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 Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “TPS” should be spelled out. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2023/0397972 A1).
Consider claim 1, Kim teaches a computer-implemented method for generating a 3D digital model of gingiva, comprising: obtaining a 3D digital model of gingiva in a first state ([0121] – [0128]); and performing deformation process on the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state based on its deformation control points and deformation control points of a 3D digital model of crowns in a second state ([0151] – [0161], [0170] – [0177], [0200] – [0205]), to obtain a 3D digital model of the gingiva in the second state, wherein corresponding deformation control points of 3D digital models of the crowns and the gingiva in the same state coincide ([0252] – [0257]).
Consider claim 2, Kim teaches in the deformation process, the deformation control points of the 3D digital model of the crowns in the second state are taken as new positions of corresponding deformation control points of the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state ([0077], [0153], [0162] – [0166]), a deformation equation is established based on this ([0078], [0124], [0174], [0193] – [0205]), and coordinates of vertices of the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the second state ([0078], [0124], [0174], [0193] – [0205]).
Consider claim 3, Kim teaches the deformation control points of the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state comprise deformation control points on boundaries of the crowns ([0252] – [0257]), the deformation control points of the 3D digital model of the crowns comprise deformation control points on the boundaries of the crowns ([0252] – [0257]), and the deformation control points on the boundaries of the crowns of the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state correspond to those of the 3D digital model of the crowns, respectively ([0252] – [0257]).
Consider claim 4, Kim teaches the deformation control points of the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state further comprise deformation control points on the edge of its bottom surface ([0013] – [0014], [0083], [0106], [0107], [0224]), and these deformation control points remain stationary in the deformation process ([0013] – [0014], [0083], [0106], [0107], [0224]).
Consider claim 6, Kim teaches the first state is an initial state ([0071] – [0072], [0075], [0151]).
Consider claim 7, Kim teaches the deformation control points are obtained by sampling on a 3D digital model of a jaw in the initial state ([0178] – [0183], [0249] – [0250], [0256] – [0257]).
Consider claim 8, Kim teaches the deformation control points are obtained by sampling evenly, and the number of the deformation control points is predetermined ([0176] – [0190]).
Consider claim 9, Kim teaches the 3D digital model of the jaw in the initial state is obtained by scanning one of the following: a patient's jaw, an impression of the patient's jaw and a physical model of the patient's jaw ([0053], [0059], [0075] – [0076], [0122], [0249] – [0250], [0256] – [0257]).
Consider claim 10, Kim teaches the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state comprises a real gingiva part and a base, where the real gingiva part joints the crowns and is located on the base ([0071] – [0080], [0126] – [0136], Fig. 2, Fig. 5 – Fig. 8).
Consider claim 11, Kim teaches the real gingiva part is a gingiva part within a predetermined distance from a gingival line. ([0071] – [0080], [0126] – [0136], Fig. 2, Fig. 5 – Fig. 8).
Consider claim 12, Kim teaches the first state is the initial state, and the method further comprises: obtaining a plurality of 3D digital models of the crowns in successive states ([0151] – [0161], [0170] – [0177], [0200] – [0205], [0252] – [0257]); and repeating the above operation to generate a plurality of 3D digital models of the gingiva in the successive states ([0151] – [0161], [0170] – [0177], [0200] – [0205], [0252] – [0257]), each of which is generated based on the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the first state and a corresponding one in the plurality of 3D digital models of the crowns in the successive states ([0151] – [0161], [0170] – [0177], [0200] – [0205], [0252] – [0257]).
Consider claim 15, claim 15 recites a computer system for generating a 3D digital model of gingiva, comprising a storage device and a processor ([0018] – [0019]), wherein the storage device stores a computer program which when executed will cause the processor to perform the method for producing a 3D digital model of gingiva according to claim 1 (see rejection for claim 1).
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.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2023/0397972 A1) in view of Stoustrup et al. (US 2024/0054729 A1).
Consider claim 13, Kim teaches all the limitations in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach fusing the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the second state generated by the method for generating a 3D digital model of gingiva according to claim 1 and the 3D digital model of the crowns in the second state, to obtain a 3D digital model of a jaw in the second state.
Stoustrup teaches fusing the 3D digital model of the gingiva in the second state generated by the method for generating a 3D digital model of gingiva according to claim 1 and the 3D digital model of the crowns in the second state, to obtain a 3D digital model of a jaw in the second state ([0098] – [0104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of fusing the 3D digital model of the gingiva and the 3D digital model of the crowns to obtain a 3D digital model of a jaw because such incorporation would be beneficial for dental examination. [0103].
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2023/0397972 A1) in view of Stoustrup et al. (US 2024/0054729 A1) and Li et al. (US 2024/0090976 A1).
Consider claim 14, the combination of Kim and Stoustrup teaches all the limitations in claim 13 but does not explicitly teach using the 3D digital model of the jaw in the second state, generated by the method for generating a 3D digital model of a jaw according to claim 13, to control an apparatus to make a shell-shaped tooth repositioner.
Li teaches using the 3D digital model of the jaw in the second state, generated by the method for generating a 3D digital model of a jaw according to claim 13, to control an apparatus to make a shell-shaped tooth repositioner ([0038] – [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of using the 3D digital model of the jaw to control an apparatus to make a shell-shaped tooth repositioner because such incorporation would make the overall mechanical performance of the shell-shaped tooth repositioner better. [0045].
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2023/0397972 A1) in view of Spiridonov et al. (US 2010/0167243 A1).
Consider claim 5, Kim teaches all the limitations in claim 1 but does not explicitly teach the deformation process is based on TPS deformation method.
Spiridonov teaches the deformation process is based on TPS deformation method ([0083]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of using deformation process that is based on TPS deformation method because such incorporation would help realize a complete tooth model for any one and/or all teeth of a patient, suitably through an accounting of patient’s individual and/or specialized features and characteristics. [0083].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAT CHI CHIO whose telephone number is (571)272-9563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-5pm.
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, JAMIE J ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/TAT C CHIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486