altering one or more parameters to adjust the smile score.
Andreiko et al. teaches that the rules may be modified after initialization of the rule based expert system application, para. 0125 and that the rule base expert system application 146 may provide different weightages to different factors for arriving at a composite score 1402 that is optimized for achieving an aesthetic smile, para. 0134.
Pokotilov et al. in view of Andreiko et al. are analogous art because they are from the similar problem solving area of smile aesthetics. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add the custom adjustment of Andreiko et al. to the method of Pokotilov et al. in order to obtain parameter changes. The motivation for doing so would be to improve a smile.
Regarding claim 7, Pokotilov et al. does not expressly disclose the method of claim 5 wherein the one or more parameters for generating the smile score is selected from the group consisting of smile arc, incisor plane cant, occlusal plane cant, max midline, max transverse display, cuspid inclination, buccal segment inclination, tooth proportionality, flow, gingival display, maxillary central inclination, and COP.
Andreiko et al. teaches that mini-aesthetics rules relate to one or more factors selected from a group consisting of incisor display, crowding, smile symmetry, transverse smile, gingival display, vermilion display, smile arc, occlusal space cant, and buccal corridor, para. 0028; and that the application provides weightings to one or more factors selected from a group consisting of smile index, incisor display, commissure width, philtrum length, crown height, incisor at rest characteristics, gingiva display on smile characteristics, lip incompetence and facial symmetry, to generate a composite score for the aesthetic smile, para. 0025
Pokotilov et al. in view of Andreiko et al. are analogous art because they are from the similar problem solving area of smile aesthetics. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add the parameter group of Andreiko et al. to the method of Pokotilov et al. in order to obtain factors related to smile aesthetics. The motivation for doing so would be to improve a smile.
Regarding claim 8, Pokotilov et al. does not expressly disclose the method of claim 1 further comprising overlaying a plane upon the one or more teeth of the digital facial image to determine a position of one or more brackets upon the one or more teeth.
Andreiko et al. teaches the superimposing/overlaying, see figure 25.
Pokotilov et al. in view of Andreiko et al. are analogous art because they are from the similar problem solving area of smile aesthetics. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to add the overlay feature of Andreiko et al. to the method of Pokotilov et al. in order to obtain fitting related to smile aesthetics. The motivation for doing so would be to improve a smile.
Regarding claim 9, Andreiko et al. discloses the method of claim 8 further comprising overlaying images of the one or more brackets upon the one or more teeth on the digital facial image in a corresponding manner (see figure 26).
Conclusion
Coachman et al., Digital Smile Design: A Tool for Treatment Planning and Communication in Esthetic Dentistry, 2012 discloses a multi-use tool that can assist the restorative team throughout treatment, improving the dental team’s understanding of the aesthetic issues and increasing patient acceptance of the final result. The placement of references lines and other shapes over extra- and intraoral digital photo graphs widens the dental team’s diagnostic vision and helps to evaluate the limitations, risk factors, and aesthetic principles of a given case.
Stonisch (US 20110033815 A1) discloses taking three-dimensional digital imagery of the prepared natural teeth. The demonstration dental template is set in position to match the desired vertical and horizontal positions of the final restoration. Digital imagery is taken of the template to record its desired plane of occlusion and the desired incisal length of the teeth, i.e. to record the position of the vertical and horizontal facial planes of the template relative to the tooth plane of the natural teeth. The teeth are prepared and the method may include taking three-dimensional digital imagery of the prepared natural teeth. Three-dimensional digital imagery of the position template and of the prepared teeth can then be sent to the laboratory and used and correlated with each other to communicate desired vertical and horizontal of the restoration in making the restoration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS J LETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7464. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6 ET.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
/THOMAS J LETT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611