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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 3/12/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 3/12/26.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “thread chasers” of claim 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 2-8 and 15-17 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.
Regarding claim 2, the term “integrated with the first internal thread set” is indefinite, as it is unclear what specifically would or would not be considered “integrated” threads. For example it is unclear if the threads are required to be in communication, adjacent each other, overlapping, serially aligned, etc. As best understood by the Examiner any threads adjacent or abutting another are interpreted to be “integrated”. Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 3, the term “the abutment having associated therewith right-hand external threads” is unclear whether or not the abutment comprises the threads or if the threads are part of another component. It is unclear what the meets and bounds of the term “associated therewith” actually comprises. Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 4, the claim depends on claim 3 which recites the abutment having threads to engage the threaded portion, as best understood. However, claim 4 contradicts the limitations of claim 3, by instead requiring a separate fastener connect the abutment to the threaded sections. It is unclear whether Applicant intends for the abutment to be a unitary abutment with thread (as recited in claim 3) or a separable abutment with fastener (as recited in claim 4). Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 8, the claim is indefinite for the same reasons as explained above in regards to claim 3; specifically the claim incorporates claim 3 which recites that the abutment is “associated” with the threaded portion. It is unclear whether the abutment is intended to be a unitary component or used with a separable fastener. Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 15, the claim attempts to incorporate limitations from withdrawn method claim 12. Additionally, that claim attempts to incorporate limitations from claims 8, 3 and 1. As the claim attempts to incorporate limitations from a withdrawn claim, itself attempting to incorporate limitations from other claims, the meets and bounds of claim 15 are indefinite. It is unclear what specifically is or is not required by the claim. As best understood by the Examiner, the claim is interpreted as requiring the implant, and two fasteners as recited therein. Clarification is required.
Regarding claim 17, the terms “the first and/or second thread sets” lack antecedent basis in the claims and it is unclear whether the term intends to refer back to the bidirectional thread or another thread. As best understood it is intended to refer back.
All other claims not specifically addressed above are rejected based on their dependency on a previously rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lazarof (US 5087199).
Regarding claims 1-2, Lazarof discloses a dental implant (12) for implantation into a patient’s jawbone, the dental implant comprising: a body (14) having a longitudinal length (see Figs), external threads (46) along the longitudinal length, and a longitudinal bore within the body (holes where 20 and 22 are located); and bi-directional internal threads (20/22) within the longitudinal bore, wherein the bi-directional threads are configured to alternatively threadably engage a right-hand threaded fastener (24) and threadably engage a left-hand threaded fastener (28). The Examiner notes that the threads can alternately be connected to each fastener (e.g. first threaded fastener 24 can be connected to 20, or alternatively second threaded fastener 28 can be connected to 22). Additionally, the Examiner notes that threads 46 are right handed threads, threads 22 are left handed threads (see 5, lines 1-10), and the threads 20 are right hand threads (see col 6, lines 1-3). Lazarof further discloses wherein the bi-directional internal threads comprise: a first internal thread set of right-hand threads (20) within the longitudinal bore, the first internal thread set being configured to threadably engage the right-hand threaded fastener (24); and a second internal thread set (22) of left-hand threads within the longitudinal bore and integrated with the first internal thread set (e.g. longitudinally abutting and adjacent the first thread), the second internal thread set being configured to threadably engage the left-hand threaded fastener (28; per claim 2).
Regarding claim 3, Lazarof discloses a dental assembly comprising the dental implant of claim 1 (see above); and an abutment assembled thereto (prosthetic component, see col 5, lines 30-34), the abutment having associated therewith right-hand external threads (24) threadably engaged with the bi-directional internal threads of the dental implant to secure the abutment to the dental implant (see citations above).
Regarding claim 8, Lazarof discloses a dental restoration comprising: the assembly of claim 3 (see above); and a crown (26) assembled thereto, the abutment having a first portion (24) secured to the bi-directional internal threads of the dental implant, the abutment having a second portion to which the crown is attached (e.g. portion of abutment secured to or received in crown).
Regarding claim 15, Lazarof disclose a kit for use in a method of using the restoration of claim 8 (see above, as best understood by the Examiner), wherein the first fastener (24) has either the right-hand external threads or the left-hand external threads thereon, and the second fastener (28) has either the right-hand external threads or the left-hand external threads thereon that are oppositely threaded to the first fastener (see citations above).
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) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazarof in view of Pelak (US 5556280).
Regarding claims 4-5, Lazarof discloses all the features of the claimed invention as explained above, including wherein the abutment comprises a fastener to provide the abutment with the right hand external threads (see above), wherein the fastener is a first threaded fastener having the right hand external threads, the assembly further comprising a second threaded fastener (28) having the left hand threads, the first and second fasteners being interchangeable for assembly with the bidirectional threads (e.g., capable of being interchangeably used if so desired; e.g. one being engaged then the other; as in alternatively in claim 1). Lazarof, however, does not teach wherein the first fastener is separate from and assembled with the abutment as required.
Pelak, however, teaches an implant, abutment and threaded fastener, wherein the abutment can be formed integrally (Fig. 3) or separately (Fig. 5) from the abutment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the device of Lazarof to provide a separable abutment and fastener as such modification would merely involve making a formerly integral component into separate structures, which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan (see MPEP 2144.04(V)(C)).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazarof in view of Pelak, as combined above, further in view of Conte et al (US 2011/0306014 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Lazarof/Pelak, as combined above, discloses all the features of the claimed invention, including wherein the second fastener has a hexagonal coupling feature for coupling with a hexagonal driver (e.g. at 50, see col 4, lines 63-68, Lazarof), but does not explicitly teach that the first fastener has a different coupling feature for use with a different driver as required.
Conte et al, however, teaches an abutment screw (500) and associated driver which can be provided with a 4 lobe or torx connection (see [0070]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the first fastener of Lazarof/Pelak, as combined above, to include Conte’s teaching of providing a 4 lobe or torx connection to an abutment screw, as such modification would merely involve the simple substitution of one known element for another, with a reasonable expectation of success, which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan (see MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazarof in view of Conte et al.
Regarding claim 16, Lazarof discloses all the features of the kit of claim 15 and comprising a hexagonal driver (e.g. at 50, see col 4, lines 63-68, Lazarof) for coping with a coupling feature of the second fastener (e.g. hex coupling feature, see above), but does not explicitly teach providing a different driver with a different coupling feature in the first fastener as required.
Conte et al, however, teaches an implant kit comprising an implant, abutment, abutment screw (500) and associated driver which can be provided with a 4 lobe or torx connection (see [0070]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the first fastener of the kit of Lazarof to include Conte’s teaching of providing a 4 lobe or torx driver and connection to an abutment screw, as such modification would merely involve the simple substitution of one known element for another, with a reasonable expectation of success, which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan (see MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lazarof in view of Anitua Aldecoa (US 2009/0317771 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Lazarof does not teach wherein the kit further comprises thread chasers for repairing any damage to the first and/or second internal thread sets within the longitudinal bore of the dental implant as required.
Anitua Aldecoa, however, teaches providing a thread chaser (tool 1) with threads (4) corresponding to the internal threads of an implant (12, see Figs). The Examiner notes that such tool is capable of being used to repair minor damage to the internal threads of the implant, if so desired, and as such is interpreted as a thread chaser. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the kit of Lazarof to include Anitua Aldecoa’s thread chaser, as such modification would allow easy removal of the implant if so desired (see Aldecoa, abstract).
The Examiner notes that Lazarof/Aldecoa, as combined above does not explicitly disclose a plurality of the thread tools as required. However, the Examiner notes that such modification would merely involve a duplication of known parts of the device, which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the kit of Lazarof/Aldecoa, as combined above, to include an additional thread chaser, as such modification would merely involve the duplication of known parts of the device which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD MORAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 AM-4 PM EST.
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, Eric Rosen can be reached at 571-270-7855. 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.
/EDWARD MORAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772