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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 4, the applicant claims “a second opening formed in the arm or formed in a second arm”. The applicant then further claimed that the opening is configured to be retained in an upper arch of the mouth. It is unclear what the applicant is trying to claim with respect to the second opening when it is formed in a second arm. It is unclear if the second arm is a completely different second arm, such that it is not coupled to the claimed art or if it is one of the rod or sleeve, such that it makes up the claimed arm including the rod and sleeve. It is noted that for examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as in the alternative when the second opening is formed in a second arm, the second arm is one of the sleeve or rod of the claimed arm. Such that each end of the arm has an opening, however, the applicant should amend the claim to clarify what is being claimed.
The same issues applies to claim 19 and the limitations are being interpreted as the same as discussed above in detail.
Drawings
The drawings were received on March 19, 2026. These drawings are accepted and entered.
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) 1-6, 8-9, 12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolley (11,246,682) in view of Williams (2010/0151402).
Jolley teaches with respect to claim 1, an orthodontic apparatus comprising an arm 10 (the spring) to extend in a mouth of a patient, an opening formed in the arm (the ends of the spring, see col. 11, ll. 12-21, 31-26, such that the opening in the arm is an eyelet), a cylinder (see annaoted figure, portion of anchor 20), and a device retaining the opening on the cylinder such that when the cylinder is in the mouth, they cylinder extends in a coronal apical direction in an arch of the mouth of the patient (see annotated figure, such that the device is the enlarged end of the anchor 20, and the cylinder extends in a coronal apical direction when placed in the mouth). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the arm comprising a sleeve and a rod and the device is a screw.
PNG
media_image1.png
290
610
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Williams teaches an orthodontic apparatus comprising an arm to extend in a mouth of a patient (see figs. 20-21, such that a spring or extension arm can be installed in the mouth), the arm comprising a sleeve and a rod (see fig. 1, annotated figure below), an opening formed in the arm (such that element 304 is an opening at each end of the arm, see figs. 2, 15, pars. 83, 94-95, 100), a cylinder 506, and a screw 502 retaining the opening on the cylinder in the mouth (pars. 96, 99, 100-101, figs. 20-21, 26, such that the securing cylinder and screw of figure 26 can be used to secure the arm and rod device of fig. 21 as they are taught as equivalents and par. 100 the spring or “other orthodontic mechanism”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to include a screw as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder. Further it is noted that it would have been obvious to modify the arm to be an arm with a sleeve and rod in order to provide the desired forces to the teeth. It is noted that Williams teaches an arm being a spring arm and a rod and sleeve arm are known equivalents and therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select either type of arm depending of the desired forces applied to the teeth.
PNG
media_image2.png
370
405
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 2, wherein the arch is a lower arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 3, wherein the arch is an upper arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 4, wherein the apparatus further comprises a second opening formed in the arm (see figs. such that the arm has a coupler on each end, col. 11, ll. 11-21, 31-37), a second cylinder (see annotated figure below, fig. 1C) and a second device retaining the second opening on the second cylinder such that when the second cylinder is in the mouth, the second cylinder extends in a coronal apical direction in an upper arch of the mouth of the patient (see annaoted figure above, fig. 1c). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the second device is a second screw.
Williams further teaches a second opening (see figs. 21-22, 26, such that each end of the arm has an opening), as second cylinder 504 (see figs. 24-26, such that there is a cylinder on each arch), and a second screw 502 retaining the second opening on the second cylinder in an upper arch of the mouth of the patient (see figs. 21-22, 26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to include a screw as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 6, a base formed with the cylinder (see annotated figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 8, wherein the base is configured to extend in a coronal apical direction and attachable to one or more teeth of the patient (see annotated figure above, such that the base is attached to the teeth through the archwire and brackets and alternatively is capable of being directly attached to the teeth through bonding if desired). It is noted the limitation of the base being attachable to the teeth is functional and therefore, the prior art only has to be capable of functioning as claimed in order to meet the claimed limitation.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 9, wherein the base straddles over a forwards extending arm (see annotated figure above, such that the forward extending arm is the arch wire, col. 7, ll.61-66 regarding the base being crimped onto the archwire such that it would straddle it).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above. With respect to claim 12, the limitation “is cased or molded in surgical grade materials” is being treated as a product by process limitation; that is, that the cylinder is made by casting or molding. As set forth in MPEP 2113, product by process claims are NOT limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only to the structure implied by the steps. Once a product appearing to be substantially the same or similar is found, a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection may be made and the burden is shifted to applicant to show an unobvious difference. See MPEP 2113. Thus, even though Jolley is silent as to the process used to make the cylinder, it appears that the product in Jolley would be the same or similar as that claimed; especially since both applicant’s product and the prior art product is made to be used in the mouth and is formed of a specific shape. It is noted that the device of Jolley is disclosed to be used in the mouth and therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the cylinder of Jolley to be made of a surgical grade material to ensure the device is safe for intra-oral use.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 14, the cylinder is configured to extend in a coronal apical direction in a lower arch of the mouth of the patient near canine teeth or a first bicuspid area (such that the anchor is capable of being positioned as claimed which can be evidenced by fig. 1B).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 15, wherein the arm is extendable and retractable based on movement of the moth of the patient (see figs., such that the arm is a spring which is extendable and retractable based on the forces applied to it, such that when the user opens their mouth it would extend and when the user closes their mouth the arm would retract from the extended position). It is further noted that Williams teaches the arm being extendable and retractable as claimed such that it is a telescoping assembly.
With respect to claim 16, Jolley teaches a method of installing an orthodontic device comprising extending an arm 10 in a mouth of a patient (see fig. 1C), wherein the arm includes an opening formed at one end of the arm (col. 11, ll. 12-21, 31-37, such that the opening is the threaded bore or eyelets at the end of the spring/arm), positioning a cylinder such that it extends in a coronal apical direction in an arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C, annaoted figure above), and providing a device (see annotated figure) to the cylinder to hold the opening around the cylinder (see annotated figure, such that the end of the anchor is the device as it is enlarged and retains the opening around the cylinder). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the device is a screw.
Williams teaches a method of installing an orthodontic device comprising extending an arm 500 in a mouth of a patient (see fig. 26, pars. 100-101), wherein the arm includes a sleeve and a rod (see fig. 21, pars. 100-101, annotated figure above, such that any orthodontic device can be secured in the mouth with the device of fig. 26, such that the arm with the rod and sleeve is secured, see figs. 20-21 that shows both types of devices can be secured) and an opening formed therein (such that element 304 or 502 are secured in the openings, par. 100, fig. 1), positioning a cylinder 504 in an arch in the mouth of the patient, and securing a screw 502 to the cylinder to hold the opening around the cylinder (see pars. 100-101, fig. 26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to be a screw that is secured to the cylinder as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder. Further it is noted that it would have been obvious to modify the arm to be an arm with a sleeve and rod in order to provide the desired forces to the teeth. It is noted that Williams teaches an arm being a spring arm and a rod and sleeve arm are known equivalents and therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select either type of arm depending of the desired forces applied to the teeth.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 17, the arch is a lower arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 18, wherein the arch is an upper arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 19, positioning a second such that it extends in a coronal apical direction in an upper arch in the mouth of the patient using a second opening formed in the arm or second arm (see figs. such that the arm has a coupler on each end, col. 11, ll. 11-21, 31-37), and providing a second device to the second cylinder to hold the second opening around the second cylinder (see annaoted figure above, fig. 1c). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the device is a screw.
Williams further teaches the method comprising positioning a second cylinder in an upper arch in the mouth of the patient using a second opening formed in the arm (see fig. 26) and securing a screw 502 to the cylinder to hold the opening around the cylinder (see par. 100, fig. 26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to be a screw that is secured to the cylinder as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder. It is noted that as illustrated in fig. 26, Williams teaches arm including an eyelet at each end and a cylinder and device at on each jaw.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 20, wherein the arm is extendable and retractable based on movement of the mouth of the patient (see figs., such that the arm is a spring which is extendable and retractable based on the forces applied to it, such that when the user opens their mouth it would extend and when the user closes their mouth the arm would retract from the extended position). It is further noted that the arm of Williams is also extendable and retractable based on movement of the mouth of the patient such that it is a telescoping assembly.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolley (11,246,682) in view of Williams (2010/0151402) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of in view of Mann (5,151,027).
Jolly/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the screw is a locking screw.
Mann teaches an orthopedic apparatus comprising an arm 12 to extend in a mouth of a patient, the arm comprising a sleeve 13 and rod 14, an opening (the opening in cylinder 48) formed in the arm (see fig. 13), a cylinder 45, and a screw 50 retaining the opening on the cylinder (col. 6, ll. 21-36). Further with respect to claim 5, Mann teaches the screw is a locking screw (col. 6, ll. 57-60). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the screw taught by Jolley/Williams to be a locking screw as taught by Mann in order to prevent accidental disengagement of the parts.
Claim(s) 7 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolley (11,246,682) in view of Williams (2010/0151402) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Richards (5,306,142).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, including Jolley teaching the base being crimped onto the archwire (see col. 7, ll. 61-66), however, is silent as to the shape of the base, therefore, does not teach the base is a saddle shaped base, the base includes a hole to receive an arch wire for orthodontia and the hole is in a round or rectangular shape.
Richards teaches an orthodontic apparatus comprising a cylinder 44/64 and a device 45/65, wherein the cylinder is to be in a vertical position in an arch of the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1) and the cylinder comprises a base 35/55.
Richards further teaches with respect to claim 7, wherein the base is a saddle shaped base (see figs. 6-7).
Richards further teaches with respect to claim 10, wherein the base includes a hole 40 to receive an arch wire for orthodontia and with respect to claim 11, wherein the hole is in a rectangular shape (See fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the base of Jolley/Williams which is attached to an archwire with the base to be a saddle shaped or with a hole as taught by Richards in order to provide a solid connection between the archwire and base (see abstract of Richards).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jolley (11,246,682) in view of Williams (2010/0151402) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bloore et al (2005/0032016).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach the cylinder has a height in a range of 5 to 6mm.
Bloore teaches an orthodontic apparatus comprising an arm 61 to extend in a mouth of a patient, an opening formed in the arm (such that it is a circular rubber band) an extension 33 that is to be in a vertical position in an arch of the mouth of the patient (see fig. 10). Bloore further teaches with respect to claim 13, wherein the extension has a height in a range of 5 to 6 mm (see par. 11). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the length of the cylinder taught by Jolley to be within the claimed range as taught by Bloore since it has been held that were the general condition of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05, II, A). It is noted that the cylinder of Jolley and the extension of Bloore are used for the same purpose of securing an arm within the mouth.
With respect to claim 16, Jolley teaches a method of installing an orthodontic device comprising extending an arm 10 in a mouth of a patient (see fig. 1C), wherein the arm includes an opening formed therein (col. 11, ll. 12-21, 31-37, such that the opening is the threaded bore or eyelets at the end of the spring/arm), positioning a cylinder in a vertical position in an arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C, annaoted figure above), and providing a device (see annotated figure) to they cylinder to hole the opening around the cylinder (see annotated figure, such that the end of the anchor is the device as it is enlarged and retains the opening around the cylinder). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach securing the device to the cylinder.
Williams teaches a method of installing an orthodontic device comprising extending an arm 500 in a mouth of a patient (see fig. 26), wherein the arm includes an opening formed therein (par. 96, such that the spring has an eyelet attached to the end), positioning a cylinder 504, and securing a device 502 to the cylinder to hold the opening around the cylinder (see par. 100, fig. 26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to be a screw that is secured to the cylinder as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 17, the arch is a lower arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 18, wherein the arch is an upper arch in the mouth of the patient (see fig. 1C which shows the anchor 20 on both the upper and lower arch, see annaoted figure above).
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 19, positioning a second cylinder in a vertical position in an upper arch in the mouth of the patient using a second opening formed in the arm (see figs. such that the arm has a coupler on each end, col. 11, ll. 11-21, 31-37), and providing a device to the second cylinder to hold the second opening around the second cylinder (see annaoted figure above, fig. 1c). Jolley teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, however, does not specifically teach securing the device to the cylinder.
Williams further teaches the method comprising positioning a second cylinder in an upper arch in the mouth of the patient using a second opening formed in the arm (see fig. 26) and securing a device 502 to the cylinder to hold the opening around the cylinder (see par. 100, fig. 26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Jolley to be a screw that is secured to the cylinder as taught by Williams in order to provide a secure connection, such that the screw would prevent accidental separation of the opening from the cylinder. It is noted that as illustrated in fig. 26, Williams teaches arm including an eyelet at each end and a cylinder and device at on each jaw.
Jolley/Williams teaches the invention as substantially claimed and discussed above, Jolley further teaches with respect to claim 20, wherein the arm is extendable and retractable based on movement of the mouth of the patient (see figs., such that the arm is a spring which is extendable and retractable based on the forces applied to it, such that when the user opens their mouth it would extend and when the user closes their mouth the arm would retract from the extended position).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed March 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that with respect to claims 16-20, the prior art of Jolley does not teach the arm having a sleeve and rod and therefore, the amendments overcome the rejection. However, it is noted that claims 16-20 were rejected under the combination of Jolley in view of Williams. It is noted that the prior art of Williams was used to teach the new limitation of the arm having a sleeve and rod as discussed above. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. It is noted that the same prior art was applied, however, it was applied in a different manner to teach the new limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEIDI MARIE EIDE whose telephone number is (571)270-3081. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-4:00.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at 571-270-5614. 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.
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772 4/1/2026