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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 9-10, in the reply filed on 06/12/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/12/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/15/2024, 10/31/2024 and 06/16/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takehiro et al. (WO 2018074605 A1) [IDs dated 08/15/2024], herein Takehiro.
The Examiner has previously provided a machine translation of (WO 2018074605 A1). The citation of the prior art in this rejection refers to the machine translation.
In regards to claim 9, Takehiro teaches a dental mill blank for cutting formed from a laminated body, wherein the laminated body includes at least three layers, namely an uppermost layer, at least one intermediate layer, and a lowermost layer. Each of the layers forming the laminated body includes a filler (A) and a polymer (B), and the filler (A) in each layer includes at least one type of inorganic particle (a) and at least one type of pigment (C). A chromaticity difference ΔE*T between the uppermost layer and the lowermost layer is at least equal to 5.0 and at most equal to 15.0 and a chromaticity difference ΔE* between all adjacent layers is at least equal to 1.0 and at most equal to 5.5 [Abstract, lines 13-28, 33-38, 89-104]. These ranges are within the claimed ranges. The blank comprises 5 layers by example which change color across their heights [lines 1920-1922, examples 10-11]. No laminate interfaces are present between the layers [lines 190-204, 1622-1625]. The shape of the blank is a cylinder with similar upper and bottom surface shapes [lines 42-46]. The color tone reproduces across the blank that of a natural tooth [lines 1622-1625, 1821-1827].
In regards to claim 10, Takehiro teaches, in example 11, a five layer blank in which each color layer is 2 mm in height, this is within the claimed range as 2/10 *100= 20% [Table 1, reproduced below the fourth column shows thickness/height in mm, lines 274-286, 1780-1784]. The optional requirement, for differing heights in color unit 1 and color unit m, is considered optional and thus not necessary to meet the limitations of the claim. However, it is noted that Takehiro teaches other examples in which the height of color unit 1 and color unit 5 are different. i
PNG
media_image1.png
754
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes: Goto et al. (US 20170056140A1), Goto et al. (US 20170056141A1) .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH A COLLISTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1019. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9 am-5 pm.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/ELIZABETH COLLISTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights