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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2022-0018688 A to Choi et al., hereinafter, “Choi” in view of KR 2022-067095 A to Kim.
Claim 1. Choi teaches An apparatus for generating orthodontic plan information that performs a method of generating orthodontic plan information based on a current dental state of a patient who intends to receive orthodontic treatment, [page 1] a user directly moves and rotates an individual tooth model of a patient to generate a final tooth alignment model to be corrected from a patient's current tooth alignment model.
the apparatus comprising: memory configured to store a current teeth model that models a patient's dental state before orthodontic treatment; [page 7] The storage unit 12 stores various data such as information necessary for performing the operation of the orthodontic simulation apparatus 1 and information generated according to the operation. The storage unit 12 may provide data to the control unit 14 for data analysis of the control unit 14 .
and a controller configured to generate an expanded teeth model by rearranging a plurality of teeth constituting the current teeth model so that predetermined spaces required for orthodontic treatment are secured, [page 6]The control unit 14 creates an ideal dental arch for automatic generation of a tooth arrangement model when establishing an orthodontic treatment plan using software. The abnormal dental arch serves as a reference for tooth arrangement, and the tooth model is arranged on the abnormal dental arch. The control unit 14 automatically uses the characteristic information of the tooth model (eg, tooth feature points, feature vectors) and relation information with the abnormal dental arch (eg, the angle between the tooth model and the abnormal dental arch). to create a tooth arrangement model. For example, the control unit 14 may move each tooth model so that the position of the feature point of each tooth model coincides with the position of the point constituting the abnormal dental arch. In addition, each tooth model may be rotated so that the angle between the feature vector of each tooth model and the TNB frame (Tangent-Normal-Binormal Frame) of the abnormal dental arch coincides with a preset angle. When generating the tooth arrangement model, the controller 14 may move and rotate each tooth model in consideration of the collision between the tooth models so that the collision between the tooth models does not occur by examining whether there is a collision between the adjacent tooth models.
to perform a collision error level test on the expanded teeth model, to, when the collision error level test for the expanded teeth model is successful, generate a candidate orthodontic teeth model, in which spaces between teeth constituting the expanded teeth model are filled, [page 6] The control unit 14 creates an ideal dental arch for automatic generation of a tooth arrangement model when establishing an orthodontic treatment plan using software. The abnormal dental arch serves as a reference for tooth arrangement, and the tooth model is arranged on the abnormal dental arch. The control unit 14 automatically uses the characteristic information of the tooth model (eg, tooth feature points, feature vectors) and relation information with the abnormal dental arch (eg, the angle between the tooth model and the abnormal dental arch). to create a tooth arrangement model. For example, the control unit 14 may move each tooth model so that the position of the feature point of each tooth model coincides with the position of the point constituting the abnormal dental arch. In addition, each tooth model may be rotated so that the angle between the feature vector of each tooth model and the TNB frame (Tangent-Normal-Binormal Frame) of the abnormal dental arch coincides with a preset angle. When generating the tooth arrangement model, the controller 14 may move and rotate each tooth model in consideration of the collision between the tooth models so that the collision between the tooth models does not occur by examining whether there is a collision between the adjacent tooth models.
Choi fails to explicitly teach by rearranging the teeth through the spaces between the teeth constituting the expanded teeth model, to perform a dental arch error level test on the candidate orthodontic teeth model. Kim, in the same field of dentition modeling teaches by rearranging the teeth through the spaces between the teeth constituting the expanded teeth model, to perform a dental arch error level test on the candidate orthodontic teeth model, and, [pages 9-10]…the teeth are arranged along the generated arch line and displayed on the output unit (S250). For example, moving individual teeth into a tooth alignment that coincides with the positioned upper and lower arch lines… Before the tooth arrangement and display step (S250), a step (S240) of securing a space by determining the tooth arrangement limitation may be further performed. In the space securing step ( S240 ), when the tooth arrangement along the arch line, when the range of the planned tooth arrangement exceeds the limit range of the skeleton, the space necessary to enable the tooth arrangement within the limit range can be secured.
when the dental arch error level test for the candidate orthodontic teeth model is successful, confirm the candidate orthodontic teeth model as a final orthodontic teeth model and generate orthodontic plan information based on the final orthodontic teeth model. [page 9] the necessary space is secured so that the planned tooth arrangement is possible in consideration of additional items such as interdental preparation, arch extension, and tooth extraction. Then, in the secured space, the teeth may be arranged according to the arch line and displayed on the output unit (S250).
…the device for designing tooth arrangement 1 may further perform the steps of establishing a treatment plan, performing treatment, providing results according to treatment, and confirming prognosis.
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Choi with the teachings of Kim [Advantage] to enable establishing a patient-specific dental treatment plan with functional improvement and aesthetic improvement by reflecting changes in the patient's skeletal structure and facial appearance.
Claim 7. Reviewed and analyzed in the same way as claim 1. See the above analysis and rationale.
Claim 13. Choi teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon a program that, when executed by a processor, causes the processor to execute the method set forth in claim 7. a series of operational steps is performed on the computer or other programmable data processing device to create a computer-executable process to create a computer or other programmable data processing device. It is also possible that instructions for performing the data processing apparatus provide steps for executing functions
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Choi with the teachings of Kim [Advantage] to enable establishing a patient-specific dental treatment plan with functional improvement and aesthetic improvement by reflecting changes in the patient's skeletal structure and facial appearance.
Claim 14. Choi teaches A computer program that is executed by an apparatus for generating orthodontic plan information and stored in a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium to perform the method set forth in claim 7. These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-usable or computer-readable memory which may direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to implement a function in a particular manner, and thus the computer-usable or computer-readable memory.
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Choi with the teachings of Kim [Advantage] to enable establishing a patient-specific dental treatment plan with functional improvement and aesthetic improvement by reflecting changes in the patient's skeletal structure and facial appearance.
Claim(s) 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2022-0018688 A to Choi et al., hereinafter, “Choi” in view of KR 2022-067095 A to Kim and in further view of US 2020/0306011 A1 to Chekhonin et al., hereinafter, “Chekhonin”.
Claim 6. Choi fails to explicitly teach a plurality of options by taking into consideration a state of the teeth constituting the current teeth model. Chekhonin, in the field of analyzing dentition treatment plans, teaches wherein: the controller determines a plurality of options by taking into consideration a state of the teeth constituting the current teeth model, [Abstract] generating a plurality of potential treatment plan variations for the concurrent and interactive review of the treatment plan variations
[0007] A treatment plan may include a plurality of different stages during which the patient's teeth are moved from an initial position to a final position
[0010] a dental professional may make a model (e.g., a digital model or scan, and/or a physical model, which may subsequently be digitized) and send it to a remote site (e.g., a laboratory) where multiple options for treatment plans may be generated.
generates expanded teeth models for the plurality of respective options, [0257] the user may select one or both to rotate (in some variations the user interface may be allowed to permit either separate rotation of the respective 3D models of the patient's teeth when showing stages of the treatment plan, or the user interface may be configures so that moving one of the 3D models of the patient's teeth in a particular treatment plan may automatically move the other 3D model of the patient's teeth according to the second treatment plan.
and generates a plurality of candidate orthodontic teeth models based on the expanded teeth models for the plurality of respective options; [0257] the user may select one or both to rotate (in some variations the user interface may be allowed to permit either separate rotation of the respective 3D models of the patient's teeth when showing stages of the treatment plan, or the user interface may be configures so that moving one of the 3D models of the patient's teeth in a particular treatment plan may automatically move the other 3D model of the patient's teeth according to the second treatment plan.
and the apparatus further comprises an input/output interfaced configured to display the plurality of candidate orthodontic teeth models. [0007] Any of the methods and apparatuses described herein may pre-calculate a plurality of potential treatment plan variations including all of the staging and various, potentially alternative, final configurations and display them in parallel.
Thus, before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Choi with the teachings of Chekhonin [0006] may improve treatment planning, including potentially increasing the speed at which treatment plans may be completed, as well as providing greater choices and control to the dental professional, and allowing improved patient involvement in the treatment planning process.
Claim 12. Reviewed and analyzed in the same way as claim 6. See the above analysis and rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The innovation that makes claims 2 and 8 allowable is “calculates angle difference costs between adjacent teeth for the teeth constituting the current teeth model, and optimizes postures of the teeth constituting the current teeth model by taking into consideration the angle difference costs; defines arch functions for maxillary teeth and mandibular teeth of the current teeth model, and calculates amounts of movement of the teeth constituting the current teeth model by calculating distance differences between arrangement positions of the teeth, constituting the maxillary teeth and mandibular teeth of the current teeth model, and the arch functions; rearranges the teeth constituting the current teeth model based on the calculated amounts of movement; and generates the expanded teeth model by adjusting heights of the rearranged teeth so that height differences between the rearranged teeth and their adjacent teeth are each equal to a predetermined value or less.”
Claims 3-4 and 9-11 would be allowable because they are dependents of claims 2 and 8, respectively.
The innovation that makes claim 5 allowable is “when the candidate orthodontic teeth model satisfies all of a fifth condition in which there is no space between the teeth constituting the candidate orthodontic teeth model and a sixth condition in which occlusal plane positions of incisors of maxillary teeth of the candidate orthodontic teeth model and occlusal plane positions of incisors of mandibular teeth of the candidate orthodontic teeth model satisfy medical criteria according to the patient's teeth structure…”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DELOMIA L GILLIARD whose telephone number is (571)272-1681. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, John Villecco can be reached at (571) 272-7319. 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.
/DELOMIA L GILLIARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661
Prosecution Insights