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 Interpretation
The specification defines “relaxed or contracted configuration” on page 4 lines 4-10. The relaxed or contracted configuration is defined as when the biasing device is in an inactive configuration, is not under stress, and may not exert a pulling force between the distal portions of the anchors.
The specification defines “substantially planar and/or flat” on page 4 lines 21-25: “The term "substantially planar and/or flat" will be herein understood as encompassing a geometric (flat) plane, as well as slightly curved planes, e.g. a plane having a curve in the range of 0-5°; e.g. 0-3°. Thus, the working plane may be a geometric (flat) plane, or may be a slightly curved plane, e.g. a plane having a curve in the range of 0-5°, e.g. 0-3°.”
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a second anchor configured for connecting to a second attachment member or to a second location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof, wherein the first anchor has a first or proximal portion including a proximal end and a second or distal portion including a distal end” should be corrected to “a second anchor configured for connecting to a second attachment member or to a second location within the patient's mouth at a distal end thereof, wherein the second anchor has a first or proximal portion including a proximal end and a second or distal portion including a distal end”.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the follow informality: “a second anchor configured for connecting to a second attachment member or to a second location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof” should be updated to include “the patient’s mouth”.
All dependent claims need to be changed to recite “The apparatus according to claim”.
Words that are objected to are underlined in the original and updated limitations for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 11-12, and 17 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.
Claims 1 and 17 both recite “ wherein the first or proximal portion of the first anchor extends in a first, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration and the first or proximal portion of the second anchor extend in a third, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration”. A third direction is recited before a second direction, resulting in the third direction being indefinite. Numbered order of elements in the limitations need to be claimed in numerical order. For example, to overcome this rejection the directions could all be defined within the claim first in numerical order and then their relationships to each other recited.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the first plane”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 is rejected due to its dependence on claim 11.
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)(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 1-2 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vogt (US 5,711,667).
Regarding Claim 1, Vogt discloses an orthodontic apparatus (orthodontic appliance 5; Figures 1 and 2) comprising a biasing device (connecting device 8, though particularly the embodiment for connecting device 65 in Figure 8 is relied upon), the biasing device being configured to bias the apparatus in a contracted configuration (Figures 1 and 2; col 4 line 34 to col 5 line 9; col 7 lines 33-44; col 10 line 19-34), the biasing device (particularly the embodiment shown in Figure 8, an annotated copy of which is below) comprising:
a first anchor (outer body 66 with end cap 68 including clip portion 16) configured for connecting to a first attachment member or to a first location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof (clip portion 16 with aperture 17 is for connecting to attachment location – though clip 16 is not labeled in Figure 8 it is described specifically as being part of end cap 68 in col 10 lines 22-27; see Figure 2), wherein the first anchor has a first or proximal portion (overlapped with second anchor, see annotated Figure 8 below) including a proximal end (end 70) and a second or distal portion including a distal end (clip portion 16 to end of clip away from outer body 66);
a second anchor (piston 67 with clip portion 22) configured for connecting to a second attachment member or to a second location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof (clip portion 22 with aperture 23 is for connecting to attachment location; see Figure 2), wherein the first anchor has a first or proximal portion (overlapped with first anchor, see annotated Figure 8 below) including a proximal end (end 72) and a second or distal portion including a distal end (clip 22 to end of clip away from piston 67); and
a biasing member (spring 24) provided between the proximal end of the first anchor and the proximal end of the second anchor (provided between hook 71 at end 72 of piston 67 and hook 69 at end 70 of outer body 66) such that the first or proximal portion of the first anchor and the first or proximal portion of the second anchor overlap (see annotated Figure 8 below),
wherein the first or proximal portion of the first anchor extends in a first, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration and the first or proximal portion of the second anchor extend in a third, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration (first and third longitudinal directions are the same; see annotated Figure 8 below),
wherein the second or distal portion of the first anchor (clip 16, described as being part of end cap 68 in col 10 lines 22-27) is substantially planar (Figure 4A) and extends in a second plane and in a second direction which is different from the first longitudinal direction of its respective first or proximal portion (clip 16 is at angle to outer body 66), and wherein the second or distal portion of the second anchor (clip 22) is substantially planar (Figure 4B) and extends in a fourth plane and in a fourth direction which is different from the third longitudinal direction of its respective first or proximal portion (clip 22 is at angle to piston 67),
and wherein the second plane is different from the fourth plane (see annotated Figure 8 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
501
1022
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above), wherein the second plane and the fourth plane are not parallel to each other (clips 16 and 22 as shown in Figure 8 are not on parallel planes since if they were continued out, they would intersect. ).
Regarding Claims 15, 16, and 20, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above), wherein at least the first or proximal portions of the first and second anchors (claim 15), the second or distal portions of the first and second anchors (claim 16), and the biasing member (claim 20) are made of a shape memory material (col 5 lines 27-37 include super-elastic nickel-titanium, also known as nitinol, in the list of possible materials for connecting device 8 to be fabricated of; nitinol is known to be a shape memory material, including being listed in the instant application specification multiple times as a potential shape memory alloy).
Regarding Claim 17, Vogt discloses an orthodontic apparatus (orthodontic appliance 5; Figures 1 and 2) comprising a biasing device (connecting device 8, though particularly the embodiment for connecting device 65 in Figure 8 is relied upon), the biasing device being configured to bias the apparatus in a contracted configuration (Figures 1 and 2; col 4 line 34 to col 5 line 9; col 7 lines 33-44; col 10 line 19-34), the biasing device (particularly the embodiment shown in Figure 8, an annotated copy of which is below) comprising:
a biasing member (spring 24);
a first anchor (outer body 66 with end cap 68 including clip portion 16) configured for connecting to a first attachment member or to a first location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof (clip portion 16 with aperture 17 is for connecting to attachment location – though clip 16 is not labeled in Figure 8 it is described as being part of end cap 68 in col 10 lines 22-27; see Figure 2); and
a second anchor (piston 67 with clip portion 22) configured for connecting to a second attachment member or to a second location within a patient's mouth at a distal end thereof (clip portion 22 with aperture 23 is for connecting to attachment location; see Figure 2),
wherein the first anchor and the second anchor each have a first or proximal portion (overlapping portions, as shown in annotated Figure 8 above) and a second or distal portion (clips 16 and 22),
wherein the first or proximal portion of the first anchor extends in a first, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration and the first or proximal portion of the second anchor extend in a third, longitudinal, direction at least when the biasing device is in a relaxed or contracted configuration (first and third longitudinal directions are the same; see annotated Figure 8 above),
wherein the second or distal portion of the first anchor (clip 16, described as being part of end cap 68 in col 10 lines 22-27) extends in a second plane (Figure 4A) and in a second direction which is different from the first longitudinal direction of its respective first or proximal portion (clip 16 is at an angle to outer body 66), and wherein the second or distal portion of the second anchor (clip 22) extends in a fourth plane (Figure 4B) and in a fourth direction which is different from the third longitudinal direction of its respective first or proximal portion (clip 22 is at an angle to piston 67),
and wherein the first or proximal portions of the first anchor and of the second anchor are made of a flexible material (col 5 lines 27-37 include super-elastic nickel-titanium, also known as nitinol, in the list of possible materials for connecting device 8 to be fabricated of).
Regarding Claim 18, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 17 (as presented above), wherein the second or distal portions of the first anchor and of the second anchor are made of a flexible material (col 5 lines 27-37 include super-elastic nickel-titanium, also known as nitinol, in the list of possible materials for connecting device 8 to be fabricated of).
Regarding Claim 19, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 17 (as presented above), wherein the flexible material is a shape memory material (nitinol is known to be a shape memory material, including being listed in the instant application specification multiple times as a potential shape memory alloy).
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 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogt (US 5,711,667) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tuneberg (US 2002/0132207).
Regarding Claims 3, 4, and 5, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Vogt teaches the second plane and the fourth plane being at an angle relative to each other (Figure 8) but is not explicit as to the degree of such an angle. However, Vogt does state that the parameters of the device can be varied for potential applications (col 7 lines 14-17). Such potential variations may be due to different attachment mechanisms or shapes of the patient’s mouth and teeth.
Tuneberg, in the same field of endeavor of biasing devices for orthodontic apparatus (abstract, Figure 1) teaches that the attachment ends of a connecting device between the upper and lower jaws can be bent at a variety of angles or one or both attachment ends can extend straight from the device (Figures 3, 5-8; ¶ 0024-0025). In particular, the embodiment shown in Figure 3 shows that the flanges for attachment can both point in the same direction (flanges 52 and 66) or can point in opposite directions (flanges 52A and 66). When both are pointing in the same direction, the second and fourth planes, which extend in the Z-axis out of the page such that holes 56 and 67 intersect the planes, the planes intersect at an angle of approximately 90° relative to each other. Thus Tuneberg teaches the attachment ends – or the second and fourth planes – being at an angle of about 10-90° (claim 3), about 45-90° (claim 4), and about 90° (claim 5) relative to each other.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the orthodontic apparatus as taught by Vogt to include the second and fourth planes intersecting at 90° relative to each other as taught by Tuneberg. Vogt teaches that the parameters of the connecting member can vary depending on use, and Tuneberg teaches a variety of angles of the attachment portions being known, therefore it would be obvious to try the different angles for the attachment portions, which define the second and fourth planes, including them being at 90° which is in the claimed range for claims 3-5. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating the angle range with “about” or “typically” each time it is described in the specification.
Claims 6-7 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogt (US 5,711,667) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Abel (US 2018/0116767).
Regarding Claim 6, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Vogt teaches that at variety of shapes for the overlapping elements of the anchors may be useful in certain circumstances (col 5 lines 38-50), but does not explicitly teach the proximal portion of the first anchor being substantially planar.
However, Abel, in the same field of endeavor of biasing devices for orthodontics (abstract), teaches a biasing device (orthodontic device 50 shown in Figure 10 and orthodontic device 70 shown in Figure 12) wherein the first or proximal portion (overlapping portions in shafts 56 and 58 of device 50 and overlapping portion of shafts 76 and 78 in device 70) of both the first and second anchor is substantially planar (device 50 is described in ¶ 0097 as having a semi-circular cross-section and the flat sides of the two shafts 56 and 58 abut each other and a plane is formed there; device 70 in Figure 12 has flat wires forming shafts 76 and 78). Abel also teaches a variety of shapes for this overlapping portion of the anchors (see embodiments in Figures 2 and 16).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device as taught by Vogt to include the proximal portion of the first anchor being substantially planar as taught by Abel. This would have been a simple substitution of a known shape for such a portion of an anchor for another known shape of the portion of the anchor, supported by Vogt’s assertion that shapes other than those shown may be useful in some circumstances.
Regarding Claim 7, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 6 (as presented above). Abel further teaches wherein at least a side of the first or proximal portion of the first anchor facing the second anchor is substantially planar and/or flat (Figure 8, where the flat sides of semi-circular cross section flanges 56 and 58 are shown abutting).
Regarding Claim 13, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 6 (as presented above). Modifying the first proximal portions of the anchors taught by Vogt to the substantially planar version taught by Abel would change the first proximal portions of the biasing device in Figure 8 of Vogt to be planes that run along the x-axis (horizontal axis on the page of Figure 8 ), regardless of how they are oriented about the x-axis then. Therefore the first plan is along the x-axis. In contrast, the distal portion of the first anchor is along the second plane along the y and z axes of Figure 8, extending out of the page. Therefore the first and second planes intersect and are not parallel.
Regarding Claim 14, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 13 (as presented above). Vogt teaches the proximal portions of the first and second anchors being configured to engage one another by complementary or interlocking features (slot 73 in outer body 66 of first anchor with hook 71 of second anchor moving through the slot during device function). It would be obvious and well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the same interlocking feature of a slot and hook for the substantially planar proximal portions of the anchors taught by Abel in order to keep the elastic biasing member on the side of the anchors, rather than around the anchors. One would be motivated to keep the elastic biasing member on the side in order to make it easier to replace.
Regarding Claim 9, Vogt discloses an apparatus according to claim 1 (as presented above). Vogt teaches that at variety of shapes for the overlapping elements of the anchors may be useful in certain circumstances (col 5 lines 38-50), but does not explicitly teach the proximal portion of the first anchor being substantially planar.
However, Abel, in the same field of endeavor of biasing devices for orthodontics (abstract), teaches wherein the first or proximal portion (overlapping portion in shaft 56) of both the first and second anchor is substantially planar (it is described in ¶ 0097 as having a semi-circular cross-section and the flat sides of the two shafts 56 and 58 abut each other and a plane is formed there; that plan is a first plane). Abel also teaches a variety of shapes for this overlapping portion of the anchors (see embodiments in Figures 2, 12, and 16).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device as taught by Vogt to include the proximal portion of the second anchor being substantially planar as taught by Abel. This would have been a simple substitution of a known shape for such a portion of an anchor for another known shape of the portion of the anchor, supported by Vogt’s assertion that shapes other than those shown may be useful in some circumstances.
Regarding Claim 10, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 9 (as presented above). Abel further teaches wherein at least a side of the first or proximal portion of the second anchor facing the first anchor is substantially planar and/or flat (Figure 8, where the flat sides of semi-circular cross section flanges 56 and 58 are shown abutting).
Regarding Claim 11, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 9 (as presented above). Abel further teaches wherein the first plane and the third plane are parallel, at least in a relaxed or contracted configuration (Figure 8).
Regarding Claim 12, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 11(as presented above). Abel further teaches wherein the first or proximal portion of the first anchor and the first or proximal portion of the second anchor are configured to contact each other along a flat surface thereof and/or to slide longitudinally and parallel relative to each other (Figures 8 and 10; ¶ 00997-0100).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vogt (US 5,711,667) and Abel (US 2018/0116767) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Scheu (US 5,879,157).
Regarding Claim 8, Vogt and Abel teach an apparatus according to claim 6 (as presented above). They do not explicitly teach wherein the first plane and the second plane (proximal and distal portions of the first anchor) are parallel, at least in a relaxed or contracted configuration. Rather Vogt teaches the second plane (that of clip 16) intersecting and therefore not being parallel, with the proximal portion and its associated first plane since the second plane extends out of the page along the z-axis (see Figure 8). However Vogt does also state that the parameters of the device can be varied for potential applications (col 7 lines 14-17). Such potential variations may be due to different attachment mechanisms or shapes of the patient’s mouth and teeth.
Scheu, in the same field of orthodontic apparatus with biasing devices (abstract), teaches biasing devices (1) with the distal portion of the anchor (connection eyelet) being in the same plane (x-y plane of page as seen in Figure 1) as the proximal portion of the anchor (sleeve 2), with the distal portion still extending in a different direction along that plane than the proximal portion (Figure 2, described in col 2 lines 38-41 as being angularly offset).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the orthodontic apparatus as taught by Vogt and Abel to include the first and second planes being parallel as taught by Scheu. Vogt teaches that the parameters of the connecting member can vary depending on use, and therefore it would be a simple substitution of one orientation of the first and second planes for another orientation, which one may be motivated to make for ease of manufacturing or to accommodate different attachment mechanisms between the biasing device and the other parts of the orthodontic apparatus.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Morin (US 2014/0072928) teaches the planes of the attachment portions of the anchors of biasing member being at angles to the overlapping portion direction.
Kottemann (US 2016/0067014) teaches a biasing device for use with removable dental aligners.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer P. Connell whose telephone number is (703)756-1169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 3 pm 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, 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.
/JENNIFER P CONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
5/4/2026
